The Capitol Zoning District Commission turned down an application Thursday for a historic home on South Broadway to continue to house a rehabilitation program for substance-abuse offenders.
Despite a recommendation from the commission’s staff to approve the conditional-use permit needed for Muskie Harris to continue to use the home at 2000 S. Broadway for his recovery program, commissioners voted against issuing the permit. Six members were opposed, two voted in favor and one abstained.
Harris began operating at the house in late October and said he didn’t know the conditional-use permit was required. Two managers and 10 tenants live in the house. He now has 30 days to appeal the decision to Pulaski County Circuit Court. If the court upholds the decision, it would be a violation of capital zoning code for the home to be used as a boardinghouse, and the commission could seek a court order to evict the occupants.
Harris said after Thursday’s vote that the program’s attorney, former Circuit Judge Marion Humphrey, would be appealing the decision and that he’s prepared to file a discrimination lawsuit against the commission.
“The commissioners are really way off base with going on their personal opinions instead of following the law,” Harris said. “You see staff recommended approval. Why would they do that if it wasn’t in compliance?”
Thursday marked the third time that the commission has considered the permit. It first took up the issue in December but voted to postpone making a decision until the commission’s legal counsel could determine whether the program’s clients are protected under the federal Fair Housing Act.
People recovering from substance abuse are considered a protected class under the law, and the commission’s attorney cautioned commissioners against denying the permit based solely on the status of the tenants. Courts assign participants to the program. Tenants are recovering from either drug or alcohol abuse, and they typically stay about a year until their cases have made it through the courts and they’ve satisfied a judge’s requirements.
At a January meeting, some commissioners proposed issuing a temporary permit and having Harris return to the board in November, when the program’s track record would be reviewed. The proposal didn’t pass at that meeting, and Harris chose to defer his application until Thursday’s meeting because the full commission wasn’t present in January.
An identical motion presented Thursday regarding the temporary permit also failed, with three in favor, five against and one abstaining. Albert Hurst chose not to vote because he owns property nearby, though other commissioners and staff members told him that they didn’t feel that was a conflict of interest, because the purpose of the commission is to represent the voice of the neighborhood.
Commissioners then voted on the permit application, with Solomon Bradford and Chad Green voting in favor and Ron Maxwell, Carla Davis, Tommy Jameson, Amber Jones, Brian Minyard and Ralph Vines voting against it.
Jameson had earlier voted in favor of the temporary permit.
At the January meeting, Davis also voted in favor of the temporary permit.
“I hate this, but I’m going to have to change what I voted last time. Even though Little Rock city code allows that many people in a structure of that size, that’s for a regular structure not an historic home that’s wood. I just think it would be a lot of wear and tear on that house,” Davis said Thursday.
The commission chose not to consider a recommendation from a staff member that they limit the number of occupants to 10 - eight program participants and the two managers - if the occupancy burden was an issue.
Jones expressed concern about the odor of tobacco smoke in the alley behind the home and questioned whether it met fire code, but she was told that the city issued a letter stating the home was in compliance with all state codes. Other commissioners who voted against the application didn’t say why they chose to do so at Thursday’s meeting.
Harris said approval of locating the program in the house would have been a big step for the therapeutic community. There’s need in the neighborhood for that service, he said, and several area churches have expressed interest in partnering with the home on certain programs. He’s hopeful that the court will allow the proposed use of the house, he said.
Arkansas, Pages 9 on 02/21/2014