Laserfiche WebLink
Recovering drug addicts are presumptively "qualified" persons under the ADA and <br /> Rehabilitation Act. See 42 U.S.C. §12131, 29 U.S.C. §794(a). The ADA and the <br /> Rehabilitation Act specifically provide that a person who has completed a supervised <br /> rehabilitation program or is currently participating in such a program and is no longer <br /> engaging in drug use shall be deemed a"qualified individual".42 U.S.C.§12210(a),(b)(1); <br /> 29 U.S.C. §705(20)(C)(ii). The ADA applies to zoning ordinances. See Bay Area, 179 F.3d <br /> 725. <br /> Ordinance 3598-18 expressly changes the definition of "clinic" to include "opiate <br /> substitution treatment facilities" and then proceeds to prohibit all clinics in the B-3 zone. <br /> This plainly indicates that the ban is related to the treatment of "opiate substitution <br /> treatment facilities" and appears to be a violation of the ADA.There can be no doubt that <br /> prohibiting all such treatment facilities within the B-3 zone harms the protected class-as <br /> it limits the ability of those who need treatment to obtain that treatment. As in Bay Area, <br /> this indicates that the ordinance violates the ADA and the Rehabilitation Act and may <br /> well be struck down if challenged through legal proceedings. The locational limitations <br /> in the Subarea Plan Clinic Overlay and Office-Clinic Overlays only exacerbate these legal <br /> concerns. <br /> However, even if the Ordinance did not violate the ADA and the Rehabilitation Act, it <br /> should not in fairness apply to Ideal Option. Ideal Option has been operating its Everett <br /> clinic and providing comprehensive medication assisted treatment for thousands of <br /> recovering drug users since 2016. Given the City of Everett's efforts to combat its opioid <br /> addiction problems, including its lawsuit against Purdue Pharma and the Everett Police <br /> Department's partnership with the Police Assisted Addiction and Recovery Initiative <br /> ("PAARI"), the services provided by Ideal Option should be greatly valued and allowed <br /> to expand. <br /> Ideal Option entered into a lease for a larger clinic Iocation within the B-3 zone on March <br /> 5,2018. Ideal Option desires to move because it has outgrown its current clinic space and <br /> cannot provide treatment to enough individuals while located in its small space. Ideal <br /> Option signed its larger lease two days before Ordinance 3598-18 was adopted and has <br /> been paying rent for that lease ever since-despite not currently being permitted to open <br /> its doors. For this reason alone, Ideal Option's proposed clinic location should be exempt <br /> from the restriction placed by Ordinance 3598-18 and its location within the B-3 zone <br /> should be grandfathered in as an exempt non-conforming use while the moratorium <br /> against clinics is in place. <br /> In addition,it is very important to note that the space in which Ideal Option is seeking to <br /> operate was,until April 1,2018,being used as another clinic. That clinic has since closed, <br /> and Ideal Option has been preparing to open in its new location.Therefore, there will be <br /> no net increase in the number of clinics in the B-3 zone. Ideal Option will simply be <br /> occupying a space which was already being used as a clinic at the time that Ordinance <br /> 3598-18 went into effect. There can be no doubt that the prior clinic would be permitted <br />