EVERETT — The city’s planning commission is wrestling with the definition of “family” as it considers changes to the city’s code.

Everett is proposing a change in its official definition as one way of closing a gap in regulations of transitional houses, sometimes referred to as clean-and-sober houses.

The rule change lowers the maximum number of unrelated adults who could live under one roof from eight to four before triggering a city review, but also seeks to give the city more leeway to allow group homes for the disabled, including those recovering from addiction.

As the city code stands now, the houses often are located in residential zones, and are largely unregulated. The city doesn’t know even how many there are.

“We have no idea,” Everett’s planning director, Allan Giffen, told the commission.

Given the number of questions posed by the commission and public Tuesday, it’s not clear when or if the city’s proposed changes will be back on the planning commission’s agenda, Giffen said.

The proposed changes touch on a number of sections in the municipal code, but the heart of the matter is the fact that up to four unrelated adults can live together under the same roof and not be subject to any more regulations than a typical family related by blood, marriage, adoption or fostering.

A section of the current code applying toward adults with disabilities sets the maximum number at eight. The code amendments would remove that limit.

After that, it gets complicated.

People with addictions or who are in recovery are classified as disabled under the federal Fair Housing Act. The federal law requires the city to provide “reasonable accommodation” for people with disabilities, a term that means the city must allow disabled people the same opportunities for housing, even if it means allowing an exception to the rules.

But that doesn’t cover all the cases. Some providers of transitional housing rent rooms to recently released inmates who might not be addicts or otherwise considered disabled.

If a certain group home doesn’t meet the definition of family, and not all the residents are disabled, then it would be up to the city’s planning director to determine if the home was “functionally equivalent” of a family. That would mean weighing various criteria, such as if the tenants had long-term leases, shared in the ownership of furniture and appliances, or contributed to the upkeep of the house.

The language is modeled on a part of the city of Bellevue’s code, Giffen said.

“It’s fairly black-and-white for nondisabled (people) under the current definition. It’s four or fewer, or that’s it,” he said.

The proposed code would allow more than four disabled people through the reasonable accommodation review process, but it wouldn’t change how the city reviews homes with nondisabled residents or mixed populations.

Jeanmarie Trapp, the executive director of Fresh Start Housing, said she operates two facilities in Everett, one for men and one for women. The men’s home is in a residential zone, and could fall through the cracks of the proposed changes.

Both of her homes have a mix of people in recovery and former inmates, she said.

“We don’t like to have a mix of all one ‘problem,’ if that sounds coarse,” Trapp said. “Then they don’t sort of conglomerate together. And we share rooms because we don’t want people to isolate (themselves).”

“It’s not always functional, but we work toward it, and it does work. Just like any other family,” she said.

Some providers of transitional housing are more hostile to any changes, and several people urged the City Council at a recent meeting to not make any changes for fear they would be shut down.

Michelle Westford, whose family operates several group homes in Everett, said the rule change was simply another way for the city to drive them out.

“Allan has been on our tail since 2007 trying to shut us down,” she said. “This is absolutely ridiculous. If you’re so in love with Bellevue, go ahead and move there.”

Giffen said that seems to be stemming from a misinterpretation of the proposed rule change.

“Some people coming to testify think we’re going to take a hard-line stance,” he said.

The language doesn’t give the city any new regulatory authority outside of setting the limit.

The commission struggled with how to draw the regulatory line. Commissioner Richard Jordison said he felt the language was “sneaky.”

”If what you’re trying to do is stop too many people living in a house, you should just come out and say it,” Jordison said.

Commissioner Kathryn Beck said she felt the city shouldn’t be attempting to define “family” at all.

“I think defining family is a relic of the past, and it’s social commentary,” she said.

Chris Winters: 425-374-4165; cwinters@heraldnet.com. Twitter: @Chris_At_Herald.