南昌第十二医院看精神科费用高吗南昌癫痫医院在哪,南昌第十二医院看精神科专业么靠谱嘛,南昌哪里看幻视好啊,南昌第十二医院精神科医院正规嘛口碑好嘛,南昌治疗心理哪家医院,南昌专科治神经衰弱医院,南昌到哪里治疗神经病好

SAN DIEGO (CNS and KGTV) - The San Diego City Council Tuesday approved a code amendment that prohibits housing discrimination against applicants using Section 8 vouchers or other rent substitutes. The proposed code amendment blocks landlords from rejecting applicants based solely on voucher status, though they would still retain a right, based on other rental criteria, to choose residents who don't use subsidies.Studies have found that prohibiting income-based discrimination leads to increased neighborhood options for residents and decreased segregation.“Hearing from the community was very powerful and I am happy that the Council approved the ordinance to end housing discrimination taking place in San Diego,” said Councilmember Georgette Gómez. “This is one step towards helping increase access to affordable housing for all San Diegans.”Local California governments with such provisions include Berkeley, Corte Madera, East Palo Alto, Foster City, Marin County, San Francisco, Santa Clara County, Santa Monica and Woodland.San Diego's proposed ordinance also establishes a landlord contingency fund for property damage or lost rent related to renters with vouchers.Implementation of the proposal is expected to take two years. Year one focuses on voluntary compliance as well as landlord outreach and education of the potential benefits of renting to Section 8 users, including consistent on-time rent payments, long-term tenancies, flexible leases and background checks.Year two introduces investigation and enforcement services.More than 15,000 low-income households receive Section 8 assistance through the San Diego Housing Commission. That breaks down to 36,478 individuals, 86 percent being people of color.In June, the San Diego City Council's Smart Growth and Land Use Committee advanced the ordinance to the council with no recommendation through a split 2-2 vote. Council members Georgette Gomez and David Alvarez supported the proposal, while council members Scott Sherman and Lorie Zapf did not. 2061

SAN DIEGO (CNS) - A 28-year-old man was behind bars Friday on suspicion of stabbing his girlfriend multiple times inside a Colina Del Sol apartment, police said.Dispatchers received multiple calls shortly before 10 p.m. Thursday from neighbors who reported hearing screaming coming from one of the apartments in a complex on 49th Street just south of El Cajon Boulevard, San Diego police Officer Tony Martinez said.Officers responding to the scene found that a woman had been stabbed multiple times and the suspect had fled, Martinez said.The victim, whose age was not immediately available, was taken to a hospital for treatment of her wounds, which were not believed to be life- threatening, the officer said.Around 10:35 p.m. Thursday, the suspect apparently called 911 and told a dispatcher his location, and that he was going to surrender, the San Diego Union-Tribune reported.The 28-year-old man, whose name was not immediately available, was taken into custody around 10:45 p.m. on El Cajon Boulevard near El Cerrito Drive, Martinez said. 1053

SAN DIEGO (CNS and KGTV) - The San Diego City Council Tuesday approved a code amendment that prohibits housing discrimination against applicants using Section 8 vouchers or other rent substitutes. The proposed code amendment blocks landlords from rejecting applicants based solely on voucher status, though they would still retain a right, based on other rental criteria, to choose residents who don't use subsidies.Studies have found that prohibiting income-based discrimination leads to increased neighborhood options for residents and decreased segregation.“Hearing from the community was very powerful and I am happy that the Council approved the ordinance to end housing discrimination taking place in San Diego,” said Councilmember Georgette Gómez. “This is one step towards helping increase access to affordable housing for all San Diegans.”Local California governments with such provisions include Berkeley, Corte Madera, East Palo Alto, Foster City, Marin County, San Francisco, Santa Clara County, Santa Monica and Woodland.San Diego's proposed ordinance also establishes a landlord contingency fund for property damage or lost rent related to renters with vouchers.Implementation of the proposal is expected to take two years. Year one focuses on voluntary compliance as well as landlord outreach and education of the potential benefits of renting to Section 8 users, including consistent on-time rent payments, long-term tenancies, flexible leases and background checks.Year two introduces investigation and enforcement services.More than 15,000 low-income households receive Section 8 assistance through the San Diego Housing Commission. That breaks down to 36,478 individuals, 86 percent being people of color.In June, the San Diego City Council's Smart Growth and Land Use Committee advanced the ordinance to the council with no recommendation through a split 2-2 vote. Council members Georgette Gomez and David Alvarez supported the proposal, while council members Scott Sherman and Lorie Zapf did not. 2061

The line is available Monday through Friday from 7 a.m. to 11 p.m., Saturdays from 7 a.m. to 3 p.m. and Sundays from 7 a.m. to 9 p.m. By the end of the year, the state expects that the call center will be available 24/7. In peer-run or peer-to-peer programs, someone who has personally gone through similar mental health challenges provides support to callers. “Too many Californians are struggling with mental health and emotional well-being challenges. Peer-to-peer support is a proven way of helping people stay healthy and get the help they need. The California Peer-Run Warm Line is an important resource for so many people, and I’m thrilled we were able to get it funded,” said State Senator Scott Wiener (D-San Francisco.)The line was made possible through the state budget allocation of .8 million, which will be spread over three years. The debut of the line comes days before Thursday's World Mental Health Day. 1245

SAN BERNARDINO, Calif. (AP) — A jury on Monday recommended the death penalty for a Southern California man convicted of killing a family of four with a sledgehammer and burying their bodies in shallow desert graves.Jurors in San Bernardino made the recommendation for Charles "Chase" Merritt, 62, in a case that puzzled investigators for years after a couple and their two young sons vanished from their home in 2010. Their bodies were found three years later.Merritt supported his head on his fists and closed his eyes as the verdicts were read. He also spoke briefly to his attorney.He was convicted this month of the murders of his former business associate Joseph McStay, McStay's wife Summer, and their 4- and 3-year-old sons, Gianni and Joseph Jr.Merritt had pleaded not guilty and his lawyers didn't offer witnesses during the penalty phase of his trial, insisting he is innocent.San Bernardino County Superior Court Judge Michael A. Smith set a Sept. 27 hearing to formally sentence Merritt. He thanked the jurors after the verdicts were read, saying he knew the decision was "extremely difficult."Authorities said they believed Merritt killed the family as McStay was cutting him out of his business making and selling custom water fountains. When the family disappeared, there were no signs of forced entry at their San Diego County home and their car was found parked at a strip mall near the Mexico border.For years, no one could figure out what happened to them. In 2013, their bodies were found in shallow graves in the desert after an off-road motorcyclist discovered skeletal remains in the area. Authorities also unearthed a rusty sledgehammer that they said was used to kill the family.Merritt was arrested the following year. Authorities said they traced his cellphone to the area of the desert graves in the days after the family disappeared and to a call seeking to close McStay's online bookkeeping account. Merritt also had referred to McStay in the past tense during an interview with investigators.Authorities concede the case against Merritt largely focused on circumstantial evidence and that questions remain about what happened at the McStay home.During the trial's penalty phase, prosecutor Britt Imes asked jurors to consider any possible motive for the killing of two young boys, whether they could have been witnesses to the murder of their parents or simply victims of callous killings."There is no motive that can be ascribed to the killer of a 4-year-old and a 3-year-old that passes muster," he said.Merritt's attorneys didn't call any witnesses during the penalty phase, instead appealing to any lingering doubts jurors may have had about killings they say their client didn't commit."From the very beginning, this case screamed doubt," defense attorney Raj Maline told jurors. "This case is filled with unanswered questions."California has not executed anyone since 2006. Voters approved a ballot measure to speed up executions in 2016, but Gov. Gavin Newsom this year placed a moratorium on executions while he's in office. 3072