Special Social Services and Public Safety Committee

Summary

Meeting Overview

The Special Social Services and Public Safety (SSPS) Committee convened on August 26, 2025, from 6:00 to 8:00 p.m., with Committee Chair J. Reynolds presiding. The meeting focused entirely on the Recovery Residences (Sober Living Homes) Ordinance, with all three agenda items dedicated to reviewing the ordinance, gathering public input on it, and outlining next steps. The session was informational in nature — no votes were taken during the meeting. A total of 33 public comments were heard, reflecting significant community interest in the ordinance under consideration. Chair J. Reynolds closed the meeting with remarks on next steps following the public input received.

Attendance

The following members were present at the Committee meeting held on August 26, 2025:

• J. Reynolds
• W. Baxter
• D. Wu
• C. Ellinger
• T. Morton
• S. Lynch
• J. Hale
• A. Beasley
• H. Boone

All 9 members were in attendance. No members were recorded as absent or late.

Public Comment

The committee received extensive public comment on the topic of sober living homes, with 33 speakers addressing the committee. Views were sharply divided between those supporting sober living homes as essential recovery resources and those raising concerns about neighborhood safety, property values, and the need for regulation.

Supporters of sober living homes included several individuals with personal connections to recovery:

• Chastity Griffin, owner of Bluegrass Recovery, described the backlash faced when opening sober living homes and stressed the importance of community living for people in addiction recovery. 15:00
• Brandon Franklin shared his personal experience with addiction and the positive impact sober living homes had on his recovery. 21:23
• Odell Hager highlighted the role of sober living homes in reducing homelessness. 26:19
• Michaela Key, a Bluegrass Recovery client, Joseph Smith, a Bluegrass Recovery employee, Steve Hensley, and Heather Brannum each spoke to the structure, accountability, and second chances provided by sober living programs. [timestamps: 29:27, 30:33, 31:41, 32:44]
• Cassandra Brown expressed support for a proposed ordinance while emphasizing the importance of giving people second chances. 1:54:41

Opponents and those calling for regulation raised concerns about safety, zoning, and neighborhood impact:

• Carl Burgess cited a lack of notification to local residents. 18:14
• Jeff Marshall, William Baker, Kenneth Marshall, Barbara Talbert, Leon Slater, and Janice Jackson raised concerns about safety, property values, and the protection of children and elderly residents from unregulated homes. [timestamps: 33:15, 34:49, 35:50, 38:02, 40:12, 43:19]
• Vicki Mitchell and Arty Green argued for treating sober living homes as businesses subject to appropriate zoning and oversight. [timestamps: 46:02, 48:17]
• Robin Connor and Jeffrey Baity addressed the disproportionate impact of sober living home placement on historic Black neighborhoods. [timestamps: 53:08, 57:55]
• Scott Mulkey presented a proposed ordinance for regulating sober living homes, referencing examples from other cities. 1:01:51
• Senator Reginald Thomas and Representative George Brown, Jr. both called for certified, regularly overseen sober living homes. [timestamps: 1:29:59, 1:41:25]
• Rodriguez Ballinger drew a distinction between recovery residences and transitional programming. 1:20:03

Contested Items

• Sober Living Homes Ordinance: A proposed ordinance to regulate sober living homes drew significant community opposition during the meeting. Concerns raised centered on safety, zoning, and the potential impact on surrounding neighborhoods. The extracted data does not specify the outcome of the discussion or identify the individual speakers involved in the debate.

Review of the Recovery Residences (Sober Living Homes) Ordinance

5:47

The committee took up Agenda Item I, a review of the proposed ordinance governing recovery residences, commonly known as sober living homes. Michael Cravens presented the item, which covered the ordinance's key components including state law requirements, certification, licensing, and enforcement measures.

The review was informational in nature, providing committee members with an overview of how the proposed ordinance would regulate recovery residences within the jurisdiction. The ordinance addresses:

• State law requirements — ensuring the local ordinance aligns with applicable state-level mandates governing recovery residences
• Certification — establishing standards or processes by which recovery residences would be certified
• Licensing — outlining the licensing framework operators would be required to follow
• Enforcement measures — detailing how compliance would be monitored and violations addressed

No final action was taken on the ordinance at this meeting, as the item was presented for informational purposes. The committee received the presentation from Cravens without a recorded vote or formal decision at this stage.

Public Input on the Recovery Residences (Sober Living Homes) Ordinance

12:23

The committee opened the floor for public input on the proposed Recovery Residences (Sober Living Homes) Ordinance, inviting community members to share their support, concerns, and suggestions regarding the measure.

Two key speakers addressed the committee during this portion of the meeting: J. Reynolds and T. Morton. The discussion was informational in nature, providing an opportunity for public voices to be heard as the ordinance continues through the review process.

• J. Reynolds and T. Morton were identified as the primary speakers offering public comment during this agenda item.
• Community members used the session to express a range of perspectives, including support for, concerns about, and suggestions related to the proposed ordinance.

The committee received the public input without taking formal action, and the item was recorded as informational. No vote or binding decision was made at this stage of the process.

> *Note: Additional detail on the specific arguments, concerns, or proposals raised by individual speakers was not available in the source materials for this summary.*

Committee Chair Closing Remarks – Next Steps

1:58:23

Committee Chair J. Reynolds delivered closing remarks to conclude the August 26, 2025 committee meeting and outlined the path forward for the ordinance under discussion.

Reynolds indicated that the committee's work on the ordinance is ongoing, with further discussions and updates anticipated in October. No final action was taken on the ordinance at this meeting, and the item was treated as informational in nature.

No additional speakers or debate were recorded for this agenda item, and no formal vote or resolution was produced. The next opportunity for the committee to revisit the matter is expected at a future meeting in October.