Wheaton council affirms denial of Radical Hospitality Ministries' group care home license appeal

The Wheaton City Council on a special meeting affirmed the denial of Radical Hospitality Ministries' (RHM) appeal of the Group Care Home License Review Committee's decision, concluding the committee's finding that RHM had been operating a group care home without the required license was supported by the record. The council's action affirms the committee's written decision dated 01/27/2025 and relies on evidence submitted during the committee review and in the appeal record.

The council's review was limited to the record assembled by the committee; no new testimony or documents were accepted. That record includes RHM application materials, a residential handbook, a 2023 tax filing, a DuPage County grant application, inspection reports and correspondence between RHM and city staff. In public comment, neighbors and supporters presented opposing views about safety, code compliance and the organization's mission; the council repeatedly reminded speakers that those remarks were not part of the record on appeal.

RHM board member James Baugh told the council the organization began providing temporary housing at 530 East Indiana Street in January 2023 and later sought a group care home license after deciding to offer additional services. Baugh said the organization transported clients off-site for counseling and other services and that the house itself was not used for program delivery. "We have tried to operate in good faith," he told the council, and emphasized that the property passed the city's fire inspection on Nov. 25, 2024.

City Attorney Dawn Dedier and the committee argued the written record shows a programmatic structure that went beyond simple room rental. Dedier cited RHM documents — including a residential handbook requiring a personal growth plan, financial contribution language and disciplinary procedures — and a 2023 tax form and other materials describing RHM's "comprehensive transitional services" as evidence the organization provided social and habilitative support to residents. Dedier said those items supported the committee's conclusion that services had been provided to a resident at the house and that the operation met the city code definition of a group care home.

Members of the public who opposed the appeal raised code and safety concerns: they pointed to an application/lease the neighbors described as short-term and lacking ordinary protections, earlier failed fire inspections, and the possibility that the Haywards (the homeowners) had not yet completed a required inspection to address zoning issues cited in the committee record. Neighbors also referenced the presence of an elementary school in the area and questioned vetting and eligibility procedures for residents.

Supporters of RHM — including neighbors and people with lived experience who read written statements — argued reentry housing reduces recidivism and that the organization had helped people find work and stability. Deontay Holyfield, whose letter was read into the record, wrote, "I am a felon ... I pay my taxes," and urged the council to consider reentry supports; several residents recounted personal contacts with RHM volunteers and said they trusted the organizers.

Council discussion focused on whether the documents in the record established that RHM had provided programmatic services "to persons residing therein in a residential community setting," the statutory language the city uses to define a group care home. RHM argued that services described in its materials were delivered off-site and that the code requires that programming be provided at the residence to trigger the license requirement. The city and the committee countered that handbook language, the description of case work and the organization's own statements were sufficient to infer on-site program delivery or an operational model that amounted to a group care home.

After debate the council moved to affirm the committee's denial. The roll-call vote was recorded as: Councilman Barbier, yes; Councilwoman Bray Parker, yes; Councilman Brown, yes; Mayor Sees, yes; Councilman Clausing, yes; Councilwoman Robbins, yes; Councilman Weller, yes. The motion to affirm the committee's denial therefore passed and the appeal was denied.

The action leaves the group care home license denied; the Haywards, RHM and city staff discussed previously that some code and inspection issues were in process of remediation. The council did not take new evidence or direct staff to reopen fact-finding; its decision was strictly on the record before it. RHM said it will need to decide whether to change how it houses or serves clients if it cannot operate with a license. The meeting closed with routine adjournment votes.

(For the record: the committee held an initial hearing that denied the application on Jan. 22, 2025; that first denial was rescinded to allow a subsequent committee public meeting that produced a second denial; RHM's application was filed June 5, 2024; the first resident identified in the record, Patrick Manning, moved in Jan. 7, 2023 and remained through Aug. 2024; the property passed fire inspection on Nov. 25, 2024.)