03-13-18 CC RPT 03 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

CITY OF IIVER.SIDE City 0J Arts &Innovation City Council Memorandum IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL DATE: MARCH 13, 2018 FROM: CITY ATTORNEY WARDS: ALL SUBJECT: WORKSHOP ON RESIDENTIAL RECOVERY FACILITIES AND GROUP HOMES ISSUE: To receive a presentation from staff on residential recovery facilities and group homes. RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council receives staff's presentation. BACKGROUND: There is a complex legal framework for regulating congregate living facilities in California. This Memorandum addresses the legal regulations applicable to many of the more prevalent types of group housing in California. A city's ability to regulate land uses is not unfettered. Cities are prevented from enacting local zoning ordinances directed at state licensed residential care and living facilities serving six or less residents (or more generally "group homes") and sober living homes. These must be treated as single-family dwellings. This includes a prohibition against any conditional use permit, zoning variance, or other discretionary action that is not required of a single family dwelling in the same zone. Furthermore, federal and state fair housing laws further restrict the ability of local government with regards to group homes and supportive housing. Where a city's zoning code illegally singles out and treats housing for persons with disabilities in an adverse manner, there is intentional discrimination. To prove discriminatory intent, an individual need only show that disability was one of the factors considered by the city or county in making a land use or zoning decision. Oxford House -C v. City of St. Louis, 843 F. Supp. 1566 (E.D. Mo. 1994). Additionally, where a zoning code or practice has a disparate impact on people with disabilities, there is disparate impact discrimination. Federal case law has established that a federal fair housing law violation may be proven through a "disparate impact" while California law has established that a liability can be established on the basis of "discriminatory effect." (Government Code Section 12955.8(b); Broadmoor San Clemente Homeowners v. Nelson, (2004) 25 Cal. App. 4th 1.