Sober Houses spark heated discussion in St. Paul

Posted by admin on March 8, 2008 under St. Paul | Comments are off for this article

Sourced from TC Daily Planet.

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.

City offers possible zoning changes as it hears neighbors

Posted by admin on March 4, 2008 under Pioneer Press, St. Paul | Comments are off for this article

Sourced from TwinCities.com

By Alex Friedrich

afriedrich@pioneerpress.com

Article Last Updated: 03/04/2008 12:23:18 AM CST

Problems with poorly run sober houses have riled people in a number of St. Paul neighborhoods, and Monday the city discussed its first shot at regulating the facilities.

At a Summit-University community center, planning officials heard residents sound off on proposed zoning ordinance amendments designed to handle the houses. In the meantime, the city maintains a de facto moratorium on them.

The changes are supposed to balance the needs of sober-house inhabitants — recovering alcoholics and addicts who are getting their lives back together — and the communities in which they live.

“We want to make sure the structures are safe, integrate them into neighborhoods and make sure we address the larger impacts on the neighborhoods,” city planner Luis Pereira said.

St. Paul has almost three dozen registered sober houses, he said, but residents said many others operate “under the radar.”

Many houses comprise a handful of recovering substance abusers who decide to live together and support each other. Others are larger operations run by landlords for a profit.

To live in a house, alcoholics must not drink and must be financially self-supporting, among other things.

The houses have been around for decades, and many neighborhood residents never know they’re there.

But some people have complained they’re seeing more and more in their communities — sometimes more than one on a block. And because federal laws consider the residents disabled, more of them can live in a house than is normally allowed.
Critics said that creates a number of problems, especially when the sober houses are poorly run.

At the forum, neighbors painted a picture of absent landlords, poor upkeep, lots of noise and huge parking crunches.

“This is public safety stuff that the city has to get a handle on,” said 55-year-old Marshall Avenue resident Gary Carlson.

Among other things, neighbors said they want the city to keep better tabs on sober houses, better screen those who run them, reduce the density of the houses and resolve parking problems.

But sober-house supporters said they shouldn’t be singled out and that they draw fewer police visits than college “party houses.”

Most residents in sober houses are productive and law-abiding, supporters said, and need the facilities to make a transition to mainstream life.

“I owe my life to sober housing,” said David Mott, a 23-year-old sober-house resident who said he’ll earn a degree in accounting next year.

John Curtiss, of the Minnesota Association of Sober Homes, cautioned against suggestions to identify all the facilities in the city or to decide where a law-abiding recovering alcoholic or addict is allowed to live.

“It’s a scary thing to hear that kind of thing in a community,” he said.

The proposed zoning amendments, which stemmed from a city study of sober housing, would still permit the facilities in any area that allows residential use. And they would grandfather in existing sober houses that are legal.

Among other things, the amendments call for:

– 1 1/2 off-street parking spaces per dwelling unit.

– A parking plan for each sober house.

– Information from each sober-house operator, which would include the number of residents, bedrooms and bathrooms.

– A “modest” distance requirement between new sober houses with seven or more residents.

– A minimum lot size for those with six or more residents.

The city will hold at least two more public hearings on the matter, and Pereira said officials hope to bring a draft ordinance to the Planning Commission this spring.