Cooley and ACLU File Discrimination Lawsuit against the City of Escondido

San Diego – May 19, 2015 – Cooley, along with the ACLU, Brancart & Brancart and the Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, has filed a lawsuit against the city of Escondido, California charging that it employed zoning and land use pretexts to discriminate against vulnerable children fleeing violence and persecution in Central America. The lawsuit, brought on behalf of Southwest Key, alleges violations of federal and state fair housing laws and the United States Constitution.

As required by law, the federal government contracts with organizations such as Southwest Key to provide housing for children fleeing violence and persecution. Many of the children ultimately qualify for asylum or legal status, allowing them to remain in the United States.

In February 2014, Southwest Key approached the city of Escondido about potential locations to house unaccompanied children awaiting placement with parents, relatives or other caregivers while their immigration cases are pending. When Southwest Key first approached the city, it sought to convert a motel site located in a commercial zone into housing for the unaccompanied children. However, the city's staff rejected that proposal claiming it was not allowed despite the fact that the municipal code permitted "residential care facilities" in the subject commercial zone. Attempting to work with the city, Southwest Key agreed to suspend an appeal from that decision and to pursue a conditional use permit to convert a former skilled nursing facility located in a residential zone in another part of the city.

In June 2014, before the city's Planning Commission held its hearing on the conditional use permit for the nursing home, Escondido Mayor Sam Abed publicly opposed the project, claiming it was a "federal" issue he did not want in Escondido. The Planning Commission then unanimously rejected the proposal.

The City Council held a hearing on Southwest Key's appeal in October 2014. Opposing the appeal, members of the public stated, "We don't want these people in our neighborhood," and reminded the City Council, "You are sitting up there right now because the majority of the people wanted you there, not the minority. Speak for the majority." The City Council voted 4-1 to deny Southwest Key's appeal.

Joseph Rich, co-director of the Fair Housing and Community Development Project at the Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, said: "Such statements have been found by many courts to be coded language for racial and national origin animus and to support findings of discrimination that violate the Fair Housing Act and other civil rights laws."

The Cooley team advising on this case includes partner Michelle Rhyu, special counsel Mary Kathryn Kelley and associate Craig TenBroeck.

About Cooley LLP

Cooley's lawyers solve legal issues for entrepreneurs, investors, financial institutions and established companies. Clients partner with Cooley on transformative deals, complex IP and regulatory matters, and high-stakes litigation, often where innovation meets the law.

Cooley has 850 lawyers across 12 offices in the United States, China and Europe.

This content is provided for general informational purposes only, and your access or use of the content does not create an attorney-client relationship between you or your organization and Cooley LLP, Cooley (UK) LLP, or any other affiliated practice or entity (collectively referred to as “Cooley”). By accessing this content, you agree that the information provided does not constitute legal or other professional advice. This content is not a substitute for obtaining legal advice from a qualified attorney licensed in your jurisdiction and you should not act or refrain from acting based on this content. This content may be changed without notice. It is not guaranteed to be complete, correct or up to date, and it may not reflect the most current legal developments. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Do not send any confidential information to Cooley, as we do not have any duty to keep any information you provide to us confidential. This content may be considered Attorney Advertising and is subject to our legal notices.