A reprieve for RV dwellers
Judge tells San Diego to stop ticketing homeless people living in vehicles.
SAN DIEGO — A federal judge has ordered this city to stop ticketing homeless people for living inside vehicles, calling its longtime law prohibiting such behavior too vague for effective enforcement.
The injunction issued by U.S. District Judge Anthony Battaglia on Tuesday is a victory for disabled homeless people living in recreational vehicles who filed suit last year over the law, which they say is discriminatory.
Though the injunction will be in place only until Battaglia rules in the case, the judge said he expects to eventually decide in favor of the homeless people.
“The court finds plaintiffs have shown a likelihood of success on the merits of their claim that the ordinance is vague because it fails to alert the public what behavior is lawful and what behavior is prohibited,” Battaglia wrote.
He said the habitation law doesn’t indicate specifically what turns a vehicle into a person’s home or “living quarters,” noting that people have been ticketed for reading a book inside their vehicle.
Before the lawsuit was filed last November, San Diego officials and lawyers for the plaintiffs discussed potential changes in enforcement that would allow displaced RV owners to park their recreational vehicles somewhere legally.
Last week’s injunction could allow the two sides to revisit those discussions and find a solution.
In addition to prohibiting the city from issuing tickets under the ordinance, the injunction prevents the city from impounding vehicles and pursuing any outstanding tickets that have been issued but not prosecuted.
Battaglia gave city officials 30 days to report to the court how San Diego has complied with the order.
A spokeswoman for City Atty. Mara Elliott declined Wednesday to discuss the order, saying in an email only that “we will review the ruling and advise our client.”
San Diego got some good news from Battaglia, who said a separate city ordinance prohibiting overnight parking of recreational and other oversized vehicles appears to be legally sound.
The lawsuit filed by the disabled homeless group says that ordinance is discriminatory, along with the vehicle habitation law. The suit alleges both laws illegally prevent disabled homeless people from living and sleeping in recreational vehicles parked overnight on city streets.
The overnight parking ordinance, enacted in 2014, prohibits such vehicles from parking on any city street or in any public parking lot between 2 and 6 a.m.
Battaglia declined Tuesday to block that law, contending that the plaintiffs and their attorneys didn’t demonstrate that it has been discriminatory.
He also wrote that the law doesn’t appear to have the same vagueness as the vehicle habitation law.
“While the court sympathizes that this ordinance leaves plaintiffs with nowhere to park between these hours and is decidedly unfair, the law is not ambiguous, unclear or vague in any way,” Battaglia wrote.
Special city parking lots established last year allow overnight parking for homeless individuals, but they don’t accept RVs and have far fewer spaces than the estimated 1,000 homeless people living in vehicles locally. The lots also require users to apply for slots in shelters, a move that doesn’t make sense for most disabled homeless people living in RVs because shelters aren’t an appropriate environment for them, the suit says.
Regarding shelters, the lawsuit says physically disabled people may struggle with stairs and that those with mental health problems don’t function well in noisy, dirty, unsafe and overcrowded facilities where there is a lack of privacy.
The lawsuit says the RV law and the vehicle habitation ordinance both violate numerous U.S. and state constitutional rights, including the 8th Amendment prohibition on cruel and unusual punishment and the 14th Amendment guaranteeing due process. They also violate the anti-discrimination protections of Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, the suit says.
In June, city attorneys argued the laws are neutral and can’t be challenged under disability discrimination laws because they apply to everyone regardless of disability status.
But in June, Battaglia said that a policy “can violate the Americans with Disabilities Act and Rehabilitation Act if it disparately impacts or places a disproportionate burden on the disabled.”
The class-action lawsuit was filed on behalf of nine disabled homeless people by Disability Rights California and the National Law Center on Homelessness & Poverty. Attorneys for both organizations couldn’t be reached for comment.