|
All Cities and Counties in California
<br />June 14, 2022
<br />Page 2
<br />
<br />
<br />The State of California, including the Department of Justice, is actively committed to
<br />promoting fair housing choice for people with disabilities, including by promulgating and
<br />enforcing relevant state laws governing local jurisdictions’ exercise of their land use and zoning
<br />powers. To ensure your jurisdiction’s ongoing compliance with these critical protections, I urge
<br />you to review and update your land use and zoning laws, policies, and practices for compliance
<br />with state and federal laws. I further urge you to adopt and implement a reasonable
<br />accommodations process related to, but separate from, your land use and zoning processes if
<br />your jurisdiction has not already done so, and make its availability known throughout your
<br />communities.7
<br />
<br />Local jurisdictions’ land use and zoning actions are subject to the California Fair
<br />Employment and Housing Act (FEHA, Gov. Code, § 12900 et seq.), its federal counterpart the
<br />Fair Housing Amendments Act (FHAA, 42 U.S.C. § 3601 et seq.), and the California Planning
<br />and Zoning Law (Gov. Code, § 65000 et seq.), among other laws. Title II of the Americans with
<br />Disabilities Act (ADA, 42 U.S.C. § 12131 et seq.) and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act (29
<br />U.S.C. § 794) have also been found to apply to zoning ordinances and require local jurisdictions
<br />to make reasonable accommodations to their requirements under certain circumstances. (Bay
<br />Area Addiction Research v. City of Antioch (9th Cir. 1999) 179 F.3d 725, 730-732; see also 28
<br />C.F.R. § 35.130(b)(7).)
<br />
<br />The FEHA and the FHAA prohibit cities, counties, or other local governmental agencies
<br />from adopting and implementing land use and zoning laws, policies and practices that
<br />discriminate based on disability. (42 U.S.C. § 3604(f)(3)(B); see also Gov. Code, §§ 12927,
<br />subd. (c)(1), 12955, subd. (1).) The FEHA and the FHAA further impose an affirmative duty on
<br />local jurisdictions to make reasonable accommodations (i.e., changes or exceptions) to their
<br />zoning laws and other land use regulations and practices where necessary to provide people with
<br />disabilities equal opportunity in housing.8 (42 U.S.C. § 3604(f)(3)(B); see also Gov. Code, §§
<br />12927, subd. (c)(1), 12955, subd. (1); Cal. Code Regs., tit. 2, §§ 12161-12162; see, e.g., Gamble
<br />v. City of Escondido (9th Cir. 1997) 104 F.3d 300, 307 [FHAA affirmatively required city to
<br />make reasonable accommodations for residences for people with disabilities]; Turning Point,
<br />Inc. v. City of Caldwell (9th Cir. 1996) 74 F.3d 941, 945 [municipality’s refusal to make
<br />reasonable accommodations in its rules when such accommodations may be necessary to afford
<br />persons with disabilities equal opportunity for housing violated FHAA]; City of Edmonds v.
<br />Wash. St. Bldg. Code Council (9th Cir. 1994) 18 F.3d 802, 806, aff’d sub nom. City of Edmonds
<br />v. Oxford House, Inc. (1995) 514 U.S. 725 (City of Edmonds) [“The FHAA imposes an
<br />affirmative duty to reasonably accommodate handicapped persons”].)
<br />
<br />
<br />7 In 2001, our office sent a letter urging local jurisdictions to adopt a reasonable accommodations
<br />process related to zoning actions. (California Attorney General Bill Lockyer, Letter to All California
<br />Mayors, May 15, 2001.)
<br />8 U.S. Dept. of J. (U.S. DOJ) and HUD, Joint Statement, State and Local Land Use Laws and
<br />Practices and the Application of the Fair Housing Act (Nov. 10, 2016)
<br /><https://www.justice.gov/crt/page/file/909956/download> (as of May 20, 2022).
|