Wonder if there are any in Irvine/Tustin?
Fight between rehab facilities and cities felt across Orange County
Oct. 14, 2015 Updated Oct. 15, 2015 12:55 p.m.
By JORDAN GRAHAM, FRED SWEGLES and ERIN DONNELLY / STAFF
The battle between Orange County drug rehab facilities and the cities they have overwhelmed continued this week with a treatment center suing San Clemente, San Juan Capistrano residents protesting sobriety homes, and Costa Mesa attempting to expand its existing restrictions on sober-living centers.
All three cities have experienced an influx in recent years of drug and alcohol rehab facilities operating from houses and apartments in residential neighborhoods, sometimes co-opting whole blocks.
?We?ve been getting no help from Sacramento, and there isn?t going to be any coming,? Costa Mesa Planning Commissioner Colin McCarthy said Monday, noting that cities have so far been left to address sober-living issues without state help. ?It?s never been that we don?t want these people in our city. It?s that we?re not going to take a disproportionate share and suffer the byproducts.?
The pattern for some Orange County cities has become predictable: Sober-living homes arrive in numbers. Residents complain that the facilities change the character of neighborhoods, attracting higher traffic, transients and sometimes crime. City councils attempt to regulate. Sober-living homes sue the city, arguing the restrictions discriminate against recovering addicts ? a group protected by the Americans with Disabilities Act.
Orange County cities are at different points in that progression.
San Juan Capistrano residents began protesting sober-living homes last week, with 30 neighbors signing a petition asking the city to create an action committee to address the influx of facilties on Paseo Terraza and Via Estelita streets and restrict how or when the centers can hold meetings.
A San Clemente drug treatment center operating ?about seven? facilities in that town sued the city in federal court Oct. 7, alleging the city?s July moratorium on sober-living home openings is discriminatory.
?The city has targeted Sovereign (Health of California) for arbitrary and malicious treatment,? the suit says.
San Clemente City Attorney Scott Smith countered that the city had ?clear authorization in California and federal law to... enact a short-term ?pause? on particular land uses.?
In Costa Mesa, which estimates it has a quarter of the county?s rehab homes, the Planning Commission voted Monday to expand the city?s 2014 sober-living ordinance, which limited the number of rehab facilities that can operate in single-family-home neighborhoods. The new ordinance, if also approved by City Council, would extend those restrictions to nearly the entire city, preventing sobriety homes from simply relocating from one region of town to another.
?We?ve heard there are new (sober-living homes) still opening fairly regular,? said Commissioner Tim Sesler.
Costa Mesa?s 2014 law was the first in Orange County to impede the spread of rehab facilities without paying hefty settlements. The city has been sued twice over the law, but federal judges dismissed both cases, saying the city?s regulations actually help recovering addicts by preventing neighborhoods from becoming institutionalized settings.
Newport Beach wasn?t as lucky with its sober-living lawsuits. In July, the city ended a seven-year legal battle with sober-living homes by paying a $5.25 million settlement on top of $4 million in legal fees, relating to its 2008 attempt to regulate the facilities.
To date, cities have been left to addess sober-living issues at a local level, but Assemblyman Matt Harper, R-Huntington Beach, said some help could be coming from the state. Earlier this year, Harper said he was concerned about the spread of sober-living homes, and he coauthored a two-year bill in February (AB-838) that could address some issues of overconcentration.
?This is not limited to these cities. This seems to be as statewide issue,? Harper said. ?Our goals include more rigorous oversight of sober-living homes by the state, and also for the city to be able to manage the concentration in a particular neighborhood.?
Contact the writer: jgraham@ocregister.com or 714-796-7960
Fight between rehab facilities and cities felt across Orange County
Oct. 14, 2015 Updated Oct. 15, 2015 12:55 p.m.
By JORDAN GRAHAM, FRED SWEGLES and ERIN DONNELLY / STAFF
The battle between Orange County drug rehab facilities and the cities they have overwhelmed continued this week with a treatment center suing San Clemente, San Juan Capistrano residents protesting sobriety homes, and Costa Mesa attempting to expand its existing restrictions on sober-living centers.
All three cities have experienced an influx in recent years of drug and alcohol rehab facilities operating from houses and apartments in residential neighborhoods, sometimes co-opting whole blocks.
?We?ve been getting no help from Sacramento, and there isn?t going to be any coming,? Costa Mesa Planning Commissioner Colin McCarthy said Monday, noting that cities have so far been left to address sober-living issues without state help. ?It?s never been that we don?t want these people in our city. It?s that we?re not going to take a disproportionate share and suffer the byproducts.?
The pattern for some Orange County cities has become predictable: Sober-living homes arrive in numbers. Residents complain that the facilities change the character of neighborhoods, attracting higher traffic, transients and sometimes crime. City councils attempt to regulate. Sober-living homes sue the city, arguing the restrictions discriminate against recovering addicts ? a group protected by the Americans with Disabilities Act.
Orange County cities are at different points in that progression.
San Juan Capistrano residents began protesting sober-living homes last week, with 30 neighbors signing a petition asking the city to create an action committee to address the influx of facilties on Paseo Terraza and Via Estelita streets and restrict how or when the centers can hold meetings.
A San Clemente drug treatment center operating ?about seven? facilities in that town sued the city in federal court Oct. 7, alleging the city?s July moratorium on sober-living home openings is discriminatory.
?The city has targeted Sovereign (Health of California) for arbitrary and malicious treatment,? the suit says.
San Clemente City Attorney Scott Smith countered that the city had ?clear authorization in California and federal law to... enact a short-term ?pause? on particular land uses.?
In Costa Mesa, which estimates it has a quarter of the county?s rehab homes, the Planning Commission voted Monday to expand the city?s 2014 sober-living ordinance, which limited the number of rehab facilities that can operate in single-family-home neighborhoods. The new ordinance, if also approved by City Council, would extend those restrictions to nearly the entire city, preventing sobriety homes from simply relocating from one region of town to another.
?We?ve heard there are new (sober-living homes) still opening fairly regular,? said Commissioner Tim Sesler.
Costa Mesa?s 2014 law was the first in Orange County to impede the spread of rehab facilities without paying hefty settlements. The city has been sued twice over the law, but federal judges dismissed both cases, saying the city?s regulations actually help recovering addicts by preventing neighborhoods from becoming institutionalized settings.
Newport Beach wasn?t as lucky with its sober-living lawsuits. In July, the city ended a seven-year legal battle with sober-living homes by paying a $5.25 million settlement on top of $4 million in legal fees, relating to its 2008 attempt to regulate the facilities.
To date, cities have been left to addess sober-living issues at a local level, but Assemblyman Matt Harper, R-Huntington Beach, said some help could be coming from the state. Earlier this year, Harper said he was concerned about the spread of sober-living homes, and he coauthored a two-year bill in February (AB-838) that could address some issues of overconcentration.
?This is not limited to these cities. This seems to be as statewide issue,? Harper said. ?Our goals include more rigorous oversight of sober-living homes by the state, and also for the city to be able to manage the concentration in a particular neighborhood.?
Contact the writer: jgraham@ocregister.com or 714-796-7960