Escondido Changes Senior Housing Ordinance to Settle Suit

The Escondido City Council has revised its senior housing ordinance in order to settle a federal lawsuit charging that the law discriminated against younger families.

U.S. Justice Department attorneys are expected Monday to file a lawsuit in U.S. District Court in San Diego. At the same time, they will file a consent decree outlining the settlement agreement approved by the council. The consent decree will immediately settle the suit.

Federal officials intend to file the suit, even though a settlement agreement has been reached, in order to legally bind the city to comply with the consent decree.

“We could have been facing potentially hundreds of thousands of dollars in civil penalties and legal fees” if the case had gone forward, Assistant City Atty. Jeffrey Epp said.

The ordinance revisions, adopted Wednesday night, allow the owners of 17 senior complexes to choose whether they will open their buildings to all tenants. Those electing to retain seniors-only housing will have to provide amenities for seniors mandated by federal law, such as shuttle service, elevators and safety bars in bathrooms, officials said.

The change came after the owners of one complex complained that the ordinance, meant to promote moderately priced housing for the elderly, was discriminatory and hurt them financially because they couldn’t rent vacant units to younger people with children.

After a two-year investigation by the Department of Housing and Urban Development and the Justice Department, federal officials told the city that its 1982 ordinance violated amendments to the Fair Housing Act, even though those amendments were passed after the Escondido ordinance was adopted.

When the Fair Housing Amendments Act was passed in 1988, it barred discrimination against families with children and required that “housing for older persons” be narrowly tailored to seniors by offering amenities. That amendment did not allow for grandfathering of ordinances already in effect, as Escondido’s was.

“The rules of the ballgame were changed at halftime,” City Manager Doug Clark said. “I think it (the federal amendment) is basically a bad law, but there’s nothing very much you can do about it.”

Epp said the controversy over the ordinance has been frustrating because the ordinance had been passed with good intentions, and the city had no way of knowing it was in violation until an investigation was launched. But Epp said he is happy federal officials agreed to sit down and work out a solution before filing the suit.

Clark said some seniors will be unhappy about the prospects of young people living in their buildings. But, he said, “Our hands are tied.”

In promoting the senior units, the city lost out on school fees and other money that is normally required of developers. The fees were waived as incentive to build senior housing, Clark said.

Parking and density restrictions were relaxed to encourage developers to build the 1,923 units.

Complexes with fewer than 150 units were restricted to people age 62 and over; those with more than 150 units were available to people 55 and over.

But, by 1985, there was a glut of senior units, and a moratorium was placed on their construction. No senior complexes have been built since.

About two years ago, Robert and Eva Mae Lynch, owners of Country Club Creekside Apartments, challenged the ordinance so they could rent to people who didn’t meet the age restrictions. HUD and the Justice Department then launched investigations that culminated in closed sessions with the City Council over the past six weeks.

Under the consent decree, the city must reimburse the Lynches $5,000 for their costs. In return, the couple agreed not to seek more damages.

The decree also requires the city to send letters informing complex owners of their options, and to spend $10,000 on advertising and educational workshops to educate city officials and landlords about the new law.

Federal authorities said they will monitor how the ordinance is implemented for three years.

City officials said they hope the free market will solve some vacancy problems for landlords. At the same time, some units that will be open to all residents may remain predominantly for seniors because they lack sufficient parking, large bedrooms and play areas. Many of the units also rent for about the same price as apartments not involved in the affordable senior program, they added.