The City of Cookeville council voted unanimously to approve Resolution R25‑11‑20, asking Putnam County’s representatives in the Tennessee General Assembly to sponsor an amendment to the Tennessee Code (transcript citation: 'section 7 51 26 0 1') that would allow local governments to require location restrictions for new sober‑living homes.

City Manager Mills told the council the request follows “numerous calls with complaints and concerns about sober living facilities” scattered through residential areas and a recent incident at a local sober‑living facility. Mills said federal law and current state law limit the city’s ability to regulate homes with eight or fewer residents, and pointed to a 2024 state public chapter (public chapter 503, cited in the resolution) that allowed one county to require 1,000‑foot separation from day cares, preschools or other schools for newly established sober‑living homes. “Under current state law … sober living facilities with 8 or less occupants and up to 3 caregivers have to be treated exactly like a single family home,” Mills said.

Trent Strode of Goodwill, Tennessee spoke during public comment, saying he was “somewhat indifferent” to the resolution but urged the council to press state lawmakers to include language that would secure mental‑health and addiction treatment services tied to sober‑living proposals rather than treat them solely as code‑enforcement issues. Mills told the council the resolution itself does not change local rules immediately and that further legal analysis would be required if the state amends the statute; he estimated an amendment would not take effect until May or June of the following year.

The council moved and seconded the resolution and recorded a 4‑0 vote in favor. The action gives city leaders the option to pursue local rules on siting or operation of new sober‑living homes if the legislature adopts the requested change; existing homes would be grandfathered under the model cited by Mills.

The council did not adopt any local ordinance at the meeting; next steps would include legal review and, if the state changes law, local implementation or rulemaking as authorized by that change.