To amend sections 340.034, 2925.01, 5119.01, 5119.36, 5119.365, 5119.39, 5119.392, 5119.393, 5119.394, 5119.396, 5119.94, and 5119.99; to enact new section 5119.391 and sections 5119.02, 5119.369, 5119.398, and 5119.399; and to repeal sections 5119.391, 5119.395, and 5119.397 of the Revised Code to require state certification of recovery housing residences, to establish additional duties regarding services offered by community addiction services providers, and to create the Ohio Recovery Housing Task Force.
HB58 creates a certificate of need program for recovery housing residences in Ohio. Under the bill, the Director of Mental Health and Addiction Services would administer the program, determine whether proposed projects are “reviewable activities,” and decide whether to approve, deny, condition, withdraw, or void certificates of need. The bill covers new construction, acquisition or replacement of buildings used as recovery housing, major renovations over $500,000, increases in bed capacity, relocations of beds, and failures to carry out an approved project in substantial accordance with the application within five years.
The bill also establishes application procedures, fees, rulemaking authority, appeal rights, and enforcement mechanisms. Applicants would pay a fee based on bed count or another amount set by rule, and the department could impose civil penalties for unauthorized reviewable activities. A new recovery housing residence fund would be created in the state treasury to support local alcohol, drug addiction, and mental health boards in conducting inspections and complaint investigations. The bill also requires annual inspections of recovery housing residences and a complaint process for residents, staff, and the public.
HB58 would add a new layer of state oversight to recovery housing by requiring state certification through a certificate of need process before certain development, expansion, acquisition, or relocation projects can proceed. It would amend existing law governing recovery housing inspections and complaints, shift primary administrative authority to the Department of Mental Health and Addiction Services, and create new statutory definitions, procedures, penalties, and appeals. The bill would also direct fee and penalty revenue into a dedicated fund to help local boards cover inspection and investigation costs, affecting recovery housing operators, applicants, local boards, and the department.
The available voting history shows strong bipartisan support and no recorded opposition in either chamber action listed. The bill received favorable passage in committee by a 10-0 vote and then passed the House unanimously, 92-0. No committee transcript excerpts were provided, so the overall sentiment can only be inferred from the votes: the measure appears broadly supported as a regulatory and oversight response to recovery housing concerns.
No specific points of contention are documented in the provided transcripts, and the recorded votes show no dissent. Based on the bill text, likely areas of debate would include whether a certificate of need regime could limit the growth of recovery housing, create administrative burdens or costs for providers, or improve quality and accountability through state review. The bill’s exemptions for existing residences and certain maintenance or compliance-related work suggest an effort to balance oversight with continued operation of current facilities.