Hundreds attend statewide rehab forum

NEWPORT BEACH — The city is not alone in its concerns about drug and alcohol rehabilitation centers and other kinds of group homes in residential areas.

That much was clear from the 300 people, including representatives of more than 100 California cities, who came to a Friday conference on residential recovery facilities.

Less clear was how long it will take to come up with new regulations that will satisfy concerned residents and comply with federal fair-housing regulations.

In Newport, homeowners are frustrated by drug rehab facilities and sober-living homes that they say generate noise, litter, commercial traffic and crimes such as drug use and sales.

People in other cities share similar concerns, though sometimes from different sources. Mission Viejo resident Alexandria Cole said there’s a high concentration of elderly care homes where she lives.

“We’re concerned because we see lots of 911 calls, fire engines,” she said. “It’s made our neighborhood into more of a commercial zone than it should be.”

Drug and alcohol recovery homes have opened around Riverside County, where officials worry there’s too little supervision. Robin Reid, a legislative assistant to the Riverside County Board of Supervisors, said she’s heard some facilities give clients medication without a doctor present, and code enforcement officials have found 15 to 20 people living in a facility that was supposed to serve six.

The problem Newport Beach and other cities run into is that facilities for recovering drug addicts are protected by federal fair-housing laws. That’s because addicts — if they’re no longer using — are classified as handicapped and afforded the same protections against discrimination.

But one thing cities learned Friday was that antidiscrimination laws don’t protect drug rehab or sober-living home operators who snub state laws or violate local rules such as building and safety codes.

Riverside City Atty. Gregory Priamos described his city’s extensive program to investigate sober-living homes to make sure they’re legitimate and close them down if residents are using drugs, for example.

That’s useful information for Newport Beach, said Cathy Wolcott, a contract attorney for the city.

“This is the first step to working with a lot of other cities,” Wolcott said.

While cities may be united in wanting more local control over drug recovery homes, they face a number of obstacles. Past attempts to change state law have failed, and federal laws would be even harder to nudge, should cities take them on.

Some advocates for recovering drug addicts worry that cities’ efforts are aimed at limiting recovery programs. Instead, the focus should be on how to meet the need for drug treatment, said Margaret Dooley of the Drug Policy Alliance, a national organization that promotes drug policy reform.

“The message I’m hearing this morning sounds, unfortunately, a lot less like how can we stop discrimination and more about how can we get around the Fair Housing Act,” said Dooley, who also was a panelist at the conference.

Newport Beach has set up a committee to talk about intense uses, such as sober-living homes, in residential areas; a town hall meeting on the issue was held last week; and the city hosted Friday’s conference. But some residents don’t think the city is doing enough.

Denys Oberman, who has urged a moratorium on recovery homes in Newport, said the facilities will continue to proliferate while the city takes its time about changing its regulations.

Officials need to stop the over-concentration of rehab houses, she said, “before the adverse impact cannot be reversed.”