House committee adopts substitute for bill aimed at tighter rules for recovery housing

The House Community Revitalization Committee on a voice motion adopted substitute language as the working document for House Bill 58, a measure sponsors described as an effort to tighten oversight of recovery housing across Ohio.

Representative Swearingen moved to adopt “sub bill 13064024” as the working document; the motion carried with no objections and the substitute was accepted as the working document. Representatives Pizzulli and Jerrells then presented the substitute and outlined its major changes.

Why it matters: Sponsors said the substitute seeks to curb exploitative operators in recovery housing, improve resident conditions and give local officials faster tools to act. “House Bill 58 was introduced to help put an end to the Wild West atmosphere in recovery housing across Ohio,” Representative Pizzulli told the committee.

Key provisions explained by sponsors include: - A single, centralized list of recovery housing operators maintained by OMAS to reduce conflicting data between ADAMs boards and certifying entities. - Creation of a task force to review referral practices, resource distribution, local inspection practices and to consider an ombudsman program to handle complaints. - A transportation requirement specifying that entities who court-order someone to treatment and provide initial transportation must provide return transportation if the person defies orders, a change sponsors said would reduce homelessness tied to out-of-area placements. - Authority for local prosecutors to seek injunctions against operators described as bad actors, to enable faster local response rather than routing all cases through the Attorney General’s office. - A directive for OMAS to adopt clear rules for disciplinary actions and improved communication among OMAS, ADAMs boards and certifying entities. - Adoption of the federal definition of kickback schemes to close an identified loophole involving financial incentives tied to referrals.

Sponsors emphasized what the substitute does not do: it removes a certificate-of-need provision from the bill, leaving certificate-of-need issues to be studied by the proposed task force, and it does not expand ADAMs board powers immediately. Representative Jerrells said the substitute was “a reasonable compromise” reached after meetings with advocates, operators, prosecutors and local officials.

Representative Gross asked for clarification on several points, including whether the substitute sets a maximum length of stay in recovery housing and the bill’s fiscal note. Sponsors said the bill does not currently impose a mandatory time limit on residents’ duration of stay and that a fiscal note would be provided separately; they said many of the proposal’s components use existing authorities and processes.

The committee recorded the substitute’s adoption as the working document; no recorded roll-call vote or numerical tally was provided in the transcript.