Subcommittee weighs HB 432 to define, certify recovery houses amid safety and zoning concerns

The subcommittee of the Municipal and County Government on Wednesday, Feb. 19, 2025, heard testimony on House Bill 432, which would create a statutory definition for "recovery homes," require certification by a recognized certifying organization, and restrict some local land‑use review for those residences.

The bill matters because it would change how municipalities treat shared or congregate recovery housing, clarify fire‑ and building‑code expectations, and tie certain code waivers and access to certification. Proponents said the measure would reduce stigma, bring uncertified operations aboveboard and connect operators to fire‑safety inspections and certifying bodies. Opponents said it would strip local zoning tools that municipalities use to manage density, parking and sewer impacts.

State Fire Marshal Sean Toomey, for the record the State Fire Marshal, told the committee his office helped refine the bill’s definition and supports the definition as written so long as operators meet the other code requirements. Toomey said his office focused on tying the statutory definition to fire‑code provisions that address egress, alarm systems and heating, and that "we were amenable to to removing that as long as they followed the rest of the process in that, definition." He described the typical recovery‑house occupancy pattern as longer‑term than a motel and said, based on his experience, residents often live a year to a year and a half and develop household cohesion that affects safety and evacuation.

Toomey explained how his office and local fire departments inspect recovery houses: an inspector meets operators, verifies smoke and carbon monoxide alarms, checks fire extinguishers and egress, confirms street numbers, and allows time for operators to obtain third‑party certification. He said the fire code provides a…