[ad_1]
Costa Mesa’s ordinance requiring sober living homes to obtain a special permit from city officials was ruled legal by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.
“This decision of the Ninth Circuit is the culmination of the hard work and wisdom of city councils, planning commissioners, city staff and outside counsel dating back over 12 years,” Costa Mesa Mayor John Stephens said in a Dec. 4 statement.
Sober living homes are intended to provide residential space for people with alcohol or drug addiction so they can stay clean and participate in a recovery program.
However, these facilities can often go unregulated, drawing complaints from locals about noise and other disturbances in residential neighborhoods.
Costa Mesa officials have made a few updates to their sober living home ordinance over the past 10 years. In 2014, the council added new requirements requiring group homes to be at least 650 feet apart.
Most recently, a 2015 update required all group homes to acquire a conditional use permit if they serve seven or more occupants.
These updates led to a lawsuit from Ohio House, a treatment center that operates a men’s sober living facility in Costa Mesa. Although it opened in 2012, changes in city law required Ohio House to apply for a permit.
The city denied Ohio House’s permit since the facility was located within 650 feet of four other group homes — one licensed sober living facility, two state-licensed treatment centers and one unpermitted facility.
Ohio House took legal action in 2019 after the city ordered the center to cease operations and imposed approximately $29,000 worth of fines, according to court documents filed Dec. 4. The lawsuit included claims of unlawful discrimination against the disabled residents of the group home.
The regulations allow the city to crack down on unpermitted group homes and ensure they aren’t clustered in certain neighborhoods or areas of the city.
OC Supervisor Katrina Foley released a statement Wednesday afternoon commending the ruling.
The county’s ordinance for sober living homes is modeled after the city of Costa Mesa, according to the press release.
“The message from the Ninth Circuit is clear: local governments have the right to regulate recovery residences,” Foley said. “Unscrupulous sober living home operators adversely impact our communities, pose risks for those seeking care, and reduce access to real housing options for residents in need.”
Stephens also praised Foley and the previous council’s efforts to combat problematic sober living homes.
“I’m grateful for the efforts of Supervisor Foley while she was on council and Mayor of Costa Mesa,” he said. “Together, we have preserved the character of our neighborhoods while allowing for reasonable and appropriate care for those struggling with addiction.”
Costa Mesa has faced a number of legal challenges on this same issue in the past.
Most recently, the city faced a different lawsuit in 2019 that also claimed that the city’s sober living home regulations were discriminatory. In that case, a federal judge also ruled in favor of the city.
Orange County Struggles With Problematic Group Homes
Issues surrounding sober living homes and residential drug treatment facilities have popped up all over the county in the past several years.
Last year, Fountain Valley officials started discussing creating its own ordinance to regulate sober living homes in their community.
[Read: Fountain Valley Looks to Regulate Sober Living Homes]
Despite concern over Costa Mesa’s lawsuit — which was ongoing at the time — Fountain Valley officials unanimously passed their regulations in January.
“There is a genuine need for [sober living homes] in the city, as long as they’re good operators,” Fountain Valley Councilmember Patrick Harper said during the Jan. 30 meeting. “This ordinance is to try to regulate and protect the residents, not only the surrounding neighbors but also the residents that are in these facilities.”
It also comes after an OC Grand Jury Report from last year called out how group homes have become a growing problem in the county.
Jurors found many group homes are located too close together and cause disruption in cities. Jurors also found that some cities with laws to regulate group homes aren’t enforcing them.
Huntington Beach leaders have also adopted rules requiring sober living homes to be at least 1,000 feet away from each other and get city permits, along with limiting how many people they take in.
Newport Beach — alongside Costa Mesa — has struggled with group homes for well over a decade, taking action to require permitting and other regulations to function.
Additionally, Stanton city leaders issued a moratorium on any new methadone centers in town earlier this year so city officials can study how to best regulate them.
According to the Stanton municipal code, methadone clinics dispense drugs under the regulation of a state-licensed drug rehabilitation, detoxification or treatment program.
[Read: Orange County Cities Grapple With Drug Treatment Facilities]
A statewide ballot measure from this year’s primary election is also bringing up questions about group homes in California.
The measure, known as Prop 1, authorizes $6.4 billion in bonds to create more housing for homeless people and drug treatment centers and was narrowly passed by voters in the March 5 primary election.
[Read: Does Prop 1 Mean More Group Homes for Orange County?]
Some local officials, especially in coastal cities like Newport Beach, have raised concerns that the measure could bring more drug abuse and mental health treatment homes in neighborhoods.
Angelina Hicks is a Voice of OC Tracy Wood Reporting Fellow. Contact her at ahicks@voiceofoc.org or on Twitter @angelinahicks13.
•••
Can you support Voice of OC with a donation?
You obviously care about local news and value good journalism here in Orange County. With your support, we can bring you more stories like these.
Related
[ad_2]
Source link
