Lakeside Park City Council members heard from an expert on sober living houses during their meeting this week, continuing an ongoing discussion about Oxford Houses in the community.
Chicago attorney Daniel Lauber told council that the state of Kentucky had one of the highest death rates in the nation due to drugs since at least 2014 and that it has only increased.
“There was zoning permitted under Ronald Reagan’s Fair Housing Amendments Act of 1988 which added disability as a protected class,” Lauber said. “Federal Law allows zoning regulation of all types of community residences for people with disabilities, including sober homes, to provide a ‘reasonable accommodation’ for community residences.”
He said a goal was to acquire residential land use, and set these houses in regular neighborhoods, using neighbors as role models for sober living. Their plan is not to cluster the homes in a block, or concentrate them in a neighborhood, but to scatter the homes in safe, residential neighborhoods.
Since the drug problem continues to get worse, the need for rehabilitative housing for the addicts on the mend is increasing exponentially.
Lakeside Park, which has a population of 2,768, has three rehabilitative homes in the city.
There are 13 so-called Oxford House sober living facilities in Northern Kentucky. Oxford House intends for its homes to be run by its residents as a self-supporting and sustaining operation.
Newport, Ludlow, Fort Wright, Fort Thomas and Covington each have one Oxford House; Erlanger has two; and Lakeside Park and Florence have three.
The homes must be .7 miles from a bus line. The lowest occupation rate is 7 and the highest is 11, but that does not include children who live with a parent.
The state of Kentucky most recently added legislation that took the federal laws a little farther, tightening up any loopholes that might prevent a rehabilitative home like Oxford House from quietly locating in neighborhoods, without neighbors being aware.
Lauber concluded by saying the city could change the definition of the traditional family, which is now at 2-3 persons related by blood or marriage, but a new restriction would have to apply to all families who would ever think of locating in the city, so it would limit a family with a lot of children, or a family who has elderly parents or relatives move in with them.
“The state statutes prohibit any zoning restrictions by any local government,” Lauber stated. “It’s a catch 22, pure and simple. There is no way around it.”
Lauber said the state of Kentucky is one of 39 states who have added state legislation to tighten restriction loopholes.
“It is my guess, my educated guess, that the two statutes are the results of very well coordinated lobbying by advocates for People with Disabilities,” he stated. “It is not a prudent way of doing it, I consider it to be lazy and sloppy legislation, but this is what they were able to achieve.”
He told council the only avenues open to them are possibly changing the definition of a family, instituting a cap on the number, or trying to get the state statute amended, always realizing that they can’t be too restrictive, or it will be challenged.
Mayor Paul Markgraf said the city abides by the county’s definition of family, which he thinks is pretty standard. He agreed that the city could amend the ordinance for the city, but he said it would be more helpful to have more than one community amend the definition of family in the zoning ordinance. However, he clarified that answer by saying it wasn’t just the definition of family, but the restriction on how many unrelated people can live in one house, which is also technically under the definition of family.
Markgraf said Planning and Development Services of Kenton County, also known as PDS, is currently trying to upgrade many ordinances to make them more uniform and more current, so it wouldn’t be unrealistic to assume that that ordinance wouldn’t get an update.
He went on to explain that he has lived across the street from an Oxford house for a few years, and he thinks it is helpful for the people living in the homes. He said if they see people respecting their right to be there, they will ostensibly be open to reciprocal respect, and bumps in the road for the program can be minimized.
Sharmili Reddy, Executive Director of PDS, said that each city has its own ordinance that defines family, and right now it is two people related by blood or marriage, but no more than three can live in a household. She did say that these ordinances probably predate the federal Fair Housing act passed in 1988, and many of these ordinances are in the process of being changed to a less restrictive language and a broader definition of family.
She did stress that this is each city’s ordinance to change or keep as they want. If they decide to change it, they have to make an application to PDS, who makes a recommendation and sends it back to the city. If the city still wants to change it, they hold two readings of an ordinance to that effect and it is changed.
She also said that a residential care center might not have to abide by rules of the family. She echoed Lauber’s statement that the rules for places like Oxford House are virtually impossible to break.
