HomeMy WebLinkAbout24 - Response to Grand Jury Report: "Welcome to the Neighborhood"Q �EwPpRT
CITY OF
s NEWPORT BEACH
`q44:09 City Council Staff Report
August 22, 2023
Agenda Item No. 24
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
FROM: Seimone Jurjis, Community Development Director - 949-644-3232,
sjurjis@newportbeachca.gov
PREPARED BY: Jaime Murillo, Planning Manager, jmurillo@newportbeachca.gov
PHONE: 949-644-3209
TITLE: Response to Grand Jury Report: "Welcome to the Neighborhood"
ABSTRACT -
For the City Council's consideration is approval of a response letter to the 2022-2023
Orange County Grand Jury Report, "Welcome to the Neighborhood- Are cities responsibly
managing the integration of group homes?" pursuant to Penal Code Section
933.05(a) and (b). The City of Newport Beach (City) is required to comment on the
findings and recommendations pertaining to matters under the City's control no later than
September 8, 2023.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
a) Determine this action is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
pursuant to Sections 15060(c)(2) and 15060(c)(3) of the CEQA Guidelines because
this action will not result in a physical change to the environment, directly or indirectly;
and
b) Approve the City's response to the 2022-2023 Orange County Grand Jury Report,
"Welcome to the Neighborhood- Are cities responsibly managing the integration of
group homes?" and authorize the Mayor to submit it to the Presiding Judge of the
Superior Court pursuant to Penal Code Section 933.05 (a) and (b).
DISCUSSION:
The 2022-2023 Orange County Grand Jury report, "Welcome to the Neighborhood- Are
cities responsibly managing the integration of group homes?" (Grand Jury Report) was
released to the public on June 12, 2023. The Grand Jury Report serves as an
investigation into the impact group homes have on neighborhoods when there is an
over -concentration of these homes in a particular residential area. The Grand Jury Report
identifies challenges introduced by pressure from residents, group home operators and
government agencies, and provides recommendations to alleviate these challenges.
The Grand Jury Report highlights the City of Newport Beach as a lead city in tackling the
issue of group homes in 2008 with the adoption of the first comprehensive ordinance in
Orange County. The Grand Jury Report also correctly identifies several constraints and
challenges the City faces, such as litigation, tracking of unlicensed facilities, and State
actions that weaken local control and enforcement.
24-1
Response to Grand Jury Report: "Welcome to the Neighborhood"
August 22, 2023
Page 2
The City was also highlighted as a positive example of how cities can better inform
community members about the challenges faced in regulating group homes, including the
use of town hall meetings.
Attachment A is a copy of the Grand Jury Report which includes findings and
recommendations that are required to be addressed by each city pursuant to Penal Code
Section 933.05(a) and (b).
Staff has drafted responses to the Grand Jury Report which must be submitted to the
Presiding Judge of the Superior Court with an informational copy sent to the Board of
Supervisors within 90 days after the Grand Jury publishes its report. In accordance with
Penal Code Section 933.05, the responses in Attachment B address the findings and
recommendations of the Grand Jury Report.
FISCAL IMPACT:
There is no fiscal impact related to this item.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:
Staff recommends the City Council find this action is not subject to the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Sections 15060(c)(2) (the activity will not
result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment)
and 15060(c)(3) (the activity is not a project as defined in Section 15378) of the CEQA
Guidelines, California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Chapter 3, because it has no
potential for resulting in physical change to the environment, directly or indirectly.
NOTICING:
The agenda item has been noticed according to the Brown Act (72 hours in advance of
the meeting at which the City Council considers the item).
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment A — Orange County Grand Jury Report
Attachment B — City of Newport Beach Draft Response
24-2
Attachment A
Orange County Grand Jury Report
24-3
.•l
} ]may ,dF � ! �t,'•
F' l '4
f :,�,� i . � ..go- I.+ • � � i � - .
A:'tip• .� �f°. - Yf; i+5,,
T jj y
'�$Y`Y"$$$"` f r• .'� L 7' /�����,�51 .. '4y,� �p5C + 1... 17a ,l
4 R
' r ,
yl l{ F+ I5J {yy�j I
tip'`' .' ill 4yf'
10
✓LC�—•. •u6T.Al"A}•�{'•iV.'i%t/+. ..Lr:tlry a�+ii ��� J1i5�+�.5%SY3 �J}�9Ii�F�'`'i{:ttT�y�� �;....�•.^�'.'.it'.1. i_Y._.e:1v..�.., 16'u�- �__.__
Welcome to the Neighborhood
Are cities responsibly managing the integration of group homes?
�.L ., O
U J
r9'IF0Yk
County of Orange Grand Jury 2022-2023
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SUMMARY....................................................................................................................................... 3
BACKGROUND................................................................................................................................. 4
REASONFOR STUDY........................................................................................................................ 6
METHODOF STUDY......................................................................................................................... 7
INVESTIGATION AND ANALYSIS...................................................................................................... 7
OCGroup Home Density............................................................................................................. 8
TrackingChallenges.................................................................................................................. 10
CommonNuisances.................................................................................................................. 11
LeadCities................................................................................................................................. 12
Cities Are Standing Alone.......................................................................................................... 12
Fearof Litigation Costs............................................................................................................. 13
StateActions............................................................................................................................. 17
HousingElement....................................................................................................................... 18
Educatingthe Public................................................................................................................. 19
How Has This Issue Evolved?.................................................................................................... 23
FINDINGS....................................................................................................................................... 24
RECOMMENDATIONS................................................................................................................... 25
RESPONSES.................................................................................................................................... 25
90 Day Response Required....................................................................................................... 27
GLOSSARY...................................................................................................................................... 29
BIBLIOGRAPHY.............................................................................................................................. 34
NOTICE.......................................................................................................................................... 40
ENDNOTES.................................................................................................................................... 40
24-5
WELCOME TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD
SUMMARY
Group homes are an important component in the healthcare and/or recovery of many
people. These homes provide, among other things, Substance Recovery, Hospice Care,
Residential Care for the Elderly, and Sober Living. When group homes are operated for
the well-being of their residents and with respect for their neighbors, they can be an
asset to their host community. However, they can occasionally become disruptive and
the motivation for nuisance calls to local code enforcement. In extreme cases, the
"curbing" of residents can contribute to the homeless population.
Negative interactions with disruptive group homes often lead to neighborhood
opposition and anger towards city officials. How cities respond to the anger of their
constituents impacts their ability to successfully integrate group homes. Residents are
more likely to respond positively when cities offer townhall style meetings with police,
fire, code enforcement, legal, and subject matter expert involvement, especially where
the subject is discussed objectively, and public input is encouraged and respected.
Issues and concerns neighborhood residents have with group homes stem primarily
from an over -concentration of homes in residential areas. Multiple cities in Orange
County have attempted to manage integration of group homes into neighborhoods by
enacting ordinances that include setting a minimum distance between group homes to
avoid the problems associated with over -concentration. Most cities with such
ordinances have not enforced them due to the fear of incurring litigation costs.
The Grand Jury reviewed the challenges of successfully integrating group homes into
neighborhoods, including pressures exerted on Orange County cities by residents,
group home operators, and the State of California.
The State of California has recently joined the group home debate, has altered the
conversation, and raised the stakes. The State wields a large club with its power of
approval of the required Housing Element. The California Housing and Community
Development Department (HCD) is withholding approval for cities that have ordinances
attempting to place limits or impose oversight on group homes. Cities are then
vulnerable to a loss of control over zoning and permitting, as well as loss of State and
regional funding.
Some cities have decided to push back on the pressures put on them from HCD and the
fight has been carried out on an individual city basis. The Orange County Grand Jury
recommends that the County of Orange and cities join forces to create ordinances, pool
resources for defense of lawsuits, and work together to generate awareness among
legislators to improve regulations and management standards to ensure health and
safety for group home residents.
ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY 2022 12023 Page 3 of 42
24-6
WELCOME TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD
BACKGROUND
Orange County has 42 miles of beautiful coastline, three harbors, and 25 urban and
wilderness parks - including 230 miles of riding and hiking trails. Orange County also
has the dubious honor of having more than its share of our State's total number of
group recovery and sober living residences. Frequently referred to as "The Rehab
Riviera", several cities in Orange County have been dealing with pockets of over -
concentration of these types of group homes. This has posed challenges for the
residents in whose neighborhoods they are located, as well as the occupants of the
recovery and sober living homes.
Many of the homes in
question are privately
owned, unlicensed,
unsupervised, and a
challenge to monitor and
regulate. When a
neighborhood has multiple
group homes, it becomes
a more institutional
environment; this alters
the character of the
neighborhood and defeats
the purpose of the
"integration" of people who
are recovering.
The Orange County coast is a magnet for sober living homes
To address these shortcomings, multiple cities, and the County, on behalf of
unincorporated areas, have enacted ordinances that manage the permitting and
tracking of group homes.
Several significant pieces of legislation have played a part in the expansion of group
homes. These include California's Lanterman Mental Retardation Act (1988), the
Federal Fair Housing Amendments Act of 1988, the California Community Care
Facilities Act, and California's Substance Abuse and Crime Prevention Act of 2000
(Proposition 36). The resulting deinstitutionalization has had a positive effect on the
lives of many people but has created a challenge for cities as they work towards the
responsible integration of the group living arrangements necessary to accommodate the
impacted population.'
ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY 2022 12023
Page 4 of 42
24-7
WELCOME TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD
Since deinstitutionalization, the State of California has resisted appeals from local cities
to pass permitting laws, distancing requirements, or any type of regulation at all. There
is a misconception that these regulatory ordinances are intended to discriminate against
people who are disabled due to alcohol and drug addiction, and the State of California
has cited this misconception as the guiding principle for its dogged challenge of most
attempts by cities to manage the responsible integration of group homes into residential
neighborhoods. Rather, such city ordinances are intended to protect those people who
suffer from alcohol and drug addiction, as well as the neighborhoods where group
homes are located.
Licensed residential rehab programs are subject to the same local laws as single-family
homes, and no more. State law imposes fewer restrictions on licensed rehab programs
than other licensed group homes. The Community Care Facilities Act, from which
alcohol and drug rehab facilities are exempt, imposes restrictions that protect the
character of residential neighborhoods. Under this act, cities receive written notice of a
proposed facility, and any city or county may request denial of the license based on
overconcentration of residential care facilities. While alcohol and drug programs that
provide 24-hour residential non -medical services to adults recovering from drug or
alcohol abuse must obtain a State license, they cannot be regulated any differently from
a single-family home if they serve six or fewer people.
California Health & Safety Code Sections 1520.5 and 1267.9 state it is a policy of the
State to prevent overconcentration of residential facilities that impair the integrity of
residential neighborhoods. Section 1520.5 states that the department shall deny an
application for a new residential facility license if the department determines the facilities
location is proximate to an existing residential facility therefore resulting in
overconcentration. The statute recognized the need for a balanced policy to prevent
overconcentration of residential care facilities which indicates an awareness and
understanding of the impact of overconcentration on the integrity of residential
neighborhoods. The statute defines overconcentration as less than 300 feet for some
types of group homes and up to 1000 feet for others. At the time the statute was
enacted it was specific only to certain types of group homes. However, the recent
emphasis on providing more housing in California has eroded the intent of this act.
Federal and State fair housing laws protect people with disabilities from housing
discrimination. Recovering alcoholics and drug addicts are disabled for purposes of anti-
discrimination laws. When people in recovery live together in a "sober living" home,
cities cannot discriminate based on such disabilities, therefore an ordinance cannot
treat sober living homes differently than other similar uses in single-family residential
zones.
Sober living homes are not required to be licensed and are not limited to six or fewer
residents. Because no treatment is provided in these substance -free, mutually
supportive living environments, no license is required. The limitation of most other group
ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY 2022 12023 Page 5 of 42
24-8
WELCOME TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD
homes to six residents is part of the State statute; however, confusion arises because
the statute does not apply to sober living homes.
There is only so much a city can do to respond to the complaints of its residents when
dealing with an overconcentration of group homes in a neighborhood. It is important for
city residents to be educated on the barriers faced by cities, and to work with their city to
overcome these barriers.
Current laws do not adequately address the need to manage the integration of group
homes into neighborhoods. Courts should not be where the solutions are found.
REASON FOR STUDY
Many cities within Orange County have neighborhoods with a dense concentration of
group recovery and sober living residences. In most circumstances, cities do not know
where these group homes are located unless the homes generate a backlash from
neighbors due to various types of disturbances. The Grand Jury examined how Orange
County cities are managing the distancing of all types of group homes, and the impact
group homes have on neighborhoods and group home residents when the homes are in
close proximity to one another.
Group homes, most often Recovery and Sober Living homes, and the nuisances that
are commonly associated with them, are not new to Orange County. Neighborhood
complaints, concerns from individuals living in or related to residents of group homes,
the litigious nature of the relationship between cities and group home operators, and
abuse of the healthcare system have been in play in Orange County for well over a
decade.
The Grand Jury began this study by looking at how cities are managing the influx and
locations of group homes and identifying best practices where they are found. The
working premise was that each city is responsible for the integration of group homes,
which would serve to protect the residents of group homes while maintaining the
existing neighborhood atmosphere.
Has there been success addressing the issues associated with group homes and what
does that look like? Are cities going it alone or are there county -wide efforts? Has there
been progress made in this area? The Grand Jury approached the topic of group home
integration seeking answers to these questions with the expectation that there were
some systems in place resulting in the successful integration of group homes. The
investigation took a winding road which revealed that, despite countless attempts at
change, many of the problems that surfaced over a decade ago are still present. The
Grand Jury found that successfully implemented solutions have become even more
impactful in light of the State of California's heavy-handed entry into the debate.
ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY 2022 1 2023 Page 6 of 42
24-9
WELCOME TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD
METHOD OF STUDY
The Grand Jury has evaluated official documents, examined news articles, visited
multiple recovery/sober living websites, and assessed secondary sources.
The Grand Jury reviewed
numerous documents, including
the 2022 State of California's
Group Home Technical Advisory2
and the 1990 State of California
Health and Safety Code.3
To better understand the impact
of density, jurors attended
townhall and city council meetings
virtually, through recordings, and
visited neighborhoods in several
cities where there is a heavy
concentration of group homes.
The Grand Jury interviewed numerous subject matter experts, city managers, County
and city officials, legislators, city attorneys, group home operators, and legal and real
estate professionals. It also examined local, state, and national media reports and
opinion pieces regarding group recovery and sober living residences. The Findings and
Recommendations herein are based on this work.
INVESTIGATION AND ANALYSIS
Orange County has some of the heaviest concentrations of group homes and sober
living residences in the nation.4 The densities are more than the local population can
bear and residents believe the influx of the group home residents seriously impacts their
neighborhoods. Similarly, group home and sober living industry experts cite negative
impacts on the group home residents themselves.
Operators can open a group home where they desire, without having a license or State -
endorsed certification, and they can open as many group homes as they desire
regardless of local need. Because regulation is slack, cities are challenged to track and
regulate the density without any guidance or support from the State. Adding to these
concerns is a recent State of California memorandum titled "Group Home Technical
Advisory" that characterizes any attempts to regulate the homes as discriminatory.5 It
seems that method of thinking has no positive effect on how the homes are run or on
how the vulnerable residents in these homes are treated, and quite possibly has the
opposite effect.
ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY 2022 12023 Page 7 of 42
24-10
WELCOME TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD
OC Group Home Density
Reportedly, Orange County has more than its share of group homes in California, and
the country for that matter, specific to housing individuals in need of Recovery/Sober
Living Homes.6 There are no existing requirements for sober living homes with six or
fewer residents to identify or register themselves as such.
It is estimated that up to 36% of houses required to be licensed (those providing
services) by the State of California as group homes for six or fewer residents are
located in Orange County. In addition, there are hundreds of group homes not requiring
licensing that exist in Orange County neighborhoods. This lack of identification makes it
extremely difficult to estimate the total number of sober living homes in our
communities.'
As documented in numerous city council and townhall meetings, residents and activists
have raised concerns about over -saturation and common nuisances to local community
governing bodies (see Common Nuisances section). In many cases, these are
neighborhoods in which multiple group homes are in close proximity (for example three
in one cul-de-sac) or individual homes are run with little to no on -site supervision.
Neighborhoods are losing their original character and familial aspect, with some
becoming increasingly institutional and others experiencing more of a "frat house" feel.
"Residents of these homes are moving in and
out at an alarming, transitory rate"
Residents of these homes are moving in and out at an alarming, transitory rate.
Neighbors describe some of these group homes as taking no responsibility for the
actions of their inhabitants. Rules and responsibilities are either not imposed or not
enforced by the group home operators. The complaints are predominantly related to
non -regulated group homes.
Over the last several years, multiple cities in Orange County have sought to find a
solution to alleviate these concerns. Several have performed due diligence to ensure
that any action taken will provide for neighborhoods to remain neighborhoods, and that
both the disabled and the recovering addicts needing to live in these types of group
homes are in fact living in a normalized residential environment that provides the best
opportunity to be successful in their recovery.
ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY 2022 12023 Page 8 of 42
24-11
WELCOME TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD
This is not simply a "Not In My Backyard" (NIMBY) issue or reaction as evidenced by
the large number of homes that receive few or no complaints. The need for well -run
Recovery/Sober Living Homes is not in dispute. Concerns arise when these homes are
poorly run and/or when multiple homes are in close proximity, contributing to the
problem of over -concentration. These two circumstances cause changes in the local
neighborhood, and it is questionable whether they are aiding the very residents that
they are meant to be assisting and whether residents of these homes are integrating
into a normalized environment.
To that end, various cities have introduced ordinances toward resolving the problem.
Some of these include distancing requirements between group homes ranging from 300
to 1000 feet. Some ordinances require group homes to register or self -identify as such.
California Health & Safety Code Section 1267.9 provides specific requirements for
distancing of most types of group homes settings.$ These requirements are similar to
the local city ordinances in that they provide certain spacing restrictions of between 300
and1000 feet. Sober Living Homes, however, are excluded from any distancing
requirement by the State.
Los Padres
National Forest
3 Sant, "IrbaraIs 10,
••
■ y'1
Victorville
1 rrarita
■
!
jNfimpr
ri
■
Angeles
National Forest
u! :.-.�,
fir• ' - " .
Santa
r:
Long
Amboy
■
■ Si
San • ■ = W
jagdLPQ
is Forest ••
•m Palm Lorin s Joshua Tree
•+,.• ; National Park
v • •Indio
Fdlm Deser•�'■ ••.
L
Ca ■ ■ ■'■
"■..,-
Anza-Borrego
� 'ondido ■
Desert
'� •
State Park
Go gle My Maps ..■olk� � ■
■
'■ ■■ ■
MIIII Sal"f■iii
Cleveland El
�,7,ri
r,,tinnal Fnrcct Keyboard shortcuts
Points show the primary addresses ofall non -medical alcoholism and drugabuse recoveryor treatment
facilities licensed and/or certified by the California Department of Health Care Services as of May 4, 2017
(Map by Ian Wheeler, Orange CountyRegister/SCNG)
The State imposes licensing requirements on most types of group homes and provides
for oversight by one or more State or County agency. Sober Living Homes with six or
fewer residents are not required to be licensed by the State and have no regulatory
ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY 2022 12023 Page 9 of 42
24-12
WELCOME TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD
oversight. These two factors alone allow anyone to set up, open, and advertise this type
of group home anywhere in California. Orange County seems to be the favored location,
yet has no say in the siting or quantity of group homes in our residential neighborhoods.
Tracking Challenges
Just where are these sober living homes? All over. How do we know? We actually don't.
There are few local ordinances requiring the registration, licensing, or declaration of any
type of unlicensed sober living or recovery residence that has been established in a
neighborhood. There are no widely adopted methods to track or monitor any aspect of
such dwellings — their location, number of people residing in them, on -site management,
or their ownership.
The Grand Jury's research found that most sober living homes are not required by law
to have any kind of State license. Some cities have enacted ordinances that require a
permit or registration. When a sober living establishment is registered and a complaint
is received, the complaint may be recorded and could be tracked, at least for the
location of that specific home.
WHERE THE REHABS ARE
California has 1.854 reflab facilities. and mere than Ka If (1,117) aie in Los Angeles. San Bernardino. Orange and
Riverside counties. The map below shows the coneentratIons of these centers and the ratio of rehabs per resident
in some of our Coles.
•
•
M #
• LOS A€dGELES COLWY
Lang Beacp
1121,935
f221 1
1{00 Rehabsger resrden-
(00) Total rehabs
Rehab center
Snjee: CWorno 1 . ° iLe t nl Pub11c Hearth
at
■
$AN BERNARDINO COUNTY
•
M a¢
iMpaes
y, (25)
r # 71 •
s MINTY
L. na Self 5,-}n Juan Capistrorw
111.163 11L286
(201 x�(29)
s
3e'necula
115.932
(1e1
Is
do
Palm Springs
�'ilS.df}T
(t>t}
AFF WERTZEN.SC"
Except for the few cities with ordinances regulating sober living homes and the few
homes that applied for registration or received ministerial permits, accurate tracking and
monitoring remains challenging. Tracking is attainable if cities' code and law
enforcement establish and actively utilize a searchable database that includes
ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY 2022 12023 Page 10 of 42
24-13
WELCOME TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD
information about police and fire calls, nuisance complaints or code infractions, and
identification of type of establishment. The use of this information can help identify the
location and density of group homes.
Common Nuisances
Residents living in cities with neighborhoods having a significant number of recovery
and sober living homes complain that the proliferation of these group homes in recent
years has become unmanageable, and that overconcentration is impacting the quality of
life for everyone.
For years, many citizens living in neighborhoods with an unrestrained growth of sober
living homes have been voicing their concerns and frustrations over the lack of
protection their communities are given. While many of these group homes adopt rules
and regulations and attempt to be good neighbors, a citizen's primary method for
reporting concerns about a disruptive home is initiating a nuisance complaint to their
local law enforcement.
Common Nuisances
Secondhand
Smoking
Vomiting in
Driveways
Higher Noise
Levels
Curbing
�i
I
Increased Foot
Traffic
n
Box Truckr
A Deliveries
`u-01
Increased Street
Parking
5ubstantial
Rubbish @ Front
Lawns
Relapsing in
Public
Increased Traffic
The outcry is that unregulated sober living residences make for bad neighbors. Sober
living homes are not always bad neighbors, but when they are concentrated in a small
geographic area or neighborhood, the common nuisances can become more visible and
disruptive. Ultimately, this raises concerns about the potential or actual diminished
character of the neighborhood.
ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY 2022 12023
Page 11 of 42
24-14
WELCOME TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD
Lead Cities
Although the City of Costa Mesa has been front and center in the legal fights related to
group homes, it was Newport Beach that first stepped into the arena in 2008. Three
companies sued the City over an ordinance that was approved by the City Council in
2008 that regulated group homes for recovering addicts.9 Pacific Shores Properties,
Newport Coast Recovery, and Yellowstone Women's First Step House sued Newport
Beach for a total of $5.24 million. Still in place today, this ordinance was the first of its
kind in Orange County and it established quiet hours, parking and smoking areas, and
van routes. It also required the City's approval for new unlicensed homes for recovering
addicts in certain neighborhoods. In 2015, the City reached the end of its seven-year
legal battle over sober -living homes with a settlement agreement.10 11
According to the Orange County Register, which cites its own archives, Newport Beach
spent at least four million dollars in legal costs on the cases. In 2008, there were 81
facilities and 614 total beds identified in Newport Beach. In 2021, there were a known
30 facilities with 210 total beds. Where did all those facilities and beds go?12 Perhaps to
the City of Costa Mesa. In 2015, the City of Costa Mesa enacted their own ordinance
(amended in 2017) after seeing a sharp increase in the number of sober living homes
followed by a steep increase in the number of community complaints. On the heels of
the ordinance came the legal challenges, and Costa Mesa prevailed in all challenges
until January 2023 when two sober living homes, embroiled in litigation against the city,
were handed a legal victory in federal court. The earlier dismissal was reversed and
remanded by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals which ruled that asking operators of
sober living facilities for proof of disability violates federal law barring discrimination
against those with disabilities and bars discrimination in housing.
"The well -funded operators are supported by
industry organizations and associations
in their lawsuits..."
As the legal battle waged on, other local governments explored, advanced, or enacted
regulation of sober living homes, including the County of Orange (2015), and Cities of
Laguna Hills (2015), San Clemente (2016), Laguna Niguel (2016), San Juan Capistrano
(2016), Anaheim (2020), and Huntington Beach (2020). Most of these entities, perhaps
all, have chosen not to enforce their ordinances out of concern of potential litigation, and
are waiting for Costa Mesa's litigation to conclude.
Cities Are Standing Alone
Multiple cities in the County have executed ordinances to regulate unlicensed group
homes. With the exception of the newly formed South Orange County Sober Living and
ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY 2022 12023 Page 12 of 42
24-15
WELCOME TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD
Recovery Task Force, cities have not collaborated on solutions to shared and common
problems. This has been done on an individual basis, with little collaboration among
cities. Prior to drafting an ordinance, some cities study the details and effectiveness of
other cities' actions, particularly the City of Costa Mesa's ordinance, and use that as a
template to draft their own.13
Once enacted, few of the ordinances are being enforced. This lack of enforcement is
due to a small number of very specific impediments and concerns. These include:
• Fear of litigation costs due to lawsuits filed by group home operators against
cities that have enforced ordinances. (The City of Costa Mesa has reportedly
incurred over ten million dollars in legal fees in relation to group home litigation.)
Fear of the State of California withholding approval of the Housing Element for
cities that have ordinances related to the management of group homes, resulting
in the potential loss of state funds and local zoning control.
• Lack of enforcement resources. Most cities do not have the staff resources to
enforce these ordinances.
While individual cities take a wait -and -see approach to follow the progress of other cities
that are standing up to the State, little progress is being made. The cities and County of
Orange would benefit by working in partnership with one another to garner resources
and create a coalition to promote change. While the newly constituted South Orange
County Sober Living and Recovery Task Force is a good start, and the first tangible
recognition of the need to work together, the Grand Jury recommends a countywide
cooperative taskforce.
Orange County's cities and unincorporated areas are demographically diverse.The
active sharing of ideas, experiences, and information will be valuable to the overall
process of developing a worthwhile model ordinance and plan for moving forward in the
efforts to protect both the individual characteristics of Orange County neighborhoods,
and all individuals living in those neighborhoods.
Fear of Litigation Costs
Cities are concerned about the high cost of litigation and the time required to defend
ordinances regulating group homes. Private entities have challenged ordinances and in
some cases won, and in other cases continued to pursue lawsuits in spite of opposition.
In one case, the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD)
requested that the California Department of Justice file a "friend of the court" application
to intervene on behalf the litigant in its case against the City.
ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY 2022 1 2023 Page 13 of 42
24-16
WELCOME TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD
million
Newport Beach
Two examples of cities being involved in lengthy and costly lawsuits include Newport
Beach and Costa Mesa. In 2007, Newport Beach had numerous sober living homes and
was facing increasing pressure by residents to regulate them. In January 2008, Newport
Beach passed an ordinance regulating sober living homes. The ordinance was carefully
crafted to comply with State and federal law.15
By November 2008, several legal actions occurred. These included:
1. A lawsuit from a residents' group (the "Concerned Citizens of Newport Beach" or
CCNB) arguing that the City did not go far enough in enacting Ordinance 2008-
05. CCNB also sued multiple operators and asked for $250 million in damages
from the City;
2. Two group home operators (Pacific Shores Recovery and Sober Living by the
Sea) filed complaints with the US Department of Housing and Urban
Development (HUD) alleging that the City's ordinance and its practices have
discriminated against disabled persons entitled to fair housing;
3. Multiple lawsuits were filed by Sober Living By the Sea (SLBTS) alleging that the
City's group residential uses ordinance was facially discriminatory against
persons in recovery. The City reached an agreement with SLBTS;
4. The City filed lawsuits against Morningside Recovery and Pacific Shores
Recovery, alleging that some of their operations opened illegally during a short-
term temporary moratorium against the establishment of new group residential
uses. Pacific Shores Recovery has in turn alleged that the City's group
ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY 2022 1 2023
Page 14 of 42
24-17
WELCOME TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD
U
residential uses ordinance was facially discriminatory against persons in
recovery;
5. A cross -complaint by the City against Sober Living By The Sea and other
operators that consolidated certain lawsuits in U.S. District Court.
^,f
Chairs are packed during a discussion on sober -living homes in San Clemente in 2016. (Photo by Matt Masin, Orange County
Register, SCNG)
Subsequently, in 2009, three companies sued the City of Newport Beach over the
ordinance, claiming it violated anti -discrimination and fair housing laws because
individuals recovering from an addiction are a protected group. A federal judge ruled in
favor of the City in 2011. The companies appealed the case and it went to the 9th
Circuit Court of Appeals, where the Court's majority sided with the group homes, saying
there was enough evidence to argue discrimination. The Court pointed to comments
made during the 2008 hearing, which implied that the City Council was targeting
recovery group homes.
The City of Newport Beach asked the U.S. Supreme Court to review the case in 2014,
but the Court declined. The City settled with the group homes for $5.25 million in 2015.
The City's estimated legal costs exceeded four million dollars,16 for a total cost close to
ten million dollars.
The City of Costa Mesa waged a fierce and costly legal battle to regulate sober living
homes for over five years. As noted in the section regarding the State's actions and
attitude, Costa Mesa fashioned an ordinance within the limits of State and federal laws
ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY 2022 1 2023 Page 15 of 42
24-18
WELCOME TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD
in 2014.17 The City ultimately spent over seven million dollars in litigation, and prevailed
in State and federal courts; however, in January 2023, a federal appellate court
reversed and remanded the district court's 2020 ruling.
Costa Mesa Ordinance 15-11 sets limited standards for three items that address
important societal issues, none of which are discriminatory in nature:
1. Spacing (650 feet apart)
2. Background screening of the house manager
3. Process for evicting residents
Spacing between group homes maintains the purpose of the facility and residential
character of the neighborhood. Screening protects the residents of the facility. Through
interviewees, the Grand Jury learned of group home managers with criminal
backgrounds and who are themselves currently substance abusers. Standards for
evictions are needed. Through interviews and newspaper articles, the Grand Jury
learned of the practice of "curbing," putting residents out on the curb when their source
of payment runs out or when they are in violation of house rules. This practice is
believed to contribute to homelessness in Orange County.
Costa Mesa's ordinance serves an important purpose, but the ordinance is still in
litigation after several years and at an estimated cost of more than ten million dollars.18
Other Cities in California and Orange County are similarly facing lawsuits and costs
associated with group home and sober living ordinances. Cities could pool resources to
mitigate litigation cost concerns. A coalition of cities to spread costs is highly
recommended.
The Grand Jury learned that the lawsuits brought against cities are supported and
enabled by an extremely profitable industry. According to John LaRosa at
MarketResearch.com on February 5, 2020,19 the group home market is 42 billion dollars
per year. Mr. LaRosa also noted that the industry needed to be cleaned up as many of
the operators engaged in overbilling, patient brokering, and deceptive marketing.
The well -funded operators are supported by industry organizations and associations in
their lawsuits. Industry organizations include large groups such as the California
Consortium of Addiction Programs and Professionals, Behavioral Health Associates,
and National Sober Living Associates. The websites of any of these organizations and
several others can be viewed to see the type of support often provided. The
organizations not only provide support for lawsuits, but also assist in lobbying State and
federal legislators.
Many group home operators do not want any type of regulation, as evidenced by the
Costa Mesa and Newport lawsuits, though the Grand Jury found some operators who
welcome additional regulation to protect the industry from bad operators. In summary,
the industry represents a formidable foe in lawsuits due to funding and industry
associations.
ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY 2022 12023
Page 16 of 42
24-19
WELCOME TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD
State Actions
Zoning ordinances are the primary control local governments have over city land use.
The State of California has challenged the validity of group home ordinances, thereby
inhibiting local governments in addressing group homes through zoning ordinances. If
challenged, defense of the ordinances is costly and the alternative is to repeal them, a
process that can be politically charged.
When Costa Mesa originally prevailed in the lawsuits filed against their 2014 sober
living ordinance, the Cities of Encinitas, Huntington Beach, Anaheim and the County of
Orange adopted similar ordinances for sober living facilities. In May 2021, the California
Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) sent a letter to the City of
Encinitas stating its ordinance was in violation of statutory prohibitions on discrimination
in land use. HCD said the city must take immediate steps to repeal the ordinance.
HCD's letter to the City of Encinitas noted "The City appears to take significant comfort
from certain court opinions, several unpublished, appearing to reject specific, largely
different and distinguishable challenges to a different group home ordinance in Costa
Mesa, which were brought by private parties rather than the State of California. Those
decisions are neither on point nor binding here. "This statement is misleading to the
general public because it downplays judicial rulings favoring Costa Mesa's ordinance.
In May of 2021, HCD sent a "Letter of Technical Assistance" to the City of Anaheim in
which they discuss Anaheim's land use regulations. One of the items discussed was a
phone call they had with city staff to discuss concerns with the proposed Zoning Code
Amendment for group homes. HCD's concern was that the ordinance "potentially
conflict(s) with statutory prohibitions on discrimination in land use".
Also in May of 2021, HCD sent a "Notice of Violation: City of Anaheim Notice of
Violations of Housing Element Law and Anti -Discrimination in Land Use" regarding the
denial of a conditional use permit for transitional housing. The California Department of
Justice (DOJ) subsequently joined a civil lawsuit regarding the same action. HCD
believes the City has failed to implement goals, policies, and program actions included
in the housing element and failed to act consistent with Government Code requirements
in applying standards to the approval of the Project.
On December 21, 2022, HCD issued a document titled Group Home Technical
Advisory.20 The executive summary includes the following:
"In recent years, some local governments have amended their zoning ordinances
to add new regulations for group homes, particularly for recovery residences -
group homes that provide housing for persons recovering from alcoholism or
drug addiction. These amendments have raised concerns that local governments
are not complying with their affirmative obligations under state planning and
ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY 2022 12023
Page 17 of 42
24-20
WELCOME TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD
zoning laws to promote more inclusive communities and affirmatively further fair
housing (AFFH). These amendments have also generated disputes and
confusion over whether local governments are violating fair housing laws by
discriminating against persons with disabilities or other protected characteristics."
The document assumes the ordinances are not legally compliant and creates difficulties
faced by cities trying to reasonably regulate group homes. The document is labeled a
"technical advisory" but reads as a policy statement. There were apparently no public
hearings regarding the document.
"The document is labeled a "technical
advisory" but reads as a
policy statement... "
These actions by HCD and DOJ, as well as litigation, are challenges municipalities face
in adopting ordinances regarding group homes when the courts have found these
ordinances compliant with State and federal laws. This was made evident through
interviews with representatives of cities. Interviewees also expressed concern that HCD
interpreted the laws as being overly restrictive on zoning ordinances and failing to
protect the inhabitants of group homes.
Housing Element
In the State of California, all cities are required to develop a General Plan. The General
Plan serves as a blueprint for the future, prescribing policy goals and objectives to
shape and guide the physical development of the city. The General Plan is a
comprehensive policy document that informs future land use decisions, and it is
comprised of multiple elements.21
The Housing Element is one important part of a city or county's General Plan. Every
eight years, every city, town, and county must update their Housing Element and have it
certified by the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD).
The most recent cycle of the new Housing Element has been heavily impacted by the
State's laser focus on housing availability and affordability.
On September 28, 2021, Governor Gavin Newsom signed a suite of bills to boost
housing production across California which accompanies the Governor's $22 billion
housing affordability and homelessness package and ongoing work by the State to spur
more housing production, tackle barriers to construction, and hold local governments
accountable. Taken together, the actions reflect the State's focus on creating more
ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY 2022 12023 Page 18 of 42
24-21
WELCOME TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD
affordable housing, faster and cheaper. "The acute affordability crisis we are
experiencing in California was decades in the making, and now we're taking the
necessary steps to fix it," said Governor Newsom.22
Although this is a response to a real need in California, the real -world consequences to
the "build -build -build" solution are many. One of those can be seen in the State's
myopic push for housing as it has mistakenly equated group homes with additional
housing options. But housing is not increased by allowing the unbridled proliferation of
recovery and sober living homes. The industry advertises heavily outside of California
and brings many of their residents from out-of-state. It is not uncommon for some of
these residents to be "kicked to the curb" (referred to as curbing) for various reasons,
and because they are not local to Orange County, they have nowhere to go and
ultimately face homelessness.
HCD wields its power to review and approve State housing elements as a threat to
deter city and county efforts to regulate group homes. Approval of the Housing Element
has a big impact on a city's ability to enforce its general plan and to control what gets
built and where it is built. Without the HCD's approval of the housing element, a door is
opened to developers to bypass local zoning ordinances by utilizing a seldom used
loophole known as Builders Remedy. Under that law, a developer may sidestep city
approvals to construct a housing development if 20% of the project's homes are
affordable housing.23
State funding programs for transportation, infrastructure, and housing often require or
consider a local jurisdiction's compliance with Housing Element Law. These competitive
funds can be used for fixing roads, adding bike lanes, improving transit, or providing
much needed affordable housing to communities. In some cases, funding from
state/federal housing programs can only be accessed if the jurisdiction has a compliant
housing element.24 25
Educating the Public
By the time the public has organized to bring their concerns to city leadership through a
letter writing campaign, a joint written complaint, or a petition, their level of frustration
has likely been building for quite a while. How city leadership deals with the concerns
and frustrations of their constituency is likely to determine whether it will be a
collaborative or an adversarial process to find a resolution. Educating the public on the
reasons that cities have seemingly been unwilling to address the integration of group
homes into Orange County neighborhoods is key to the success of collaborative
problem solving.
Cities have been squeezed from above by a combination of intense pressure from
group home operators citing federal protections for the disabled, and the State of
California's efforts to eliminate group home ordinances by withholding approval on
cities' mandated Housing Element submission. They are also squeezed from below by
ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY 2022 12023 Page 19 of 42
24-22
WELCOME TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD
the people in neighborhoods which have been impacted by the over -concentration of
group homes, and/or the level of nuisances generated by the group homes.
"Some cities have used the multi -discipline,
educational, townhall type response to the public
outcry while others have not.
The outcome can be quite different."
A lack of understanding of the challenges faced by cities leads to the perception that
they are unwilling to step up and regulate the various group home types that are
springing up in neighborhoods. Public education will reveal that there is not an
unwillingness of cities, or the public, to find resolutions, but rather there are many
hurdles promulgated by State and federal agencies that often prevent opportunities for
reaching a solution. Cities should work together, and with State legislators and other
stakeholders, to look for ways to affect change at the State level as well as provide
more focused public education that addresses these issues.
In an effort to inform their citizens, some cities have used the multi -discipline,
educational, townhall type response to the public outcry while others have not. The
outcome can be quite different.
To illustrate, we need look no further than a tale of three cities: Anaheim, Newport
Beach, and Laguna Hills. Anaheim's group home issue heated up in October 2021
when Grandma's House of Hope requested a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) to use a
large house as a transitional living home for 19 intractably mentally ill women.26
It was not Grandma's House of Hope's first group home in Anaheim; it was the latest in
many previously successful CUP requests. Local residents coalesced against this CUP
request in a vocal and organized manner. Whether it was the number of residents
impacted, the descriptor of the group home residents as intractably mentally ill, or just
one group home too many in this neighborhood, this organized effort to prevent the
approval of the large group home attracted hundreds of local citizens and activists from
both sides of the issue. It seemed that the majority of these people attended the
planning commission meeting to voice their opinions during the public comment portion
of the agenda and to let the City's Planning Commission see the strength of their
numbers.
ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY 2022 1 2023
Page 20 of 42
24-23
WELCOME TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD
The Planning Commission was seemingly prepared to accept the staff recommendation
for approval. Public comment took over five hours, most of which was overwhelmingly
against the approval of the group home. The applicant and the Planning Commission
both expressed surprise at the public backlash. Ultimately, the approval
recommendation was scrapped, and the Planning Commission voted to deny the CUP.
Grandma's House filed an appeal and the application for the CUP was heard by the City
Council. The public attended that meeting in larger numbers than at the Planning
Commission meeting and they were every bit as angry and frustrated as they were at
the earlier meeting. In spite of robust response on the issue at the meeting of the
Planning Commission just two months earlier, the Anaheim City Council was
unprepared for the charged nature of the adversarial clash. Most speakers were
passionate but respectful, while some were rude and offensive. It was essentially an
angrier repeat of the first meeting and led to the same conclusion, a denial of the
CUP.27
The affected public walked away with no better understanding of the reasons why these
group homes are hard to regulate due to the pressures put on cities by the State of
California. The applicant ultimately filed suit against the city alleging violations of the
Housing Element Law, Housing Accountability Act, and statutes governing anti-
discrimination in local land use laws.
Nearly 200 people packed the Mission Viejo City Council chamber on March 29 for a Town Hall meeting
regarding sober living homes. (Tomoya Shimura, Orange County Register, April 1, 2016)
The City of Anaheim has not responded to the public concerns in an organized manner.
It has not provided an opportunity for the public to come together in a townhall-like
meeting where the City could address the issues and the challenges they face, have
subject matter experts on hand for short presentations, and allow for comments and
questions.28
ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY 2022 12023 Page 21 of 42
24-24
WELCOME TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD
In direct contrast to Anaheim's response, we can look at the steps taken by the Cities of
Newport Beach and Laguna Hills. Newport Beach was faced with a petition from its
residents in 2007 after a rapid increase in the number of drug rehabilitation homes. The
residents reported 103 treatment houses, nearly all on the Balboa Peninsula. There was
a town hall hosted by (then) Assemblywoman Mimi Walters, R-Laguna Niguel, and
(then) State Senator Tom Harman, R-Huntington Beach, and an estimated 200 people
attended. It was an opportunity for dialogue as well as to learn about the constraints
placed on cities by the State of California. Newport Beach responded to resident
concerns again in late 2021 by organizing a community meeting with speakers from
several city departments, a State Assemblywoman, the District Attorney, and a County
Supervisor.29 so
Hundreds attend the Sober Living Homes Town Hall meeting at the at the Laguna Hills Community
Center on Thursday (Christopher Yee, San Gabriel Valley Tribune, May 13, 2016)
We can also look at the steps taken by the City of Laguna Hills. In 2016, the City
responded to public outcry regarding group home issues by hosting a Town Hall on the
subject. The Town Hall was hosted by (then) State Senator Pat Bates and several other
State and local legislators. Also in attendance were attorneys with extensive knowledge
of the issue as well as other subject matter experts. More than 600 people attended,
and it was an opportunity for the residents in attendance to gain a better understanding
of the challenges the City faces in regulating unlicensed group homes, as well as for the
City to hear the concerns and frustrations of attendees. Proving that, when cities work to
ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY 2022 1 2023 Page 22 of 42
24-25
WELCOME TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD
inform their constituents, and allow for a robust but respectful dialogue, they create an
opportunity for collaborative problem solving.31
How Has This Issue Evolved?
The timing of this investigation aligned with the required submission of the Housing
Element portion of each city's General Plan. The State's disapproval of a city's Housing
Element carries heavy consequences, and the State of California has used the
withholding of this needed approval to coerce cities to abandon their group home
ordinances.
The Grand Jury was previously unaware of the power behind group home lobbyists and
the number of proposed legislative bills that never made it to a vote. The State's policy -
making role limits a city's ability to responsibly manage the integration of group homes
and, as a consequence, the trajectory and focus of the study changed and widened with
this knowledge. The Grand Jury looked at broader factors influencing the group home
industry, its influence, its effect on communities and often its seeming lack of real
concern about its clients. The group home industry is immense, requires improved
relations with cities, and needs more effective local governmental oversight.
ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY 2022 12023 Page 23 of 42
24-26
WELCOME TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD
FINDINGS
In accordance with California Penal Code Sections 933 and 933.05, the 2022-2023
Grand Jury requires (or, as noted, requests) responses from each agency affected by
the findings presented in this section. The responses are to be submitted to the
Presiding Judge of the Superior Court.
Based on its investigation titled "Welcome to the Neighborhood - Are cities responsibly
managing the integration of group homes?" the 2022-2023 Orange County Grand Jury
has arrived at eleven principal findings, as follows:
F1 Group homes too close to one another contribute to the problems associated
with overconcentration.
F2 Common nuisances are more likely and disruptive when sober living homes are
concentrated in a small geographic area of a neighborhood.
F3 Some cities have successfully addressed and informed community members
about the challenges faced in regulating group homes.
F4 Community satisfaction was minimal when cities took the traditional public
comment approach towards addressing community complaints.
F5 Cities are not utilizing police, fire, and code enforcement complaints as a means
of locating and tracking Group Homes.
F6 Cities are inhibited from enacting and enforcing ordinances due to fears over the
potential cost of litigation.
F7 Several cities have created an ordinance that requires a ministerial permit or
registration to operate a group home, however many of these cities do not
enforce their ordinances.
F8 City and County officials are deterred from regulating group homes by California
Housing and Community Development's housing element approval process.
F9 Cities have historically strategized and acted independently in addressing group
home challenges and solutions.
F10 Well -operated group homes can integrate smoothly into neighborhoods.
F11 There is a lack of regulatory oversight for the health and safety of residents of
unlicensed group homes.
ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY 2022 12023 Page 24 of 42
24-27
WELCOME TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD
RECOMMENDATIONS
In accordance with California Penal Code Sections 933 and 933.05, the 2022-2023
Grand Jury requires (or, as noted, requests) responses from each agency affected by
the recommendations presented in this section. The responses are to be submitted to
the Presiding Judge of the Superior Court.
Based on its investigation titled, "Welcome to the Neighborhood - Are cities responsibly
managing the integration of group homes?" the 2022-2023 Orange County Grand Jury
makes the following five recommendations:
R1 Orange County cities and the County of Orange should address citizen concerns
regarding group homes by providing an opportunity for an open dialog where an
interdisciplinary panel of subject matter experts can share with attendees the
challenges cities are facing in the management of group homes. To be
implemented by July 1, 2024. (F3, F4)
R2 By December 31, 2024, Orange County cities and the County of Orange should
collaborate in their efforts to create ordinances for the regulation of group homes,
including the development of model ordinances. (F6, F7, F9)
R3 Orange County cities and the County of Orange should pool resources for
defense of lawsuits challenging group home ordinances. To be implemented by
July 1, 2024. (F6, F8, F9)
R4 The County of Orange and Orange County cities should create a Task Force that
includes representatives from OC cities, unincorporated areas, and other entities
as appropriate and charge it with the responsibility of developing a plan to
generate awareness among State legislators and regulators of the need for
improved regulations and management standards to ensure health and safety for
Group Home residents. To be implemented by July 1, 2024. (F2, F10, F11)
R5 Orange County cities and the County of Orange should modify code enforcement
report data collection forms to include a searchable field that enables the
identification of a residence operating as a group home. To be implemented by
July 1, 2024. (F5, F7, F11)
RESPONSES
California Penal Code Section 933 requires the governing body of any public agency
which the Grand Jury has reviewed, and about which it has issued a final report, to
comment to the Presiding Judge of the Superior Court on the findings and
recommendations pertaining to matters under the control of the governing body. Such
comment shall be made no later than 90 days after the Grand Jury publishes its report
(filed with the Clerk of the Court). Additionally, in the case of a report containing findings
ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY 2022 12023 Page 25 of 42
24-28
WELCOME TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD
and recommendations pertaining to a department or agency headed by an elected
County official (e.g., District Attorney, Sheriff, etc.), such elected County official shall
comment on the findings and recommendations pertaining to the matters under that
elected official's control within 60 days to the Presiding Judge with an information copy
sent to the Board of Supervisors.
Furthermore, California Penal Code Section 933.05 specifies the manner in which such
comment(s) are to be made as follows:
(a) As to each Grand Jury finding, the responding person or entity shall indicate
one of the following:
(1) The respondent agrees with the finding.
(2)The respondent disagrees wholly or partially with the finding, in which
case the response shall specify the portion of the finding that is
disputed and shall include an explanation of the reasons therefor.
(b) As to each Grand Jury recommendation, the responding person or entity shall
report one of the following actions:
(1) The recommendation has been implemented, with a summary
regarding the implemented action.
(2) The recommendation has not yet been implemented, but will be
implemented in the future, with a time frame for implementation.
(3) The recommendation requires further analysis, with an explanation and
the scope and parameters of an analysis or study, and a time frame for
the matter to be prepared for discussion by the officer or head of the
agency or department being investigated or reviewed, including the
governing body of the public agency when applicable. This time frame
shall not exceed six months from the date of publication of the Grand
Jury report.
(4) The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not
warranted or is not reasonable, with an explanation therefor.
(c) If a finding or recommendation of the Grand Jury addresses budgetary or
personnel matters of a county agency or department headed by an elected
officer, both the agency or department head and the Board of Supervisors
shall respond if requested by the Grand Jury, but the response of the Board
of Supervisors shall address only those budgetary /or personnel matters over
which it has some decision -making authority. The response of the elected
agency or department head shall address all aspects of the findings or
recommendations affecting his or her agency or department.
ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY 2022 12023
Page 26 of 42
24-29
WELCOME TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD
The Orange County Grand Jury requires and requests the following responses:
90 Day Response Required
County of Orange Board of Supervisors
County of Orange Board of Supervisors
City Councils of:
Aliso Viejo
Aliso Viejo
Anaheim
Anaheim
Brea
Brea
Buena Park
Buena Park
Costa Mesa
Costa Mesa
Cypress
Cypress
Dana Point
Dana Point
Fountain Valley
Fountain Valley
Fullerton
Fullerton
Garden Grove
Garden Grove
Huntington Beach
Huntington Beach
Irvine
Irvine
La Habra
La Habra
La Palma
La Palma
Laguna Beach
Laguna Beach
Laguna Hills
Laguna Hills
Laguna Niguel
Laguna Niguel
Laguna Woods
F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11
R1, R2, R3, R4, R5
F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11
R1, R2, R3, R4, R5
F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11
R1, R2, R3, R4, R5
F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11
R1, R2, R3, R4, R5
F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11
R1, R2, R3, R4, R5
F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11
R1, R2, R3, R4, R5
F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11
R1, R2, R3, R4, R5
F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11
R1, R2, R3, R4, R5
F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11
R1, R2, R3, R4, R5
F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11
R1, R2, R3, R4, R5
F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11
R1, R2, R3, R4, R5
F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11
R1, R2, R3, R4, R5
F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11
R1, R2, R3, R4, R5
F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11
R1, R2, R3, R4, R5
F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11
R1, R2, R3, R4, R5
F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11
R1, R2, R3, R4, R5
F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11
R1, R2, R3, R4, R5
F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11
R1, R2, R3, R4, R5
F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11
ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY 2022 12023
Page 27 of 42
24-30
WELCOME TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD
Laguna Woods
Lake Forest
Lake Forest
Los Alamitos
Los Alamitos
Mission Viejo
Mission Viejo
Newport Beach
Newport Beach
Orange
Orange
Placentia
Placentia
Rancho Santa Margarita
Rancho Santa Margarita
San Clemente
San Clemente
San Juan Capistrano
San Juan Capistrano
Santa Ana
Santa Ana
Seal Beach
Seal Beach
Stanton
Stanton
Tustin
Tustin
Villa Park
Villa Park
Westminster
Westminster
Yorba Linda
Yorba Linda
R1, R2, R3, R4, R5
F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11
R1, R2, R3, R4, R5
F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11,
R1, R2, R3, R4, R5
F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11
R1, R2, R3, R4, R5
F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11
R1, R2, R3, R4, R5
F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11
R1, R2, R3, R4, R5
F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11
R1, R2, R3, R4, R5
F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11
R1, R2, R3, R4, R5
F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11
R1, R2, R3, R4, R5
F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11
R1, R2, R3, R4, R5
F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11
R1, R2, R3, R4, R5
F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11
R1, R2, R3, R4, R5
F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11
R1, R2, R3, R4, R5
F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11
R1, R2, R3, R4, R5
F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11
R1, R2, R3, R4, R5
F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11
R1, R2, R3, R4, R5
F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11
R1, R2, R3, R4, R5
ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY 2022 12023
Page 28 of 42
24-31
GLOSSARY
ADU
An accessory dwelling unit, usually just called an ADU, is a secondary housing
unit on a single-family residential lot. These may be converted garages, backyard
cottages, or granny flats, for example.
Brokering
A referral system where money or other inducements are exchanged by owners of
disreputable homes to get new clients. The recipients may be residents, clinics, or even
members of self-help groups such as AM 2-step programs.
Code Enforcement
Activity by local government agencies to identify and correct problems and abuses by
citizens and businesses.
Congregate Care Living
A residential home that offers inpatient services to its residents. Generally, the care that
this institution provides is more intense than what a skilled nursing care facility offers but
less intense than what a general acute care hospital provides.
Curbing
The act of evicting residents, often done late at night, so-called because they and
their belongings are sent to the curb. Eviction may occur when such residents'
insurance runs out or for violating house rules. They frequently have nowhere to go and
often have no resources, essentially rendering them homeless.
Deinstitutionalization
The closing (or reduction of services) of residential facilities, often referred to as mental
hospitals, and the reliance on smaller, more personal "homes" as a means of
rehabilitation.
Detox
Program or facility for assisting a person undergoing treatment from an intoxicating or
addictive substance.
24-32
WELCOME TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD
EBT
Acronym for Electronic Benefit Transfer, previously known as Food Stamps, these are
debit cards issued to eligible participants for the purpose of buying food and other
necessities.
Emotional Wellness Homes
A facility where a person develops the ability to handle their emotions and varied
experiences they encounter in life. Emotional wellness is an awareness, understanding,
and acceptance of our feelings and the ability to manage and change challenges
effectively.
Good Neighbor Policy
A set of principles and activities designed to provide a consistent means of
communication between facilities that provide resident services and their respective
neighbors. The Good Neighbor Policy is applicable for Residential Programs when
residents and the services have a potential impact including but not limited to
community safety, cleanliness, and security in the surrounding neighborhood(s).
Group Home (GH)*
A residential unit utilized as a supportive living environment for people meeting the legal
definition of disabled. Provides housing only for a classified group of people. No medical
care, services, or treatment can take place in a Group Home. Only State -licensed
facilities can provide care, services, or treatment under State law (see Residential
Care Facilities)
Hospice
A type of health care that focuses on the palliation of a terminally ill patient's pain and
symptoms and attending to their emotional and spiritual needs at the end of life.
Hospice care prioritizes comfort and quality of life by reducing pain and suffering.
Housing Element
Since 1969, California has required that all local governments (cities and counties)
adequately plan to meet the housing needs of everyone in the community. California's
local governments meet this requirement by adopting housing plans as part of their
"general plan" (also required by the state). General plans serve as a local
government's "blueprint" for how the city and/or county will grow and develop and
include eight elements: land use, transportation, conservation, noise, open space,
safety, environmental justice, and housing.
ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY 2022 1 2023
Page 30 of 42
24-33
WELCOME TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD
Integral Facilities
Integral facilities means any combination of two or more facilities located on the same or
different parcels, collectively serving seven or more persons, not including the licensee
or members of the licensee's family or persons employed as facility staff, that are under
the control or management of the same owner, operator, management company or
licensee or any affiliate of any of them, and which together comprise one operation.
Integral facilities shall include, but not be limited to, the provision of housing in one
facility and recovery programming, treatment, meals, or any other service or services at
another facility, or facilities, or by assigning staff, or a consultant or consultants, to
provide services to or in more than one facility.
Licensing
A permit from an authority to own or use something or to do a particular thing or carry
on a trade. In reference to this report's subject matter, licensing from a State or county
agency or department.
Like -for -Like
Identifying the spacing of group homes by type, e.g., sober living within a given distance
of sober living, assisted living within a given distance of assisted living, etc. Sober living
near assisted living does not meet the like -for -like criteria.
Model Ordinance
A common set of policies and procedures developed by a government agency to
oversee the licensing and operation of group homes.
NIMBY
Acronym for "Not in My Backyard". A term used, among other things, to identify citizens
who object to having group homes in their neighborhood.
Referral Facility
Either a Residential Care Facility, Group Home, or Sober Living Home where one or
more person's residency is per a court order or similar directive. Referral facilities must
follow the permit procedure according to the base use classification, and are not
permitted in the RL (Residential Low Density) zone.
Rehab Riviera
The nickname given to some sober living facilities in Southern California, referring to the
climate. Often used as a selling point in advertising to emphasize the outdoor appeal of
homes in the region.
ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY 2022 12023 Page 31 of 42
24-34
WELCOME TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD
Rehabilitation
The action of restoring someone to health or normal life. Care that can help one get
back, maintain or improve abilities.
Residential Care Facilities (RCF)*
A State Licensed residential facility where care, services, or treatment are provided to
persons living in a community residential setting. Provide housing and care/treatment
for the elderly, developmentally disabled, chronically ill, and chemical addiction
treatment facilities, among others. RCFs that specifically provide drug and or alcohol
abuse treatment are licensed by the Department of Health Care Services (DHCS) and
are known as alcoholism or drug abuse recovery or treatment facilities.
Homes are required to be licensed by the DHCS when at least one of the following
services is provided: detoxification, group counseling sessions, individual counseling
sessions, educational sessions, or alcoholism or drug abuse recovery or treatment
planning.
Residential Treatment Centers
Sometimes known as rehab which is a live-in health care facility providing services for
substance use disorders, mental illness, or other behavioral problems.
Saturation
Having several group homes within a neighborhood.
Single Housekeeping Units
Individuals occupying a dwelling unit that have established ties and familiarity with each
other; share a lease agreement, have consent of the owner to reside on the property, or
own the property; jointly use common areas and interact with each other; and share the
household expenses such as rent or ownership costs, utilities, and other household and
maintenance costs activities.
Six or Under
Homes with six or fewer residents. Under State law these may not be required to be
licensed or registered.
Sober Living Home (SLH)*
Sober Living Homes are also group homes, but specifically for people recovering from
a chemical addiction that meets the legal definition of disabled. Provides "housing
only" that is primarily meant for people who have just come out of rehab and need a
ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY 2022 12023
Page 32 of 42
24-35
WELCOME TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD
place to live that is structured and supportive for those in recovery. For the purposes of
the Ordinance, a Sober Living Home is not state licensed. No medical care, services, or
treatment can occur in a Living Home. Only State licensed facilities can provide care,
services, or treatment under State law (see Residential Care Facilities).
Tracking
A method to obtain data, monitor movements and a system to identify and map the
location of group homes.
Treatment Center
A facility where a client or clients go under one roof for services to improve their
physical or mental health. A residential treatment center (RTC), sometimes called
rehab, is a live-in health care facility providing therapy for substances abuse use
disorders, mental illness, or other behavioral problems. Residential treatment may be
considered the "last-ditch" approach to treating abnormal psychology or
psychopathology.
*For the purposes of this report, the City of Huntington Beach's definitions of group living
homes is being used as published on the city's website.
ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY 2022 1 2023
Page 33 of 42
24-36
WELCOME TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Teri Sforza, Will U.S. Supreme Court engage on Costa Mesa's sober living rules?, Orange County
Register, Wednesday, March 15, 2023
Teri Sforza, Addiction centers flee Costa Mesa, move to less regulated OC cities, Orange County
Register, Sunday, February 19, 2023
David Zisser, Letter from CA Department of Housing and Development to City of Huntington
Beach Planning Department - RE "Ordinance to Ban "Builder's Remedy" Projects under the
Housing Accountability Act (HAA) — Notice of Potential Violation", California Department of
Housing and Community Development web site, Monday, February 13, 2023
Ring Bender Law, SoCal Recovery and Raw Recovery v City of Costa Mesa: Amici Curiae Brief Of
The League Of California Cities, The Association Of California Cities Of Newport Beach, Fountain
Valley, Mission Viejo, And Orange In Support Of Appellee's Petition For Rehearing En Banc,
Court Filings, Thursday, February 9, 2023
Teri Sforza, Sober homes gain some ground in fight with Costa Mesa, Orange County Register,
Sunday, January 15, 2023
Covenant Hills, Day Patient and Outpatient Addiction Treatment in Orange County, YouTube
Posting, Friday, November 4, 2022
General Information, Links To Sober Living Group Homes, Advertisements And Blogs In Oc,
Orange County Sober Living I Sober Living Near You in SoCal (kaizenhouserecovery.com),
Wednesday, October 19, 2022
General Information, Links To Sober Living Group Homes, Advertisements And Blogs In Oc,
Sober Living Homes for Men & W General Information omen - Orange County Recovery,
Wednesday, October 19, 2022
General Information, Links To Sober Living Group Homes, Advertisements And Blogs In Oc,
Orange County Sober Living Homes I Sober Living Homes near me
(ocsoberlivingbestsolution.com), Wednesday, October 19, 2022
General Information, Links To Sober Living Group Homes, Advertisements And Blogs In Oc, Drug
Rehab Orange County - Lighthouse Treatment Center, Wednesday, October 19, 2022
General Information, Links To Sober Living Group Homes, Advertisements And Blogs In Oc,
Huntington Beach Rehab I Drug & Alcohol Substance Abuse Recovery
(orangecountyrecovery.com), Wednesday, October 19, 2022
General Information, Links To Sober Living Group Homes, Advertisements And Blogs In Oc,
Sober Living Homes in Southern California - Elysium Health Care, Wednesday, October 19, 2022
ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY 2022 12023
Page 34 of 42
24-37
WELCOME TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD
General Information, Links To Sober Living Group Homes, Advertisements And Blogs In Oc,
Zinnia Healing - Drug & Alcohol Rehab (serenitylodgelakearrowhead.com), Wednesday, October
19, 2022
General Information, Links To Sober Living Group Homes, Advertisements And Blogs In Oc,
California addiction rehab centers (sunshinebehavioralhealth.com), Wednesday, October 19,
2022
General Information, Links To Sober Living Group Homes, Advertisements And Blogs In Oc,
Halfway Houses I % way Houses I Sober Homes in California (addictionblog.org), Wednesday,
October 19, 2022
General Information, Links To Sober Living Group Homes, Advertisements And Blogs In Oc,
Requirements For California Rehabilitation and Sober Living Houses (hypogalblog.com),
Wednesday, October 19, 2022
General Information, Links To Sober Living Group Homes, Advertisements And Blogs In Oc, A
Place for Mom, Wednesday, October 19, 2022
Jeff Collins, These Southern California governments have approved housing plans, Orange
County Register, Tuesday, October 18, 2022
Jeff Collins, Most Southern California cities miss complete new deadline to complete housing
plans, Orange County Register, Tuesday, October 18, 2022
Alicia Robinson, Anaheim should allow home for homeless women with mental health issues,
California Attorney General says, Orange County Register, Wednesday, October 5, 2022
Alicia Robinson, Anaheim should allow home for homeless women with mental health issues,
California Attorney General says, Orange County Register, Tuesday, October 4, 2022
Public Notice — City of Mission Viejo, Council passes Sober Living and Group Home Ordinance to
ensure such facilities operate with the confines of the law, City of Mission Viejo web site Home
City of Mission Viejo, Wednesday, August 24, 2022
Public Notice, Council passes Sober Living and Group Home Ordinance to ensure such facilities
operate within the confines of the law, City of Mission Viejo website
https:Hcityofmissionviejo.org/, Wednesday, August 24, 2022
Teri Sforza, Rehab Riviera: New law hopes to keep misleading rehabs from misleading patients,
families patients, families, Orange County Register, Wednesday, August 24, 2022
Teri Sforza, California rehab doctor pleads guilty to insurance fraud, Orange County Register,
Tuesday, August 16, 2022
Vanessa Serna, Real -life Frankenstein' Beverly Hills surgeon and his girlfriend plead guilty to
$600 Million fraud scheme: Used 'body brokers' to find drug addicts to get unnecessary shots so
ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY 2022 12023 Page 35 of 42
24-38
WELCOME TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD
they could bill insurance companies to fund their life of luxury, DailyMail.com, Tuesday, August
16, 2022
California Codes, Various Codes, California Code Search "Text" of the following— using "sober"
and "living"., Monday, August 8, 2022
City of Laguna Beach Department of Community Development, City of Laguna Beach General
Plan Housing Element, City of Laguna Beach Web Site 638115638915170000
(lagunabeachcity.net), Thursday, July 21, 2022
Matt Meyer, What is 'California sober' — and does it actually work?, Nexstar Media Inc Fox
News San Diego, Saturday, June 25, 2022
Website Information Idea Flight, 9 Different Types of Group Home in California, Idea Flight Web
Site Page 9 Different Types of Group Home in California - ideaflight, Friday, April 1, 2022
City of Westminster, Adopted Housing Element 2021-202-, City of Westminster website
https://www.westminster-ca.gov/, Wednesday, January 26, 2022
Scott D. Tenley and Kelly M. Hagemann of Michelman & Robinson LLP, Federal Authorities Have
Their Eyes On Sober Living Home Operators And Marketers, Especially In Orange County,
Mondaq web site, Friday, November 19, 2021
City of Newport Beach, Community Meeting on Group Residential Uses Meeting Summary, City
of Newport Beach web site City of Newport Beach I Home newportbeachca.gov), Monday,
October 11, 2021
City of Newport.Beach, Power Point from Community Meeting Sober Living Homes, Group
Homes, and State Licensed Residential Care Facilities, City of Newport Beach web site City of
Newport Beach I Home newportbeachca.gov), Monday, October 11, 2021
City Newport Beach, Document comparing City of Newport Beach Group Home Ordinance to
City of Costa Mesa Group Home Ordinance, City of Newport Beach web site City of Newport
Beach I Home newportbeachca.gov), Friday, September 24, 2021
Staff, How to Open a Sober Living Home in California, Blog Post at Sober Living App, Tuesday,
May 11, 2021
Web Site Posting, How Much Profit Can Be Made From a Halfway House?, HALFWAY GROUP
LLC website How Much Profit Can Be Made From A Halfway
House?.openupahalfwayhouse.com), Tuesday, February 2, 2021
County of Orange Press Release, Ending Rehab Riviera: Orange County First, County of Orange
website, Thursday, October 1, 2020
County of Orange, County of Orange Group Home Ordinance, County of Orange website,
Tuesday, July 28, 2020
ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY 2022 12023
Page 36 of 42
24-39
WELCOME TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD
David Gorn, Doing the 'sober -living dance' on the Orange County coast, CalMatters, Tuesday,
June 23, 2020
Elysia Richardson, Do Drug Treatment Centers Increase Local Crime Rates?, California Highlands
Vista Drug Treatment Centers Web Site https://californiahighlandsvistas.com/blog/crime-
rates/, Monday, February 10, 2020
Orange County Public Works, Fact Sheet on Group Home Requirements, County of Orange
website https://myoceservices.ocgov.com , Saturday, February 1, 2020
Michelle Mears, Orange County Tackles Homeless Issue by regulating Group Homes, Glove,
Friday, September 27, 2019
Michelle Mears, Orange County Tackles Homeless Issue by Regulating Group Homes, California
Globe, Friday, September 27, 2019
City of Newport Beach, Group Home List, City of Newport Beach web site City of Newport
Beach I Home newportbeachca.gov), Thursday, September 19, 2019
Frank Kim, OC County Executive Officer, Memo regarding proposed ordinance to regulate Sober
Living Homes, County of Orange Web Site, Wednesday, June 19, 2019
California Department of Social Services,.Overview of the Group Home Rate Classification
Levels, DSS Website information sheet, Thursday, April 4, 2019
Miami -Dade County Form, Miami -Dade County Group Home Application, Miami -Dade County
Website.Group Home Application -no aff disc 2019 (miamidade.gov), Monday, April 1, 2019
Steven P. Dinkin, Utilizing the Safe Streets Now playbook, San Diego Union -Tribune, Sunday,
January 13, 2019
Brady P. Horn, Aakrit Joshi, Johanna Catherine Maclean, Substance Use Disorder Treatment
Centers And Property Values, National Bureau Of Economic Research, Tuesday, January 1, 2019
Teri Sforza, New rehab laws may revamp addiction treatment in California, Orange County
Register, Thursday, September 27, 2018
City of Laguna Niguel, Group Home Permit Application, City of Laguna Niguel website
https:Hcityoflagunaniguel.org/, Wednesday, July 4, 2018
William Leonard, Sober living homes in Orange County California, Sober Living Local, Saturday,
May 5, 2018
Tony Saavedra, Teri Sforza, Death in rehab generates $7 million award, Orange County Register,
Sunday, February 18, 2018
Teri Sforza, Tony Saavedra, Quest for sobriety often ends in sexual assault at some rehabs in
Southern California, Orange County Register, Friday, January 19, 2018
ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY 2022 12023
Page 37 of 42
24-40
WELCOME TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD
US Department of Health and Human Services, Ensuring Beneficiary Health and Safety in Group
Homes Through State implementation, DHSS Web Site
https://www.hhs.gov/guidance/document/joint-report-ensuring-beneficiary-health-and-safety-
group-homes-through-state , Wednesday, January 10, 2018
Teri Sforza, Rehab Riviera: California testing Vermont's model to fight addiction, Orange County
Register, Friday, December 29, 2017
Teri Sforza, Tony Saavedra, Scott Schwebke, Rehab Riviera: Industry struggling to get clean,
Orange County Register, Friday, December 29, 2017
Teri Sforza, Rehab Riviera: Are drugs for drug addicts a solution or a crutch?, Orange County
Register, Thursday, December 28, 2017
Tony Saavedra, Scott Schwebke, How a multimillion -dollar empire built around urine drug tests
exposes flaws in California's rehab laws, Orange County Register, Sunday, December 17, 2017
Jordan Graham, Are drug rehab centers fueling homelessness in Southern California?, Orange
County Register, Sunday, December 17, 2017
Teri Sforza, Are implants for opioid addicts a new hope or a new scam?, Orange County
Register, Sunday, October 22, 2017
Teri Sforza, San Clemente's'discriminatory' rules on addiction treatment centers intact after
suit settles, Orange County Register, Wednesday, July 5, 2017
Teri Sforza, California the over -regulator? Not for addiction treatment, Orange County Register,
Friday, June 23, 2017
Teri Sforza, Addiction treatment: The new gold rush. 'It's almost chic', Orange County Register,
Friday, June 16, 2017
US Congress Committee on Energy and Commerce, Letter to Thomas E. Price, M.D. Secretary
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Regarding problems resulting from the
dramatic surge of addiction treatment centers and "sober living' homes, Congressional Record,
Tuesday, June 13, 2017
Scott Schwebke, Teri Sforza, Federal agents search Sovereign Health rehab in San Clemente,
elsewhere, Orange County Register, Tuesday, June 13, 2017
California Department of Social Services Community Care Licensing Division, Power Point on
Orange County Regional Office and what it does Newport Beach Meeting, Web Site of
Department of Social Services www.ccld.ca.gov, Thursday, June 1, 2017
Teri Sforza, Detox can end in death at some 'non -medical' Southern California rehabs, Orange
County Register, Tuesday, May 23, 2017
ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY 2022 12023
Page 38 of 42
24-41
WELCOME TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD
Todd Harmonson, Sean Emery, O.C. District Attorney charges family, doctors with insurance
fraud related to sober living homes, urine tests, Orange County Register, Tuesday, May 23, 2017
Teri Sforza, Tony Saavedra, Scott Schwebke, Lori Basheda, Mindy Schauer, Jeff Gritchen, Ian
Wheeler, How some Southern California drug rehab addiction centers exploit addiction, Orange
County Register, Sunday, May 21, 2017
Teri Sforza, Is there a link between neighborhood rehab programs and petty crime in
California?, Orange County Register, Sunday, May 21, 2017
Staff Report, The Southern California rehab industry spans the nation, Orange County Register,
Sunday, May 21, 2017
Jan Wheeler, Registered Rehabs Map, Orange County Register, Thursday, May 4, 2017
Mindy Schauer, Heroin's hold: One man's journey through the Southern California rehab
industry, Orange County Register, Monday, May 1, 2017
CBS News, OC Neighbors Not Comfortable Next to Sober Living Homes, YouTube Posting,
Tuesday, November 29, 2016
California Research Bureau, Sober Living Homes in California: Options for State and Local
Regulation, California Research Bureau Publication in State Library
https://www.Iibrary.ca.gov/crb/, Friday, October 7, 2016
Amy A. Mericle, Katherine J. Karriker-Jaffe,.Shalika Gupta, David M. Sheridan, Doug L. Polcin,
Distribution and Neighborhood Correlates of Sober Living House Locations in Los Angeles,
American Journal of Community Psychology, Thursday, September 1, 2016
Teri Sforza, California argues sober home ordinances are illegal, forcing cities to make expensive
decisions, Orange County Register, Saturday, December 19, 2015
J Murphy - City of La Mesa Fact Sheet, Residential Care Facilities (or "Group Homes") in the City
of La Mesa, City of La Mesa website http://www.cityofIamesa.com , Thursday, October 29, 2015
County of Orange published guideline, Orange County Adult Alcohol And Drug Sober Living
Facilities Certification Guidelines, County of Orange Sheriff Departments website, Monday,
January 27, 2014
Sober Living by the Sea, Drug Rehab and Alcoholism Treatment OC CA by Sober Living by the
Sea, YouTube Posting, Wednesday, May 23, 2012
You Get Me3, Santa Ana Sober Living Homes, YouTube Posting, Saturday, July 3, 2010
Paul J. Weinberg, Alcohol And Drug Rehab Homes classic Nimbyism Or Everyone's Fair Share,
Thomson Reuters/West
Zoning and Planning Law Report, Wednesday, October 1, 2008
ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY 2022 12023
Page 39 of 42
24-42
WELCOME TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD
City of Newport Beach, City of Newport Beach Residential Group Home Permit, City of Newport
Beach web site City of Newport Beach I Home newportbeachca.gov), Friday, February 1, 2008
David DeBerry, Group Homes in the Neighborhood, Western City, Friday, September 1, 2006
NOTICE
Reports issued by the Grand Jury do not identify individuals interviewed. Penal
Code section 929 requires that reports of the Grand Jury not contain the name
of any person or facts leading to the identity of any person who provides
information to the Grand Jury.
END NOTES
Group Homes in the Neighborhood David Debarry, Jeff Bellinger, Western City 09-01-2006
https://www.westerncity.com/article/group-homes-neighborhood
2 Ibid. Division of Housing Policy Development. "Group Home Technical Advisory." California Department
of Housing and Community Development, December 2022.
https://www. hcd.ca.gov/sites/default/files/docs/planning-and-community/group-home-technical-advisory-
2022.pdf
3 CA Health & Safety Code Section 1267.9
4 Sforza, Terri. "California the over -regulator? Not for addiction treatment." Orange County Register, June
23, 2017. https://www.ocregister.c4om/2017/06/23/california-the-over-regulator-not-for-addiction-
treatment
s ibid . Division of Housing Policy Development. "Group Home Technical Advisory." California
Department of Housing and Community Development, December 2022.
https://www. hcd.ca.gov/sites/default/files/docs/planning-and-community/group-home-technical-advisory-
2022.pdf
6 Sforza, Terri. "California the over -regulator? Not for addiction treatment." Orange County Register, June
23, 2017. https://www.ocregister.c6om/2017/06/23/california-the-over-regulator-not-for-addiction-
treatment/
California Research Bureau, Sober Living Homes in California: Options for State and Local Regulation,
California Research Bureau Publication in State Library_Friday, October 7, 2016,
https://www.library.ca.gov/crb/,
8 CA Health & Safety Code Section 1267.9
ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY 2022 12023
Page 40 of 42
24-43
WELCOME TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD
9Orange County Register Megan Nicolai, July 15, 2015, Newport Beach Settles legal battle over Sober -
Living homes_
10 Orange County Register Megan Nicolai, July 15, 2015, Newport Beach Settles legal battle over Sober -
Living homes.
11 Los Angeles Times Susannah Rosenblatt, May 22, 2008, Sober living homes rushing to meet
Newport's deadline.
12 Community Meeting on Group Residential Uses October 11, 2021 Meeting Summary
https://nbpd.newportbeachca.gov/home/showpublisheddocument/70754/637703409585700000
13 New regional task force will tackle issues with sober living and recovery homes,News Category, City of
Mission Viejo Public Notices, September 1, 2022, new regional task force will tackle issues with sober
living and recovery homes I City of Mission Viejo
14 Grandma's House of Hope v. City of Anaheim and City Council of Anaheim Case No. 30-2022-
0124183-CU-WM-OJC
15 Newport Beach Ordinance 2008-05
16 Orange County Register Megan Nicolai, July 15, 2015, Newport Beach Settles legal battle over Sober -
Living homes_
17 City of Costa Mesa Ordinance Chapter 13-3001
18 Orange County Register Article, May 21, 2021 — State argues sober home ordinances are illegal,
forcing cities to make expensive decisions
19 $42 Billion U.S. Addiction Rehab Industry Poised for Growth, and Challenges (marketresearch.com)
20 Ca Department Of Housing And Community Development, Group Home Technical Advisory, dated
December 2022
21 Housing Element Update, 2021-2029 Planning Period FAQ & Fact Sheet,City of Arcadia
https://cros9files.revize.com/arcadia/Shape%2OArcadia/Development%20Services/planning/Housing%20
Element%20Update/FAQ/Housing%20EIement%2OFact%2OSheet_FINAL.pdf
22 www.gov.ca.gov/2021/09/28/governor-newsom-signs-legislation
23 Growing List of Penalties for Local Governments Failing to Meet State Housing Law, Association of Bay
Area Governments, June 2021, https://abag.ca.gov/sites/default/files/documents/2021-
06/Consequences%20of%20Non-Compliance%20with%20Housing%20Laws. pdf
24 Housing Element Update, 2021-2029 Planning Period FAQ & Fact Sheet,City of Arcadia
https://cros9files.revize.com/arcadia/Shape%2OArcadia/Development%20Services/planning/Housing%20
Element%20Update/FAQ/Housing%20EIement%2OFact%2OSheet_FINAL.pdf
25 Housing Element Update, 2021-2029 Planning Period FAQ & Fact Sheet,City of Arcadia
https://cros9files.revize.com/arcadia/Shape%2OArcadia/Development%20Services/planning/Housing%20
Element%20Update/FAQ/Housing%20EIement%2OFact%2OSheet_FINAL.pdf
ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY 2022 12023 Page 41 of 42
24-44
WELCOME TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD
26 Walker, Theresa OC Register 10-25-2021 Housing for mentally ill homeless women draws heated
Anaheim response
https://www.ocregister.com/2021 /10/25/housing-for-mentally-ill-homeless-women-draws-heated-anaheim-
response/
27 Grandma's House of Hope v. City of Anaheim and City Council of Anaheim Case No. 30-2022-
0124183-CU-WM-OJC
28 City of Anaheim Planning Commission,PC Action Packets 8-30-2021
https://records.anaheim.net/CityClerk/DocView.aspx?id=2428318&dbid=0&repo=CITYOFANAHEIM
29 Many attend town hall on rehab houses,OC Register, 2-23-2007
Many attend Newport town hall on rehab houses — Orange County Register (ocregister.com)
30 Ibid. Many attend town hall on rehab houses
31 Sober Living Homes Town Hall
ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY 2022 12023
Page 42 of 42
24-45
Attachment B
Newport Beach Draft Response Letter
24-46
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
100 Civic Center Drive
Newport Beach, California 92660
11 949 644-3004 1949 644-3039 FAX
newportbeachca.gov
cl �" August 23, 2023
Mayor
Noah Blom
The Honorable Maria D. Hernandez
Mayor Pro Tern
Presiding Judge of the Superior Court
Will O'Neill
700 Civic Center Drive West
Council Members
Brad Avery
Santa Ana, CA 92701
Robyn Grant
Lauren Kleiman
RE: Response to Grand Jury Report, "Welcome to the Neighborhood -
Joe Stapleton
Are cities responsibly managing the integration of group homes?"
Erik Kenneth Weigand
Dear Judge Hernandez:
The attached is the City of Newport Beach `s formal response to the above -
noted Grand Jury Report.
If you or any members of the Grand Jury have questions about our
response, please contact Jaime Murillo, Planning Manager, at (949) 644-
3209 or jmurillo(c�newportbeachca.gov.
Sincerely,
Noah Blom
Mayor of Newport Beach
24-4 7
Welcome to the Neighborhood - Are cities responsibly managing the integration of group homes?
ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY 2022
FINDING
AGREE OR
RESPONSE
DISAGREE
(Include portion of the finding that is disputed and include an explanation of the reasons)
F1
Group homes too close to one another contribute to the
Agree
The overconcentration of residential care facilities can create an institutional environment
problems associated with overconcentration.
that defeats the purpose of community -based care and is inconsistent with the objective
of integrating persons with disabilities into the community. The American Planning
Association's Policy Guide on Community Residences states that community residences
should be scattered throughout residential districts rather than being concentrated on any
single block or in any single neighborhood. If several residential care facilities are located
next to one another, or are placed on the same block, the ability of the residential care
facilities to achieve normalization and community integration can be compromised.
F2
Common nuisances are more likely and disruptive when
Agree
As stated in the Grand Jury Report, it is the City of Newport Beach's ("City") experience
sober living homes are concentrated in a small geographic
that when facilities are concentrated in a small geographic area, common nuisances may
area of a neighborhood.
be more visible and disruptive. For instance, when facilities are overconcentrated in a
small geographical area, the City has received more inquiries related to the impacts of
second-hand smoke, noise, deliveries, parking, medical testing/waste, and general waste
removal/collection.
F3
Some cities have successfully addressed and informed
Agree
As recognized in the Grand Jury Report, the City has had past success with town hall style
community members about the challenges faced in
meetings and continues to strive to keep residents informed regarding the topic of group
regulating group homes.
homes. The City agrees it is especially important to educate residents about the
importance of creating housing opportunities for all segments of the community, the City's
legal duty to affirmatively further fair housing, and the constraints imposed by both State
and Federal law with respect to local regulation.
The City maintains a website on group homes where residents can obtain information
regarding City regulations, State laws forms and applications for operators of new facilities,
links to State regulatory websites, and past community meeting presentations.
While the Grand Jury Report highlights the 2007 town hall meeting, the City has held
several community meetings, study sessions, and public hearings on this topic. The two
most recent meetings were held on October 11, 2021, and April 4, 2022, and included local
and State leaders and subject matter experts. The October 11, 2021, community meeting
included CA Assemblywoman Cottie Petrie -Norris, Orange County Supervisor Katrina
Foley; CA Senator Dave Min; Orange County District Attorney Todd Spitzer; and City
Council Members Dianne Dixon, Joy Brenner, Duffy Duffield, and Will O'Neill. Discussion
topics included an overview of current City regulations, the interaction of local laws with
State and Federal laws including affirmatively further fair housing, and current and future
efforts to promote legislative changes that better protect the residents of group homes and
ensure that these homes are successfully integrated into residential neighborhoods. The
April 4, 2022, community meeting included representatives from the CA Department of
Social Services, Community Care Licensing Division providing an overview of their
department, contact information, licensing and regulations. Assemblywoman Cottie Petrie -
Norris was also present to discuss efforts at the State legislative level to ensure the welfare
24-48
Welcome to the Neighborhood - Are cities responsibly managing the integration of group homes?
ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY 2022
FINDING
AGREE OR
RESPONSE
DISAGREE
(Include portion of the finding that is disputed and include an explanation of the reasons)
of group home residents and promote the integration of group homes into surrounding
communities.
F4
Community satisfaction was minimal when cities took the
Agree
Occasionally, organized residents appear at City Council meetings to voice their concerns
traditional public comment approach towards addressing
during public comment on non -agenda items. Due to limits on the duration of public
community complaints.
comments, and the need for council members to focus on agenda items, residents are
often frustrated and discouraged with the feedback received at regular public meetings.
Community meetings that focus on community concerns provide a better forum for City
leaders to communicate City policies and educate residents about the scope of local
authority, and for City leaders to hear resident concerns. This type of forum generally
results in a more collaborative process where residents feel heard, and concerns can be
addressed. The community meetings discussed in the Response to F3 above, have
enabled a much higher level of communication between City officials, City staff, State
representatives and the community. These meetings highlighted that there are current
issues with State regulations, outside the local control, that must be addressed for
community concerns to be addressed.
F5
Cities are not utilizing police, fire, and code enforcement
Partially
The City utilizes all possible means of comprehensively tracking code enforcement
complaints as a means of locating and tracking Group
Disagree
complaints, regardless of whether they relate to group homes or not. The City's Police,
Homes.
Fire, and Code Enforcement departments maintain records related to all code violations.
The City, however, does not use such resources to specifically locate and track group
homes. The City complies with all State and Federal fair housing laws with respect to the
use of its resources and enforcement of its laws.
F6
Cities are inhibited from enacting and enforcing ordinances
Agree
On January 22, 2008, the City Council approved Ordinance No. 2008-5 with the intent of
due to fears over the potential cost of litigation.
maintaining zoning protections for residential districts, while benefiting disabled persons
who wished to live in those districts. The ordinance balances the protections granted to
persons with disabilities under the Federal Fair Housing Act, Fair Housing Act
Amendments (42 U.S.C. Section 3601) and other State and Federal laws, while also
ensuring that homes for disabled persons are integrated into the residential character of
the neighborhood.
As extensively documented in the Grand Jury Report, the City has been involved in several
lengthy and costly lawsuits defending the 2008 ordinance. The City implements its existing
ordinance within the bounds of the State and Federal fair housing laws.
F7
Several cities have created an ordinance that requires a
Partially
The City partially disagrees with this finding as it relates to the City. To the extent allowed
ministerial permit or registration to operate a group home,
Disagree
by State and Federal fair housing laws, the City implements its ordinance regarding group
however many of these cities do not enforce their
homes, requiring a permit for certain larger and/or unlicensed facilities. As necessary, the
ordinances.
City also implements its reasonable accommodation ordinance to ensure that all persons
have an equal opportunity to use and enjoy residential dwellings.
24-49
Welcome to the Neighborhood - Are cities responsibly managing the integration of group homes?
ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY 2022
FINDING
AGREE OR
RESPONSE
DISAGREE
(Include portion of the finding that is disputed and include an explanation of the reasons)
The City cannot confirm whether other cities enforce their ordinances.
F8
City and County officials are deterred from regulating group
Agree
The Grand Jury Report accurately identifies this issue. The Housing Element component
homes by California Housing and Community
of a local government's General Plan is required by State law to be updated periodically
Development's housing element approval process.
and is subject to review and approval by the California Department of Housing and
Community Development ("HCD"). The City's current group home regulations have been
in effect since 2008 and the permitting procedures were analyzed as part of the 4th and 5th
Cycle Housing Element reviews and found in compliance with Housing Element law.
However, during the 6th Cycle Housing Element review, the permitting process for group
homes proved to be an issue that HCD focused on, not just for Newport Beach, but for all
cities.
The City's 6th Cycle Housing Element update was submitted to HCD a total of four times
for review. During their review, HCD commented that the City should analyze the City's
application requirement for residential care facilities serving 7 or more persons as a
constraint on housing for person with disabilities. Specifically, HCD commented that "The
element should analyze the process as a potential constraint on housing for persons with
disabilities, considering the process'impact on approval certainty, timing, supply, and other
relevant factors. Depending on the results of a complete analysis, the element should add
or modify programs to ensure zoning permits group homes objectively and with approval
certainty." Given the complexities associated with the regulation of group homes and that
cities approach this issue in different ways, the City found that it can be difficult to explain
to HCD how the City's regulations are in full compliance with all applicable State and
Federal laws. Ultimately, the City and HCD agreed to adopt Housing Policy Action 3P
(Residential Care Facilities) committing the City to review and amend the permitting
procedures, application requirements, and development standards applicable to
residential care facilities for 7 or more persons. The addition of this policy resolved HCD's
correction regarding this issue. The City's 6t" Cycle Housing Element was ultimately found
compliant with State Housing Element law on October 5, 2022.
F9
Cities have historically strategized and acted
Agree
In October of 2021, the City Council formed a Residential Care Facilities Ad -Hoc
independently in addressing group home challenges and
Committee with the intent of ensuring local standards are consistent with State and
solutions.
Federal law, recommending legislative positions regarding State and Federal law, and
reviewing and recommending code enforcement protocols and updates. Through this
effort, the City has acknowledged that it cannot solve these issues alone and that
collaboration, especially with State officials, is needed. Since the creation of the
Residential Care Facilities Ad -Hoc Committee, City officials and staff have attempted to
involve other cities and especially State representatives in identifying issues and pursuing
legislative changes as evidenced by the community meetings referenced in Response to
Finding 3.
24-50
Welcome to the Neighborhood - Are cities responsibly managing the integration of group homes?
ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY 2022
FINDING
AGREE OR
RESPONSE
DISAGREE
(Include portion of the finding that is disputed and include an explanation of the reasons)
The City is open to working more with other cities and counties, and especially State
representatives, to pursue updates and legislative changes to better protect residents of
group homes and safely integrate group homes into neighborhoods in cities across
California.
F10
Well -operated group homes can integrate smoothly into
Agree
In 2009, the City entered into a Zoning Agreement with the largest residential care facility
neighborhoods.
operator in the City. The Zoning Agreement is reviewed on an annual basis and the
operator has consistently been found to operate in good faith with the terms of the Zoning
Agreement. The agreement establishes: a maximum number of beds in the City; minimum
separation between facilities and other operators; operational regulations on offices, staff,
vehicles, deliveries, smoking, trash, medical waste, quiet hours, etc.; inspections of the
interior and exterior of all facilities by Code Enforcement; and abiding by Good Neighbor
Policies. The Zoning Agreement has proven to work well for the City residents and the
operator. It prevents overconcentration in neighborhoods and minimizes disturbances to
adjacent residents. If impacts increase or change for some reason, there are action plans
required to immediately address them, which are reviewed annually.
The City also has a good relationship with other long-standing operators with conditional
use permits or reasonable accommodations that went through a regulatory review process
lawfully. Many of these operators have been in operation since 2008/2009 with very few
complaints because there are conditions and regulations in place to address problems or
disturbances.
F11
There is a lack of regulatory oversight for the health and
Partially
The City partially disagrees with this finding because, to the extent allowed by State and
safety of residents of unlicensed group homes.
Disagree
Federal law, the City does regulate "unlicensed" (i.e., non -State licensed) group homes.
Specifically, the City does not permit unlicensed facilities within the single- and two -unit
residential zoning districts and limits facilities within the multi -unit residential zoning
districts. A reasonable accommodation may be requested to allow unlicensed facilities in
all residential districts. However, the City acknowledges that there are significant
limitations placed on the City that prohibit the City from ensuring "unlicensed" group homes
are properly regulated to protect the health and safety of residents. The City is an advocate
for the return of local control since the lack of regulatory oversight creates additional
impacts to the community.
24-51
Welcome to the Neighborhood - Are cities responsibly managing the integration of group homes?
ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY 2022
RECOMMENDATIONS
ACTION
SUMMARY/EXPLANATION
(1-4 Below)
R1
Orange County cities and the County of Orange should address
1
As recognized in the Grand Jury Report and as outlined in Finding 3, the City has had
citizen concerns regarding group homes by providing an
past success with town hall style meetings and continues to strive to keep residents
opportunity for an open dialog where an interdisciplinary panel of
informed regarding the topic of group homes. The City agrees it is especially important
subject matter experts can share with attendees the challenges
to educate residents about the importance of creating housing opportunities for all
cities are facing in the management of group homes. To be
segments of the community, the City's legal duty to affirmatively further fair housing,
implemented by July 1, 2024. (F3, F4)
and the constraints imposed by both State and Federal law with respect to local
regulation.
R2
By December 31, 2024, Orange County cities and the County of
4
As noted in the Grand Jury Report, the City was the first city in Orange County to
Orange should collaborate in their efforts to create ordinances
adopt a comprehensive ordinance addressing the issue of group homes. The City's
for the regulation of group homes, including the development of
ordinance has been working well and addresses the specific local issues that are
model ordinances. (F6, F7, F9)
applicable to the City of Newport Beach. Because each city has its own local issues,
the City does not believe a one size fits all "model ordinance" approach is warranted.
As noted in Finding 8, the City has committed to HCD that it will review its ordinance
to determine if any updates are appropriate. In addition, the City is happy to share its
ordinance as a model and collaborate with other cities needing assistance in their
efforts to develop their ordinances.
R3
Orange County cities and the County of Orange should pool
4
The City supports local control and has expended significant funds on lawsuits where
resources for defense of lawsuits challenging group home
the ability of cities to manage their own affairs are at issue, including, but not limited
ordinances. To be implemented by July 1, 2024. (F6, F8, F9)
to, the regulation of group homes. However, the City must make decisions on whether
to participate in litigation involving issues of local control, including other cities
regulation of group homes, on a case -by -case basis. While the City is open to
collaborating with the County of Orange and other Orange County cities to obtain
greater clarity in State and Federal law and to ensure that cities can exercise local
control related to land use matters; the City will need to continue to evaluate litigation
measures involving other cities on a case -by -case basis.
R4
The County of Orange and Orange County cities should create a
3
The City is collaborating with the County of Orange and other Orange County cities.
Task Force that includes representatives from OC cities,
The City is working with the Sober Living Task Force, started by the City of Mission
unincorporated areas, and other entities as appropriate and
Viejo, and will be hosting the September 8"', 2023, meeting.
charge it with the responsibility of developing a plan to generate
Additionally, the City will leverage its existing relationships with State agency
awareness among State legislators and regulators of the need
representatives and State legislators to participate in the effort as well.
for improved regulations and management standards to ensure
health and safety for Group Home residents. To be implemented
by July 1, 2024. (F2, F10, F11)
R5
Orange County cities and the County of Orange should modify
4
The City collects information regarding code enforcement matters, while
code enforcement report data collection forms to include a
acknowledging that State and Federal laws require the City to respect the privacy
searchable field that enables the identification of a residence
rights of persons with disabilities. The City does not believe any further action is
warranted; however, to the extent that the State maintains information related to State
24-52
Welcome to the Neighborhood - Are cities responsibly managing the integration of group homes?
ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY 2022
RECOMMENDATIONS
ACTION
SUMMARY/EXPLANATION
(1-4 Below)
operating as a group home. To be implemented by July 1, 2024.
licensed residential care facilities, the City will ensure that it informs the public about
(F5, F7, F11)
how to access this information on the City's website. The City believes it is important
for the public to know which facilities are licensed by the State, rather than the City,
and the process for addressing concerns regarding State regulated facilities.
ACTIONS
(1) The recommendation has been implemented, with a summary regarding the implemented action.
(2) The recommendation has not yet been implemented, but will be implemented in the future, with a time frame for implementation.
(3) The recommendation requires further analysis, with an explanation and the scope and parameters of an analysis or study, and a time frame for the matter to be
prepared for discussion by the officer or head of the agency or department being investigated or reviewed, including the governing body of the public agency
when applicable. This time frame shall not exceed six months from the date of publication of the Grand Jury report.
(4) The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted or is not reasonable, with an explanation therefor.
24-53