Committee members urge ‘support not sanction’ approach after reports of rapid evictions from recovery housing

A community roundtable produced sustained discussion about practices in recovery residences and how they affect housing stability. Multiple committee members and public commenters described instances where residents are asked to leave "in 15 minutes" after a return to use and said that practice can be destabilizing and dangerous. Malika said she hears concern that some programs "kick people out very quickly," and several speakers echoed that concern as a common practice in some recovery housing settings.

Treatment providers and committee members pushed back against punitive models. Addie Atwell, a committee treatment-provider representative, stated plainly: "Housing is not treatment." She said housing is a basic human need and that withdrawing housing as a sanction for relapse undermines recovery and trust. Others urged practical alternatives: Representative Lauren Davis suggested interim beds or SUD peer respite models for short stays following a lapse, while James Tillett proposed county-level ad hoc review committees to address questionable eviction decisions and allow temporary stays pending a fuller review.

Speakers also highlighted geographic disparities: rural participants said youth transitional housing and low-barrier options are often absent in less-populated counties. Susan Pacey (King County) offered a success example where individuals retained housing when multiple supports (peer, family and clinical) collectively stabilized someone at risk. The roundtable concluded with a request that the committee follow up on eviction practices, interim/respite bed options, and better coordination across housing and treatment systems.