Costa Mesa plans to take it all the way to the top, asking the U.S. Supreme Court to weigh in as it battles discrimination suits over its sober living home laws.
The city’s winning streak in court — defending rules meant to rein in unruly homes — hit a bump in January, when a panel of judges from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit reversed a lower court’s ruling in the city’s favor.
At issue is a very specific question: How do you determine who is disabled? That’s a vital first step for a federal discrimination claim.
Sober home operators argue that the city’s rules target people recovering from addiction. The homes don’t have to prove, one by one, that their clients are actually disabled; their intent to serve recovering addicts is enough, they argue. Two of three judges from the 9th Circuit agreed.
Costa Mesa argues that federal law requires disability to be proven on a case-by-case basis in a discrimination claim, which a lower court judge agreed with. The city asked a full panel of 9th Circuit judges to reconsider the issue, but that was denied.
Now, the city will ask the highest court in the nation to weigh in.
“The law in this area from Supreme Court has been contrary to this decision,” city attorney Kim Barlow said. “The courts have required individual proof of disability to make a claim for disability discrimination.”
The city isn’t worried about its ordinances — it has prevailed in other courtroom settings — but is taking a stand on the larger issue.
“The main point in pursuing this is that it sets the barrier for suits so low that it really will force cities to go to trial” on weak claims, costing lots of public money, Barlow said.
The 9th Circuit decision overreaches “and sets a dangerous precedent that removes accountability for sober living home operators and ultimately puts people who suffer from addiction at risk,” added Seymour B. Everett III of Everett Dorey LLP, Costa Mesa’s outside attorney on these cases.
The city wants to protect disabled people from unscrupulous operators, he said. “Holding sober living home operators accountable preserves the character of communities by ensuring that operators are actually serving disabled persons and not running sham businesses in neighborhoods.”
Costa Mesa’s petition must be filed by May 24. The Supreme Court typically grants fewer than 2% of the review requests it gets each year — but the relationship between disability and discrimination and sober homes has been festering in California, Florida and elsewhere in the nation, and might get a more sympathetic hearing at the Supreme Court than it did at the 9th Circuit.
Setting standards
Other cities are watching Costa Mesa’s drama the way a dingo watches a human baby (credit: “Megamind”).
Costa Mesa’s rules say that no convicted sex offenders, violent felons or drug dealers can run sober homes. Supervision of clients 24/7 is required, sober homes must be at least 650 feet apart, residents must be actively participating in “legitimate” recovery programs and transportation must be provided when residents leave.
This protects the people in sober homes, as well as the neighbors around them, the city says.
Sober home operators say this discriminates against the disabled, as people suffering from addiction are disabled.
But Costa Mesa’s regulations have borne fruit, even as they’re challenged in court. There are far fewer licensed addiction treatment centers and sober homes in Costa Mesa today, and far more in many other Orange County cities, than there were six years ago, according to state data.
Since 2017, the number of state-licensed addiction treatment centers in Mission Viejo has increased by 50%. In Anaheim, it’s up 22%. In Newport Beach, it’s up 58%.
Meanwhile, in Costa Mesa, it has plummeted by nearly half. And the number of unlicensed sober homes rises, or falls, in tandem with the number of licensed treatment centers.
‘800-pound gorilla’
As the Rehab Riviera migrates, Costa Mesa’s tales of woe are becoming other cities’ tales of woe.
Led by Mission Viejo, they’re banding together into the newly renamed Southern California Sober Living and Recovery Task Force, hoping to form a unified front. With an eagle’s eye on Costa Mesa’s litigation, they’re working on a sober living ordinance that can be adopted by one and all.
“What’s gone wrong?” said Bill Curley, city attorney for Mission Viejo, at a recent task force meeting. “We’re hoping to get from all cities the horror stories. Then we can craft an ordinance that deals with those situations. If someone wants to take a swing at us, they’re taking on five, 10, 15, 20 cities’ ordinances, not just one particular city’s.
“If we can create a uniform ordinance, we are now the 800-pound gorilla instead of the 5-pound chimp.”
Court rulings in lawsuits challenging Costa Mesa’s rules suggest that an ordinance “must focus on land use determination and the regulation of business activity through administrative discretion or conditional use permits rather than whether the sober living homes are allowed to exist,” a backgrounder from Mission Viejo said.
“If we can take care of those people in these homes,” said Mission Viejo councilmember Wendy Bucknum, “we’ll take care of the neighborhoods.”
The task force’s next meeting is slated for May 12. Cities from beyond Orange County’s borders have expressed interest.
“I watch from a distance with great compassion our Costa Mesa friends,” Curley said. “Costa Mesa was requiring residents to be proved to be in need. A burden? Or good governance to make sure the right people get the right protection in the right way?”
Source: Orange County Register
Be First to Comment