Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutH. 14 - JC Wallace PresentationJ.C. Wallace Residential Care Facility •CUP Determination •Reopening the CUP •What the City is Doing Recommendation •Informational Only •Receive and File CUP History •1985: Senior Rest Home (CUP 85-09) •1996: RCFE approval •Multiple ownership changes •2022: No intensification of use CUP 85-09 Conditions •Infrastructure, utilities, and site improvements •Building and safety requirements •Parking and circulation •Originally senior-oriented (not controlling under State law) CUP 85-08/E96-07 Conditions •Building and Fire Code compliance •State licensing required •Secondary access and site improvements •Comply with Previous CUP 85-09 2022 Findings •No physical expansion •No increase in occupancy •Same operational structure •Services to continue as per original CUP •Allow residents aged 18-59 •Substantially Similar with no intensification of use Based on these findings, staff determined the existing CUP remained applicable and no new discretionary approval was required. Scope of the 2022 Review The review DID: •Evaluate operational similarity •Evaluate whether the existing CUP remained applicable •Evaluate whether operational intensification occurred The review DID NOT: •Approve a new facility •Expand occupancy •Approve physical expansion •Create a new land use entitlement Why the Determination was Administrative The review did not involve approval of: •A new CUP •A physical expansion •Increased occupancy •A fundamentally different operational model The distinguishing factors were primarily: •Resident age •Behavioral health status •Protected disability classifications. The review evaluated whether demographic change alone constituted a material operational land use change requiring discretionary approval. Administrative Determination The review evaluated whether: •Operational characteristics materially changed •The existing entitlement remained applicable •A new discretionary approval was required The review concluded: •No material operational change occurred •The existing entitlement remained applicable •No new discretionary approval was required. Why the Determination is Significant The 2022 review found: •No physical expansion •No increase in occupancy •Same congregate residential care structure •No material intensification of use Welfare & Institutions Code §5120 requires residential care uses serving behavioral health populations to be treated consistently with other residential care uses. Fair Housing Laws: Mental health conditions are protected disabilities. The operational characteristics of the facility remained substantially similar to the previously approved residential care use. Why Substantially Similar? RCFE •24-hour non-medical supervision •Congregate housing •Congregate meals •Assistance with daily living •Non-secure / non-locked setting •Supportive care ARF •24-hour non-medical supervision •Congregate housing •Congregate meals •Assistance with daily living •Non-secure / non-locked setting •Supportive care •Coordination with outside services (e.g., County DBH) From a land use perspective, both are functionally equivalent residential care uses Land Use Analysis When evaluating whether uses are substantially similar, the analysis focuses on: •Residential character •Operational intensity •Staffing and supervision •Traffic and site impacts •Physical operation of the use In both cases, the facility operates as: •Congregate residential living •Long-term occupancy •Supportive supervised housing •A non-secure residential environment The more operationally similar the uses are, the more difficult it becomes to characterize them as fundamentally different land uses Why Functional Similarity Matters Similar Uses Are Evaluated Based on Function and Operational Characteristics Factors supporting operational similarity include: •Congregate residential living •Meals and supervision •Supportive care services •Non-secure environment •Long-term residential occupancy •Similar operational intensity The question evaluated by the City was not whether the resident population changed, but whether the operational land use characteristics materially changed. What Actually Changed? What Changed: •The resident population shifted from primarily elderly residents to a broader adult residential population •Some residents now receive behavioral health-related supportive services •The facility began coordinating more closely with County behavioral health resources What Did NOT Materially Change: •No physical expansion •No increase in occupancy •Same congregate residential living model •Same meals and supportive housing structure •Same non-secure residential environment •Same overall residential care function The review evaluated whether these demographic and service changes materially altered the operational land use characteristics of the facility. Why Allow Mental Health Use? After evaluating operational similarity, the City also evaluated how State and Federal law applied to residential care uses serving behavioral health populations Welfare & Institutions Code §5120 was part of the original Lanterman–Petris–Short (LPS) Act framework Enacted 1967 — Effective July 1, 1969 §5120 – Included within the original statutory scheme governing community-based mental health services §5120 has consistently: •Required permitting of mental health-related facilities •Maintained equivalency with hospitals and similar uses •Prevented local jurisdictions from: •Excluding these uses •Treating them differently based on population The policy has consistently been to prevent local governments from excluding these uses Welfare and Institutions Code §5120 It is the policy of this state as declared and established in this act and in the Lanterman-Petris -Short Act that the care and treatment of mental patients be provided in the local community. In order to achieve uniform statewide implementation of the policies of this act, it is necessary to establish the statewide policy that, notwithstanding any other provision of law, no city or county shall discriminate in the enactment, enforcement, or administration of any zoning laws, ordinances, or rules and regulations between the use of property for the treatment of general hospital or nursing home patients and the use of property for the psychiatric care and treatment of patients, both inpatient and outpatient. Health facilities for inpatient and outpatient psychiatric care and treatment shall be permitted in any area zoned for hospitals or nursing homes, or in which hospitals and nursing homes are permitted by conditional use permit. WIC §5120 –Statutory Language How §5120 Applies Where residential care uses are permitted similar residential care uses must be treated consistently when operational characteristics remain substantially similar. •Cities may still regulate: •Noise •Safety •Property conditions The City regulates operational impacts — not resident demographics alone. What About the Age Restriction? The original approval reflected the population being served at that time; the later review evaluated whether the operational land use characteristics materially changed. The original approval reflected the population being served at that time. At the time of approval: •The facility operated as a senior-oriented residential care facility •The approval described the use as it then existed operationally The later review focused on whether the use itself materially changed, not solely whether the resident demographic changed. The City evaluated: •Physical operation of the site •Occupancy levels •Operational intensity •Residential care structure •Supportive service framework Context of the Original Approval Housing for Older Persons Act (HOPA) Applies to: •Independent senior housing developments •55+ and 62+ communities •Lifestyle-based housing This Does NOT Apply To: •Adult Residential Facilities (ARFs) •Residential Care Facilities for the Elderly (RCFEs) •Behavioral health residential placements •Service-based residential care facilities Key Distinction: These facilities are regulated based on residential care services, not age-restricted housing models. Senior Housing Law Federal and State law require residential care uses to be evaluated consistently. Because the facility remained functionally residential: •Restrictions based solely on resident age •Behavioral health-related residential populations •Or protected disability classifications may create legal concerns. The City must evaluate measurable land use impacts rather than resident demographics alone. Fair Housing Protections Apply Why the Determination is Significant The 2022 review found: •No physical expansion •No increase in occupancy •Same congregate residential care structure •No material intensification of use Welfare & Institutions Code §5120 requires residential care uses serving behavioral health populations to be treated consistently with other residential care uses. Fair Housing Laws: Mental health conditions are protected disabilities. The operational characteristics of the facility remained substantially similar to the previously approved residential care use. Reopening the CUP Enforcement Issues vs. Land Use Issues Individual unlawful conduct or activity does not automatically establish that the land use itself has materially changed or become incompatible. Individual conduct may be addressed through: •Law enforcement, •Public nuisance enforcement, and •Code enforcement CUP and land use determinations focus on: •Operational characteristics of the use •Intensity of operation •Physical and measurable site impacts •Compatibility of the land use itself The question for CUP purposes is whether the use itself has materially changed or created measurable operational impacts. Bar for Reopening or Revoking the CUP Reopening or revocation requires substantial, objective evidence of: •Actual CUP violations •Significant documented nuisance or safety impacts •Material operational changes •Significant intensification of the use Generalized concern alone is insufficient. The City must show objective impacts tied directly to the operation of the use itself. The City CAN Regulate Property, Site, and Compatibility Conditions •Property maintenance, Lighting, Landscaping •Trash, Debris, Graffiti, Noise and Vandalism • Security lighting and visibility Circulation and Site Operations •Parking and traffic management •Loading and access areas •On-site management contact procedures •Emergency access requirements Operational Coordination Measures •Incident reporting protocols •Coordination with law enforcement •Communication procedures with City staff What the City CANNOT Regulate Who lives there •Age (senior vs non-senior) •Protected disability classifications •Type of residents served Internal operations •Treatment programs •Supervision requirements tied to care •Entry/exit restrictions or curfews •Mandatory confinement or restrictions inconsistent with a non-secure care environment Characteristics of the Facility The facility operates as a non-secure residential care environment. Residents are: •Voluntary residents •Not under custodial detention •Not legally confined to the property As a result, the facility generally cannot: •Physically prevent residents from leaving •Impose locked confinement •Restrict resident movement The facility operates through: •Residential supervision •Supportive services •Case management •Behavioral health coordination •Community-based care Community Concerns Are Taken Seriously The City recognizes community frustration regarding: •Nuisance activity •Public safety concerns •Neighborhood quality-of-life impacts The City is actively: •Coordinating with law enforcement •Documenting reported incidents •Addressing verified impacts •Working with County and community partners The City’s focus is addressing documented impacts through lawful, consistent, and evidence-based action. What the City is Doing The City recognizes community frustration regarding nuisance activity and quality-of-life concerns. Current Enforcement Efforts Public Conduct Enforcement •Enforcing no soliciting and aggressive panhandling regulations •Enforcing smoking restrictions in parks and public spaces •Addressing nuisance activity Property & Business Impacts •Implementing trespass authorization programs with local businesses •Addressing loitering and trespass on private property •Conducting alcohol and tobacco sales compliance checks The City is actively addressing documented nuisance and quality-of-life impacts through targeted enforcement efforts. Coordination Efforts Direct Communication •We are establishing a designated point of contact with facility management •We are maintaining real-time communication when issues arise Rapid Response Coordination •We are requesting timely response from staff when residents create impacts •We are coordinating follow-up on documented incidents Good Neighbor Practices •We are working toward a formal Good Neighbor protocol •We are encouraging: –Resident accountability –Awareness of community expectations Information Sharing •We are sharing incident trends and locations with the operator •We are coordinating on problem areas and repeat issues Bottom Line Focus on responsiveness—not regulation of care or residents. Behavioral Health Coordination Coordinating with County Behavioral Health (DBH): •Individuals exhibiting concerning behavior •Appropriate outreach and intervention •Requesting follow-up support for repeat individuals Information Sharing •Sharing incident patterns and locations with County partners •We are identifying trends and repeat contacts to target resources effectively Bottom Line •Interagency coordination allows us to address root causes, not just symptoms to reduce repeat incidents more effectively than enforcement alone. Why Reporting Matters What We Are Seeing •Many incidents are: –Not reported in real time –Shared later on social media –Raised days or weeks after occurrence Why This Is a Problem •Delayed reporting means: –No law enforcement response –No verification of what occurred –No documentation created The City recognizes that residents are frustrated when incidents occur repeatedly without visible resolution. If it is not reported in real time, it cannot be responded to, verified, or acted upon What the City Needs to Take Action To Take Enforcement or Land Use Action, We Must Have: •Verified incidents •Timely reporting •Documented pattern of activity •Clear connection (nexus) to the site What Does NOT Meet the Standard •Social media posts •Second-hand reports •Delayed complaints •Anecdotal information Action requires evidence—not assumptions or delayed reports. Calls for Service Calls for service associated with the facility have increased since the demographic shift occurred. However, they have been drastically reduced through coordination with Law enforcement Most reported calls involve: •Welfare checks •Property-related incidents •Service-oriented responses within the facility Community impact analysis is limited when: •Incidents are not reported in real time •Complaints are raised after the fact •Activity cannot be verified or documented Calls for service alone do not automatically establish: •A CUP violation •Land use incompatibility •Material intensification of the use Working Together to Address Impacts What We Are Doing •Enforcing applicable laws •Coordinating with Sheriff and County agencies •Working with the facility operator •Monitoring and documenting activity What We Need from the Community •Timely reporting •Accurate information •Use of proper channels—not delayed communication Residents want visible action and timely response to documented issues. We can act on what is reported and documented. We cannot act on what we do not know about in real time. What We Are Asking Residents to Do Report Immediately When an Incident Occurs •Emergency - 911 •Non-Emergency (Sheriff) - (909) 387-8313 What to Report •Location •Description of activity •Time of occurrence Why It Matters •Allows real-time response •Creates official record •Enables follow-up and enforcement Timely reporting is the most effective tool available to address community impacts Why This Protects the Community This approach allows the City to focus on: •Active enforcement, •Coordination, •Reporting, •Legal defensibility, •Avoiding failed litigation, •Focusing on measurable impacts, •Preserving the City’s ability to act effectively. Lawful Enforcement The City remains committed to: •Enforcement •Coordination •Documentation •Responding to verified impacts Effective action requires: •Timely reporting •Objective evidence •Consistent enforcement The City can act — but must do so through lawful and evidence-based processes.