2025 Annual Report - Insight v. Costa Mesa Settlement (Housing Unit)
2025 Annual Report - Insight v. Costa Mesa Settlement (Housing Unit)
Costa Mesa Housing Settlement
In October 2025, DRC’s Housing and Equal Rights Practice Group settled the case Insight v. Costa Mesa, after five years of litigation. The settlement will see the city of Costa Mesa paying 1.75 million in attorneys’ fees. The city is also required to update its reasonable accommodation ordinance to be in compliance with the law.
This settlement is a large step forward for ensuring that cities like Costa Mesa don’t put an undue burden on people with disabilities when requesting reasonable accommodations during the housing appeal process.
Insight was a housing provider for people with mental health disabilities in the city of Costa Mesa, in Orange County, California. Insight ran an apartment complex that functioned as temporary housing for folks who were exiting residential treatment centers and needed a step down before returning to their usual housing. DRC’s client, who is referred to by the pseudonym Jane Doe, had been a resident of Insight after receiving treatment for a mental health disability in an inpatient facility.
An ordinance against group housing
The problem began in 2018 when Insight was notified by the city of Costa Mesa that they needed a conditional use permit in order to continue providing group housing. After a long time had passed, the city denied Insight’s permit because of a technicality, so Insight applied for a reasonable accommodation. Cities are required to make reasonable changes to across-the-board rules if they are necessary for people with disabilities to have an equal opportunity.
“So, Insight made that request, and the city said no to that as well, because, as it turned out, the city had a blanket policy of never, ever granting exceptions to [this specific] rule,” said Autumn Elliott, a former attorney with DRC’s Civil Rights Practice Group who oversaw the litigation for this case, “even for a case like Insight that was providing such important housing for folks with disabilities.”
This left Insight with no other option than to sue the city. Jane Doe, as represented by DRC, joined the lawsuit in the fall of 2020. Right before the case was set to go to trial, the city settled in October 2025. The settlement stated that the city needed to repay Insight $1.75 million in attorneys' fees and update its reasonable accommodation ordinance by July 2026. Despite receiving payment as part of the settlement, five years of litigation had forced Insight to close its doors. Although Insight has closed, DRC’s client was bolstered with the understanding that Costa Mesa would have to update its processes.
What makes for good neighbors?
Orange County, where Costa Mesa is located, is renowned for its temperate climate, and its proximity to the Pacific Ocean has made it a hub for group recovery homes. This area is sometimes referred to as the “Rehab Riviera.” Residents, however, have complained about noise, the impact on parking, and the drain on city resources, prompting the city council to enact ordinances that clamp down on group homes’ ability to operate. Elliott noted that while these measures were meant to target sober living homes (which are still for people with disabilities), in practice they impact all kinds of group homes, such as Insight.
“What we're seeing in communities like Costa Mesa is that they want to kick the can down the road. They want someone else to solve the affordable housing and homelessness crisis in California. They don't want to be the ones to do it,” said Jia Min Cheng, Interim Managing Attorney for the Equal Access and Housing Practice Group. “They would rather push people out, push these types of housing out to other communities, and they are taking very active steps by passing regulations and laws, creating policies that really make it impossible for these types of housing to exist, or to be built in their communities.”
Cheng said that this case is the product of NIMBY-ism, which stands for “not in my backyard,” a sentiment expressed by people who object to certain kinds of housing in their neighborhoods but have no problem with those programs being taken elsewhere. Coupled with NIMBY-ism, Elliott said, is fear and stereotypes about people with mental health disabilities.
“Any type of housing can be a problem, or not a problem, it’s just going to depend on who’s living there and what they do,” Elliott said. “It’s not inherent in people with disabilities that they’re going to be bad neighbors.”
Through the settlement, Costa Mesa will not only have to bring its reasonable accommodation request process into compliance with state and federal law, but Cheng said she hopes it sends a message.
“I think that this case as a whole puts them on notice that DRC is advocating for the rights of people with disabilities in accordance with our mission, that we are ready to hold them accountable if we see them acting against the interests of people with disabilities,” Cheng said. “And my hope for other jurisdictions is that they will similarly, one, understand that they cannot just trample over the rights of their citizens.”
