Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use And Neighborhoods topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Neighbors urge city enforcement after group home opens on Indian Hills Drive
Summary
Residents told the Richfield City Council that a group home operated by RISE Services opened on North Indian Hills Drive without local notice or a business license. Neighbors asked the council to require local permits, designate a neighborhood contact and ensure state licensing and inspections are in place.
Several neighbors asked the Richfield City Council on a residential safety and process issue after what they said was a group home moved into 888 North Indian Hills Drive.
Sarah Conder, a nearby resident, told the council the house was “introduced without notice, without city approval, and without any opportunity for the neighbors to ask questions.” She said neighbors are unsure how to report problems and described a complex ownership structure she said ties the property to multiple LLCs and an Arizona private-equity firm.
Conder said residents support inclusive housing but want clarity and enforcement of local rules: “I respectfully ask the council to, number 1, ensure this facility complies with all city ordinances and appropriate zoning laws… Number 2, ensure that they remain compliant maintain compliance with the DHHS licensing, oversight, and inspection requirements. And 3, require a designated contact or committee to address neighborhood concerns as they arise to improve safety.”
Council members and staff described the situation as largely a process failure rather than a new zoning policy dispute. City staff reported they have been in contact with the facility and its attorney and that the city’s primary compliance concern is that the operator has not completed the city business-license and conditional-use permit steps required for congregate residential facilities. A council member said if the operator fails to obtain the license the city could order it closed, but legal timelines were not specified during the meeting.
Multiple speakers pressed for a practical avenue to resolve day-to-day problems without immediate police intervention — for example, a neighborhood contact at the company or a small oversight committee to handle recurring nuisance complaints such as speeding, on-site smoking or yard maintenance. One resident raised safety concerns about occupants described as having intellectual or developmental disabilities and asked what local oversight would protect nonverbal or vulnerable residents; another council member said those concerns underscored why the city must ensure licensure and inspections are current.
City staff described the administrative steps already taken: planning staff identified the requirement for a conditional-use permit for residential-care uses in single-family neighborhoods; the city attorney and the operator’s attorney have exchanged correspondence; and staff said they will request the operator come in to complete the licensing process. Council members directed staff to send a formal notice and set a compliance deadline. If the operator fails to appear, staff said the city’s code enforcement mechanisms — including potential citations under the city ordinance — could be pursued.
No formal enforcement action or suspension of operations was ordered at the meeting. Council members asked the city attorney and planning staff to continue communications with the operator, to confirm whether state Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) licensing and inspection records are in place, and to provide a clear point of contact for neighbors to report concerns.
The neighbors who spoke said they do not oppose services for people with disabilities but want consistent application of local permits, an identified company contact for neighborhood issues and proof of state inspections and oversight.
