City attorney outlines new state‑mandated rules for certified recovery residences
Loading...
Summary
City Attorney David Megitt briefed the Jacksonville Beach Planning Commission on a state-required ordinance the City Council passed six days earlier that sets limits and conditional‑use rules for certified recovery residences, including a 14‑resident cap and several 1,000‑foot separation requirements.
City Attorney David Megitt told the Jacksonville Beach Planning Commission on Jan. 26 that a state law passed last year required every city and county to establish a process for certified recovery residences and that the City Council adopted a local ordinance six days ago to comply.
Megitt, addressing commissioners in a planning department briefing, summarized local requirements added during the rapid drafting process: a maximum of 14 residents per certified recovery residence; conditional‑use review for facilities housing seven to 14 residents; standard setback and height compliance; and four distance restrictions that bar new certified recovery residences located within 1,000 feet of another certified recovery residence, a medical marijuana treatment center dispensing facility, an alcoholic beverage establishment, or a child day care center. "It can't have more than 14 residents," Megitt said. "And if it's gonna have more than 6, so between 7 and 14, it would require a conditional use approval."
Why it matters: Megitt said cities needed to act quickly because of the statute's short implementation window and courts' interpretation of the Fair Housing Act and the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), which limit a city's ability to categorically ban such residences. He warned that an outright ban could invite federal litigation or private suits if persons with disabilities are denied housing protections. He cited a federal case, Jeffrey v. City of Boca Raton (2007), as an example in which a local ordinance was found to violate the Fair Housing Act.
Commissioners asked how the ordinance would affect facilities already operating in Jacksonville Beach. Megitt said the ordinance governs approval of establishing a certified recovery residence and does not retroactively nullify existing facilities: "This new ordinance would not affect any of those any existing recovery residences," he said, though he acknowledged some existing sites might already fall within the new definition and that different enforcement tools (code enforcement, licensing processes) could apply if problems emerged. He added that a change in location or a prolonged cessation of operations could trigger review as a legal nonconforming use.
On the application process, Megitt said the ordinance follows an interpretation adopted by multiple cities: while eight statutory requirements apply (including a prohibition on application fees), the ordinance permits oral applications when necessary to accommodate persons with disabilities. "A best practice was to allow an oral application if necessary," he said, adding that the allowance is intended to ensure ADA and Fair Housing Act compliance.
Megitt also described enforcement options if a facility violated local laws unrelated to the ordinance: standard municipal tools such as noise codes, police response, or state licensing processes would remain available. "We'd have all the tools we otherwise already have," he said.
What comes next: The council already adopted the ordinance; the planning commission will encounter conditional‑use applications for new or expanded certified recovery residences when individual proposals meet the threshold (7–14 residents) or otherwise require review. Commissioners asked for follow‑up clarifications on transferability of conditional uses and on records concerning existing facilities; staff and the attorney said they would provide additional details as cases arise.
The briefing closed with the commission thanking Megitt and asking staff to return with any needed clarifications at a future meeting.
