City keeps existing rules for boarding houses, will not copy Costa Mesa ordinance after legal review

City planning staff briefed the council Jan. 14 on local rules for boarding houses, licensed residential-care facilities and unlicensed sober‑living homes after a court decision involving Costa Mesa. Community Development Director Adam Ataman advised that state law protects state‑licensed residential care facilities (six or fewer residents) from local regulation that differs from single‑family rules and that the Costa Mesa ordinance included distinct treatment of sober‑living homes that has legal tradeoffs.

Staff recommendation and council action: Ataman recommended keeping San Clemente’s current ordinance that treats boarding houses as a general land use subject to conditional use permitting and that requires state‑licensed facilities to follow state rules. Council voted to receive and file the staff report and not to adopt Costa Mesa‑style changes that would widen where sober‑living homes could be allowed without additional discretionary review.

Why it matters: Staff said adopting a specialized permit or administrative regime like Costa Mesa’s — which the 9th Circuit considered in litigation — could require San Clemente to expand the geographic zones in which sober‑living homes are allowed to avoid discriminatory treatment under housing law. That trade‑off would likely lead to more permissive siting citywide. The council preferred a case‑by‑case discretionary path and emphasized code enforcement and complaint channels as the tool for addressing nuisance or non‑permitted facilities.

Public comments: Advocates for stronger local controls urged the city to act; other residents noted the need to enforce existing codes and to improve state oversight. Council voted unanimously to accept the staff report and take no immediate regulatory changes.