Sober-Living Homes Hearing Continues

The city's Planning and Land Use Management (PLUM) Committee returns to City Hall, 2:30 p.m., Tuesday, to resume consideration of a controversial Community Care Facilities Ordinance to control so-called sober-living homes in residential neighborhoods, and the establishment of rules for boarding houses.

When PLUM recessed last Tuesday, members wanted time for the city attorney and planning department to return with answers to these questions:

1. What is the impact on an owner occupied property where the owner needs to rent out rooms in order to make their mortgage payments?   
2. What is the impact on student housing? 
3. What is the impact on families that rent to family members?
4. What is the impact on nice/compliant facilities? 
5. What does current nuisance law provide in the way of enforcement that is inadequate?
6. Can we draw distinctions based on those homes that are providing services and those that are not?
7. What is the impact of the ordinance on housing for the disabled funded by either the state or county?
8. Is there a federal requirement that each person have a single lease to receive federal funding?
9. Can we draw distinctions based on those homes that are providing services and those that are not?

The hearing will be in the Board of Public Works Edward R. Roybal Hearing Room 350, City Hall, 200 North Spring St., in downtown Los Angeles.  It is open to the public.

Chatsworth Patch has been following the controversy.  Here are links to our exclusive coverage:

By
'It was like they had more rights than the people who lived here and paid property taxes,' neighbor says.

By
Sober-living homes exist in residential areas all over Los Angeles, causing friction between neighbors and the homes' operators and residents.

By
A proposed law to regulate unlicensed homes in L.A. has both sides marshaling their forces.

By
Ordinance that would apply city regulations to group homes of recovering addicts will now be considered by a City Council committee after Planning Commission vote falls short of recommendation.

By
After huge outpouring of public testimony, committee decides to meet Tuesday for vote.