What’s the difference between having Trump’s illegal Ballroom shoved down our throats, or an illegal senior medical care project for the rich, when we need more affordable housing for families?
Sep 04, 2026
(Norman Rockwell’s “Freedom of Speech”, from the National Archives, painted in 1943, and published in the Saturday Evening Post. Rockwell’s “Freedom of Speech,” was inspired by FDR’s January 6, 1941, State of the Union Address, where he outlined the “Four Freedoms” which went on to be included in the United Nations Charter. Those freedoms, as spelled out by President Roosevelt were: “Freedom of Speech, Expression;’“ Freedom of Worship;” “Freedom from Want;” and “Freedom from Fear.”)
US Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts was correct last week, when he wrote in a blistering dissent to the Supreme Court’s tone deaf 5-4 decision to greenlight the developer Trump’s illegal ballroom, that the construction was “likely unlawful.”
The same is true about the senior medical care project in Healdsburg, in the shadow of the SMART Train Station, when local laws specifically prohibit the use of that site for medical care, and favor the building of affordable housing for working families.
The people of our town—educated, engaged and enthusiastic for greater inclusion—with 1/3 of our population being of Latino Heritage—are ready to fight for what’s right. That courage frightens our timid town officials, terrified of incurring the wrath of rich, powerful real estate interests. Freedom from Fear, anyone?
All along, and under local ordinances and State laws encouraging affordable housing and more inclusionary housing—for seniors and everyone of Healdsburg’s non-wealthy citizens—that Hudson street site—located smack in the immediate zone of the SMART Train Station Local Plan—was supposed to be shaped by a high level of community input, not by high rollers rushing to game the system, and sneak “medical care” into an area where it IS strictly prohibited by Healdsburg’s land use code.
The proposed construction of a Residential Care Facility for the Elderly (RCFE) which includes both “personal care,” and “medical care,” in an exclusive community requiring a nearly million-dollar equity buy in, is not just, as Justice Roberts wrote of The Bully’s Ballroom “likely unlawful,” it is clearly unlawful, under our local zoning laws. Those of us with experience in public health know how “luxury” RCFEs or Continuing Care Communities for the wealthy have become golden cash cows for developers who reap vast profits from multiple millions in high buy-in costs from rich customers.
Worse, Healdsburg’s local Planning Commission gave conditional approval of the Hudson Street proposal on the basis of false information. At last month’s meeting the developer’s representatives —when asked if the proposed RCFE facility would include “medical” as well as “personal” care— misinformed the Commission, saying it would not, despite the fact that medical care is authorized—and in some instances state law requires—RCFE’s to provide medical or clinical care.
And, at virtually the same time the developer was misinforming Healdsburg’s planning officials that there would be no medical care at The Hudson, the company ran a recruitment ad seeking a “Regional Clinical Nursing Leader,” whose responsibilities include overseeing “clinical operations.” Under Nursing guidelines “clinical means involving or relating to direct medical treatment or testing of patients.”
So, surprise: in the same breath that the wealthy developer’s team was telling one crucial falsehood to the Planning Commission, it was confirming that, in fact, medical care IS central to his RCFE operations, by actively head-hunting to hire an expert in medical & clinical care to oversee all of their operations, including in Healdsburg.
A number of Healdsburg citizens, led by long-time residents Jon Eisenberg and Lewis Bangham, filed an appeal to the City Council of the The Hudson’s flawed plan, and demanded that the Planning Commission rescind its’ conditional approval of the proposal on the clear grounds that material facts were misrepresented to them by the developer. In a court of law, such a material misrepresentation is perjury; but, in the court of public opinion, it was simply the way the wealthy were accustomed to editing the facts to fit their own self-interests. But that misrepresentation should be enough to enable the Planning Commission to overturn their own conditional approval, since it was a decision based upon false information. The timely and concise Healdsburg citizens’ appeal insists that the City stick to the letter, the intent and the spirit of local and state zoning and affordable housing laws in the best interests of the people of the City.
That misrepresentation of the truth was only the first head fake by the developer to see if Healdsburg’s public officials could be tricked into killing community involvement. The other powerful threat to our prized local democratic process, was for them to simply bulldoze—the way Trump bulldozed the East Wing of the White House— over the existence of the SMART Train Station Area Plan—the specific, City-created planning framework for the area to ensure citizen involvement in this crucial plan for our future involving mass transit.
Similar “overlay” plans were created in Saggio Hills, the Mill District, and in North Healdsburg (Enso Village), to create and accommodate a diversity of needs for affordable housing, and an RCFE that would qualify for providing medical care.
That inclusive planning process worked, producing an abundance of affordable units, and a legitimate, state-of-the art RCFE rendering medical & clinical care (Enso Village), providing proof that community-based democracy can do what it’s supposed to do, when the only price attached to it is public participation, and the time taken to do the right thing.
That’s how democracy is supposed to work.