Have you seen this article yet?
“In Torrington, Venghaus said, anyone can purchase a home and turn it into a sober house. There is no way for city officials to track the number of sober houses that have sprouted up over the years since recovery facilities are covered by federal law that outlaw discrimination.”
In my opinion, there needs to be a distinction between a sober living residence where people choose to live in a life of sobriety with others, as compared to those residences which simply house people while they attend treatment.
The difference as it pertains to any level of “regulation” lies in whether or not the resident is “established in their recovery”.
Government should have NO interest in the former, and some interest in the latter, but only to the extent that we want to protect this vulnerable population from otherwise predatory tactics and patient brokering.
While I do not know if the Connecticut Alliance for Recovery Residences is associated with NARR as our state FARR is, I must say that the concept of random searches of houses and local registries of sober living residences stinks of a Big Brother state which our Constitution specifically rejects.
It’s a slippery slope, people.