Laserfiche WebLink
WELCOME TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD <br />residential uses ordinance was facially discriminatory against persons in <br />recovery; <br />5. A cross -complaint by the City against Sober Living By The Sea and other <br />operators that consolidated certain lawsuits in U.S. District Court. <br />chairs are Packed during a discussion_ on -sober -living homes in San Clemente in 2016. (Photo by Matt Masin, Orange County <br />Register, SCNG) <br />'Subsequently; in 2009, three companies sued the City of Newport Beach over - <br />ordinance,. -claiming. it_violated anti -discrimination and fair housing laws because <br />individuals -recovering from -an _addiction are a protected group. A federal judge ruled in <br />favor of 1he City in 2011: The companies appealed the case and it went to the 9th <br />Circuit Court of Appeals, _where the Court's majority sided with the group homes, saying <br />there was enough evidence -to, argue discrimination. The Court pointed to comments <br />made during the 2008 hearing, which implied that the City Council was targeting <br />recovery group homes. <br />The City of Newport Beach asked the U.S. Supreme Court to review the case in 2014, <br />but the _Court declined. The City settled with the group homes for $5.25 million in 2015. <br />The City's estimated legal costs exceeded four million dollars,16 for a total cost close to <br />ten million dollars. <br />The City of Costa Mesa waged._a fierce and costly legal battle to regulate sober living <br />homes for over five years. As noted in the section regarding the State's actions and <br />attitude, Costa Mesa fashioned an ordinance within the limits of State and federal laws <br />ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY 2022 1 2023 Page 15 of 42 <br />