Associated Press
Last update: February 22, 2009 – 1:02 PM

ST. CLOUD, Minn. – The city of St. Cloud has lost a major permit fight with the developers who want to build a home for chronic drinkers in the city.

Sherburne County Judge Thomas Hayes has ruled the city must issue a conditional use permit to River Crest.

Mayor Dave Kleis says the judge decided the city took longer than the maximum 60 days to deny the request last summer.

Kleis says he expects the City Council to abide by the judge’s order and give River Crest their permit during Monday night’s meeting.

River Crest plans to build a 40-bed facility southeast St. Cloud.

Kleis says it’s too late to do anything about this case, but he plans to lobby the Legislature to change the law and give cities more time to consider other future projects.

___

Information from: WJON-AM, http://www.wjon.com

To disdain of some, town’s largest operator of addiction-recovery housing about to ink pact with city.

By JEFF OVERLEY
THE ORANGE COUNTY REGISTER

NEWPORT BEACH – Peace is about to break out in Newport Beach’s long-running war with drug rehab homes.

After years of legal combat, elected leaders on Tuesday are expected to ink a 25-year pact effectively ending hostilities with Sober Living by the Sea, the largest operator of addiction-recovery houses in town.

Among many provisions, Sober Living would agree to cap its operations, disperse its houses and subject its small, licensed homes to oversight from which they’re technically exempt under California law.

“No other city in the state has that protection right now,” said Dave Kiff, assistant city manager of Newport Beach, of the last clause.

While officials seem eager to declare a truce, many activists are far from ready to lay down their arms.

“These councilmen want out of this issue,” said activist Bob Rush, whose River Avenue home is near several rehab houses. “They want out of the problem, and they want the appearance of having done something for the community.”

Rehab homes have dotted the narrow streets of West Newport and the Balboa Peninsula for a quarter-century or more.

The area’s unique housing stock – duplex rentals right on the sand – proved perfect for rehab companies that emphasized the idyllic weather to attract clients and used the apartment-style units to benefit from housing laws that shield small recovery homes from government oversight.

Sober Living has been adept at profiting off the situation, parlaying what began as a six-person halfway house in the 1980s to what’s now a 200-bed network representing anywhere from one-third to one-half of recovery homes in Newport. (Counting the real number of rehab houses has proved difficult for the city.)

The agreement council members will review Tuesday stems from a lawsuit Sober Living filed challenging rehab home restrictions officials passed last year in response to community outcry over a perceived glut of addiction-treatment housing.

After a judge rendered a split decision on the legality of the city crackdown, both sides negotiated a compromise to avoid “having to go to court all the time,” said John Peloquin, a vice president of Sober Living’s parent company.

That compromise is “slanted to the side of the rehab operator,” Rush said.

For one, he said, the cap only applies to how many “occupied beds” Sober Living has at any given time. Nothing limits the company’s actual capacity, much less the number of homes it runs, he said.

Having more beds than bodies would be an inefficient business model, Peloquin said. “I wouldn’t put in more beds than I would need,” he said.

Activists also question how effective city enforcement will be, since officials don’t plan surprise inspections and will rely partly on company records when evaluating compliance.

“I don’t believe our city ever intends to enforce anything against this particular operator,” said Denys Oberman, leader of Concerned Citizens of Newport Beach, which last year filed – and ultimately dropped – a $250 million lawsuit against the city and several rehab companies over perceived damage to community character.

Sober Living would be taking a major risk if it breached the pact, Kiff said. Serious violations could result in court action, and if a judge sided with the city, the company could potentially have its right to operate revoked.

The dozen or so other rehab businesses in town are going through permit hearings under the new city law. Though some of the meetings have reportedly been raucous affairs, activists are promising an empty room at Tuesday’s hearing for Sober Living, since they see approval as a fait accompli.

“It’s going to make no difference” whether activists attend, said resident Lori Morris. “That agreement is done.”

Contact the writer: 714-445-6683 or joverley@ocregister.com

By Matt Snyders at October 9, 2008 10:00 AM

A social services group that was looking to convert a soon-to-be-abandoned St. Paul building into a “sober house” has ditched its plans after nearby residents balked at the idea. (Obligatory side note: sober houses, you might infer, are supportive homes for recovering alcoholics and addicts. No booze or smack allowed.)

A nonprofit developer behind a large sober-housing proposal in St. Paul said Tuesday it’s scrapping its plans because of intense opposition from neighbors. Opponents created an anonymous Web site that featured photos of drug syringes and people passed out in yards.

St. Paul, Minn. — The property in question is across the street from the Minnesota State Fair. RS Eden was considering turning an old nursing home into up to 100 apartments for people with chemical-dependency issues.

Even the proposal’s biggest critics said they’re shocked by their victory.

“In doing a ton of research and meeting with our community representatives, it just seemed like it was something that was going to move forward in some way, regardless,” said resident Lori Hill.

Despite Hill’s initial surprise, she said she’s pleased that the developer, Minneapolis-based RS Eden, has backed off.

RS Eden maintains it was only in the exploratory stages of purchasing the site. The current owner, Sholom Home, is moving to another part of the city. But over the past month, word spread like wildfire about RS Eden’s intentions to build.

Neighbors swiftly put up a Yahoo listserv, fliers and a Website warning others of the proposal. The opposition solidified well before a public meeting scheduled for October 23.

RS Eden President Dan Cain, described the reaction by some residents as “caustic” and “bullying.” The controversy even caused rifts between neighbors.

“Then there’s also the fact that, if we were to locate in this neighborhood, would I have to worry about these people who have spread false propaganda and Web-based lies to go around and harass the tenants?” said Cain. “You know, I’m just not willing to put those things at risk.”

Several neighbors have told Minnesota Public Radio News that they know the resident who created the anonymous Web site at stopeden.com. The resident they identified did not respond to several requests for interviews.

Now at stopeden.com, gone are the black-and-white pictures of homeless drunks. They’ve been replaced with bucolic pictures of Como Park and a message thanking RS Eden. The site also suggests making a donation to support RS Eden programs.

Cecile Bedor is the city’s planning and economic development director. Bedor said the opposition killed the debate before it could even start.

“I think it’s really unfortunate that the process couldn’t be seen all the way through,” Bedor said. “RS Eden didn’t come to us with a proposal for us to necessarily approve, they hadn’t even had a purchase agreement yet. They were exploring this opportunity to do a great project in the Como neighborhood. And I think there were just a few people who used some unfortunate tactics to make sure the process didn’t happen as I think it should have.”

Officials with the Como Community Council say they’ll go forward with a series of public meetings this month about the issue. But instead of weighing the RS Eden proposal, they’ll discuss supportive housing in general, and another neighborhood challenge: What to do with an empty hulking building in need of a new tenant.

A Wayzata retreat returns to addiction treatment’s roots, rejecting costly psychiatric and pharmaceutical methods to make it more affordable.

By CHEN MAY YEE, Star Tribune

Last update: August 3, 2008 – 8:28 AM

Ten years ago, a small group of people frustrated by the rising cost of treating addiction decided to try to turn back the clock.

Managed care was eroding the Minnesota Model, the residential treatment programs that made the state the place to go to get sober. Hundreds of treatment centers around the country were closing as insurers tried to cut costs. The survivors, such as the famed Hazelden Foundation, were under pressure to show clinical results. They added medical staff, pushing prices beyond the reach of many.

The little group tried a different path.

They eschewed the clinical psychiatry and pharmaceuticals embraced by the rest of the industry, going back to the roots of the treatment movement: a full month’s residence, surrender to a higher power and support from a community of former addicts.

“We went in a direction nobody was going — simpler, more affordable,” said John Curtiss, a longtime Hazelden executive who left to start the new venture.

They called it “The Retreat.”

Now housed in a former nuns’ retreat in Wayzata’s Big Woods, it offers a one-month residential program for about $4,000, about one-seventh of what Hazelden charges. Its outcomes are comparable to that of other major centers, with 50 percent of those who come through abstaining from alcohol and drugs for 12 months afterward, Curtiss said.

Ten years after its inception, The Retreat hasn’t exactly reversed the course of American addiction treatment, which continues to get more expensive. But it has thrived and spawned similar centers in Sioux Falls, S.D.; Auckland, New Zealand; and Hong Kong.

“The Retreat is a model for the nation of affordable treatment that works,” said U.S. Rep. Jim Ramstad, a recovering alcoholic and longtime national advocate for better access to treatment. He is a regular volunteer at the Retreat.

Making access affordable

On a recent morning, two dozen women gather in a sun-filled room to study the “Big Book,” the bible of Alcoholics Anonymous. Young and old, they bend over the volumes, pages heavily underlined.

Ralph C., a bearded, bow-tied volunteer, is talking about spiritual surrender.

“Is it possible that there is a power that has more horsepower out there?” asks Ralph C., who uses just his first name in line with AA’s philosophy. “Am I beginning to suspect it’s not another man who’s going to fix this? Or a counselor or a drink?”

Quit trying to play God, he tells them.

They are among the few who have managed to get affordable help on the road to recovery. Many others never do. In 2006, 23.6 million people age 12 or older needed treatment for addiction, but only 2.5 million, or 10 percent, got it, according to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.

Cost is often a barrier — with most programs charging $30,000 or more for a month-long stay. Not all insurance covers treatment, and not all centers accept insurance.

The Retreat draws half of its patients from Minnesota, the rest from as far away as India and Australia. The average age is 38 and most have college educations.

The program isn’t for everyone. With no clinical staff, the typical client is medically stable and highly motivated. Eighty percent have been through previous treatments.

“We wanted to create a dignified, safe place to go, away from the burning house of addiction,” Curtiss said.

If they’re suicidal or otherwise need medical help, the Retreat refers them to Hazelden. Other centers in turn refer patients here.

“They have a niche,” said Ron Hunsicker, president of the National Association of Addiction Treatment Providers. But the fact that the program hasn’t been copied by many suggests its clientele may be limited, Hunsicker said. More addicts are showing up for treatment these days needing medical care.

But William Moyers, executive director of Hazelden’s Center for Public Advocacy, differs. “I believe the Retreat is the future of recovery,” he said. “It’s crucial to replicate it.” There is a need for cheaper alternatives for those who relapse, he said.

It was the Retreat, Moyers said, that inspired Hazelden to start its Lodge program in 2002, a nonclinical retreat on its Center City campus.

Letting go of insurance

Curtiss was a patient at Hazelden in the 1970s and returned as a counselor. He worked his way up to vice president of Hazelden’s national operations, overseeing multibillion-dollar expansions into New York and Chicago.

In the early 1990s, health insurers, anxious to cut costs, were scrutinizing chemical dependency programs. As insurers insisted on medical diagnoses, addiction centers duly produced them.

“You want to see pathology? We’ll show you lots of pathology,” said Curtiss, describing the mood of the day. As centers hired more medical staff, costs went up further.

Others were uneasy.

“We were going down the wrong path, trying very hard to make alcoholism into a mental illness,” said Dr. George Mann, former director of treatment at St. Mary’s Hospital in Minneapolis, now part of Fairview Health Services.

Mann, Curtiss and others began meeting to discuss solutions. In 1998, with a grant from the Johnson Institute, they opened a facility with 20 beds in the old Pillsbury mansion in Minnetrista. Curtiss staffed and furnished it for the grand sum of $177,000.

The Retreat didn’t register as a treatment center. Instead, it is regulated by the state Department of Health as “board and lodging.” It has grown into an 80-bed campus in Wayzata and runs 54 sober living beds in St. Paul for program graduates.

Over the decade, about 3,500 clients have come through the monthlong program, a third of those with financial help provided by donations. The center doesn’t have contracts with insurers.

Stoked by volunteers

In any month, 250 volunteers lead chapel services at The Retreat, drive patients or teach the “Big Book.” They not only help keep costs down, they form a vital safety net of recovering addicts.

Alcoholism is “not a disease where people bake casseroles and come over,” said Dee L., a volunteer wearing a business suit and pearls. A client three years ago, Dee now returns often to tell her story. She does it as much for herself as for them: “This is how I stay sober.”

Even board members continue to work for free. The top executive, Curtiss, is paid $140,000 a year.

An early volunteer at The Retreat was Andrew Zimmern, host of the Travel Channel’s “Bizarre Foods.”

Zimmern left New York City and checked into Hazelden in 1992, in his words: “a homeless, alcohol- and drug-addled wreck.” He credits Hazelden for saving his life. Luckily for Zimmern, his former business partner had continued to pay his health premiums, so insurance covered his treatment.

After he left, Zimmern became concerned that too many people couldn’t afford the same. So he volunteers at the Retreat.

“We all know recovery works at its simplest,” he said, “when one alcoholic talks to another.”

Chen May Yee • 612-673-7434

St. Paul Mayor Chris Coleman won’t sign a recently approved ordinance that regulates sober houses.

The ordinance, approved unanimously by the City Council this month, still takes effect. Coleman just doesn’t approve and knows that a veto wouldn’t stand a chance.

He said in a July 18 letter to council members that he agrees that “a clear definition of sober houses is necessary to ensure both that reasonable accommodations are made for those living with addiction and that the integrity of our neighborhoods is protected.”

He also agrees with parking requirements and a condition that operators must provide information to the city.

His problem is with a disputed provision that requires a 330-foot distance between sober houses — although the city could allow houses to be closer together on a case-by-case basis.

Opponents say that’s discriminatory toward sober-house residents, a federally protected class because chemically dependent people are considered disabled.

The Planning Commission had recommended the city adopt an ordinance excluding the distance mandate, and city attorneys noted that the requirement could be illegal.

“As always, I am concerned about putting the city at risk of lengthy and costly litigation,” Coleman wrote.

Regulating the homes for recovering addicts has been a complex issue, with the city trying to square the concerns of neighbors with the rights and safety of sober-house residents.

City Council President Kathy Lantry declined to comment.

CHRIS HAVENS

By CHRIS HAVENS, Star Tribune

Last update: July 10, 2008 – 9:18 AM

After months of study and public testimony, the St. Paul City Council adopted an ordinance Wednesday defining and regulating sober houses.

Council members approved it unanimously, ensuring it would take effect before a yearlong moratorium on new sober houses expires this fall.

A lawsuit is likely, opponents said after the vote.

Regulating the homes for recovering addicts has been a complex issue, with the city trying to square the concerns of neighbors with the rights and safety of sober-house residents.

“We’ve reached a reasonable balance,” said Council Member Russ Stark, who talked about the logic behind the ordinance before calling for the vote.

Sober houses are a valuable part of the community, he said. But, Stark added, neighbors raised valid concerns that the city had no clear definition or guidelines up to this point. It’s fair, he said, to place some regulations on the homes to maintain a neighborhood’s character.

A city ordinance allows no more than four unrelated people to live together in one dwelling. That would put most sober houses in violation of the law because many house five or more people. But because recovering addicts are a protected class and live as a family unit without services, operators say, they should be granted special accommodations to live in residential neighborhoods.

Existing sober houses will be grandfathered in.

A controversial provision requiring a 330-foot distance between sober houses remained in the ordinance. The city, however, could allow houses to be closer together on a case-by-case basis.

Opponents say that’s discriminatory toward sober-house residents, a federally protected class because chemically dependent people are considered disabled.

Sober people should be able to pick where they want to live, said John Curtiss, president of the Minnesota Association of Sober Homes and the Retreat recovery center.

“Our goal was to see where they [the council] went,” Curtiss said. “What seems to be reasonable is in violation of federal law.”

Several U.S. cities have lost lawsuits when trying to regulate sober houses.

Stark said the 330-foot distance requirement would allow for one new sober house per block, and the city has thousands of blocks.

The ordinance also says that:

• No more than 10 residents may live in a home in certain zoning districts.

• There should be at least 1.5 parking spaces per four residents.

• Operators must provide certain information to the city.

In other action Wednesday, the council unanimously approved the preliminary design plans — alignment, number of stations, right-of-way — for the Central Corridor light-rail line. The resolution noted 17 “outstanding issues,” such as dealing with the major loss of on-street parking along University Avenue, ensuring bicycle parking near stations and building additional stations.

Council members also approved an increase in taxi fares.

Chris Havens • 651-298-1542

By CHRIS HAVENS, Star Tribune

Last update: June 13, 2008 – 10:20 PM

A proposed St. Paul ordinance creating a zoning category and regulations for sober houses ran into vociferous opposition during a public hearing of the Planning Commission on Friday.

In a June 12 letter sent to the Planning Commission, David Lillehaug, an attorney representing the Minnesota Association of Sober Homes, said the ordinance, which goes to the City Council next week, was an invitation to a challenge in district court.

Regulating sober houses has become a controversial issue, with the city trying to balance the concerns of neighbors with the rights and safety of sober home residents.

The issue came to a head last fall when neighbors complained about the concentration of sober houses in some areas and the number of people living in them. The City Council in October approved a one-year moratorium on building permits and certification for the homes.

Any sober-house regulations would have to comply with the federal Fair Housing Act, because chemically dependent people are considered disabled and constitute a protected class.

Currently, the homes don’t fall under a specific housing category in St. Paul and aren’t subject to zoning regulations.

The proposed ordinance would establish these requirements:

• An operators’ questionnaire specifying the number of occupants and other building information

• A distance of 330 feet between sober houses, and 660 feet from homes with more than 7 people

• An additional 800 square feet in lot size for every person over six people at a residence

• 1.5 parking spaces for every four people

Lillehaug suggested that the matter be tabled and that neighbors and sober home operators be brought together to create a definition of what a sober house is and skip the regulations.

Terry Troy, of St. Paul, spoke as a concerned taxpayer and questioned whether the city should take on an issue that could cost a lot of money in court fees. Several cities around the country have been sued — and lost — trying to control sober houses.

The Planning Commission will make its recommendation to the council June 27.

The City Council’s first reading of the proposed ordinance will be Wednesday. A public hearing is scheduled for July 2.

Chris Havens • 651-298-1542

A sober house is a home for persons in recovery from chemical dependency. Residents share common areas, such as kitchen and bathrooms. They do not receive any government payments and provide no supportive services to residents. They may set rules and conditions for residents, and generally can require residents who break the rules to leave immediately, without legal eviction processes.

Some 60-70 people filled the room to overflowing and later arrivals stood around the perimeter.  About half of the community members in attendance are residents of sober houses in those communities. Newly-elected city council member Russ Stark and about fifteen city staffers and Planning Commission members attended. 
 
Barbara Wencl, a member of the Planning Commission and chair of its Neighborhood Planning Committee for the Planning Commission, moderated the discussion.  Panelists representing three Saint Paul communities were:  Ryan Kapaun from District 5, the Payne Phalen neighborhood, Diane Gerth from the West 7th Neighborhood and Phil Gerlach from District 13, which includes Merriam Park, served as panelists, along with John Curtiss, the President of the MN Association of Sober Homes, and Dave Mott a current resident of a sober home.  

City Planner Luis Pereira gave a quick overview on the ordinance process to this point beginning with a request from the city council in 2005 requesting a study.  On February 13, a draft proposal was presented to the Zoning Committee.  Several neighborhood meetings had been held leading up to the draft and several public hearings are now on the calendar with plans for a final ordinance proposal to go to the Planning Commission this spring.      
 
A key legal issue is that people with a known chemical dependency are included as disabled in the Federal Fair Housing Act (FFHA) and thus receive all of its protections. Due to this inclusion, more unrelated individuals can legally reside in a sober house than would otherwise be permitted in a single family dwelling under the current zoning ordinances. 
 
Leana Shaff, an Inspector from the Saint Paul Fire Department spoke at length about inspections of sober homes in response to safety concerns. 

“All are subject to fire, building and property maintenance inspections and I have shut down three of them,” she said. “When I find out about a new one I am there within twenty-four hours.” 
 
Parking, as any resident of Saint Paul will tell you, is always an issue.  The draft ordinance could limit the number of parking spaces required for sober homes. A similar issue is the concentration of the sober houses in a neighborhood, with the Planning Department proposing a “moderate” distance between them.
 
After statements by panel members, the meeting moved into observations, questions and issues from the audience.  As time and the evening wore on, the best-laid plans of the Planning Commission and the city staff gave way to the onslaught of, up until then, tightly capped emotions.  Several residents declared they would be moving due to this disruption of their community.  
 
John Curtiss said that Sober House residents were entitled to their constitutionally-protected privacy like any other citizen. 

One resident asked if the ordinance would be reviewed by the city attorney’s office to see if it was in violation of Supreme Court cases on similar situations.  The representative from the city attorney’s office avoided the question, stating that this was a meeting for residents and not for discussing legal issues.  Sober house residents countered that they were also community residents.      
 
All were in agreement that sober houses were better than college houses, however.  Even among Merriam Park residents, who were the most vociferous in objections to sober houses, there was division. 

”I am happy to have sober houses on my block” said resident Michelle Voychek, going on to describe neighborhood barbecues and other outreach among the members of her block.
 
Further information on other public hearings on this issue can be found by contacting Luis Pereira at luis.pereira@ci.saintpaul.mn.us.

Carrie Wasley splits her time between living in St. Paul while working for the state of Minnesota and residing in Kanabec County with her two dogs Ping and Pong, who give her sage advice on writing.