For many people who face substance use disorders, achieving and maintaining recovery can be hindered by a lack of safe, affordable housing supporting them in the process. Properly operated recovery housing can serve as an important part of a comprehensive support effort, helping residents as they initiate, stabilize and maintain long-term recovery in the community, and ultimately transition from treatment to independent living. Such housing comes with regulatory issues, and a recent state law now impacts how they are credentialed.
In South Carolina, the lack of regulation and standardization in the operation of recovery houses has raised significant concerns about their value to residents and their effectiveness. They often require an increase of support from local law enforcement professionals who are tasked with responding to public safety issues that stem from substance use disorders.
In response to this growing concern among local government leaders, the SC General Assembly passed Act 160 in 2024, which required the SC Department of Alcohol and Other Drug Abuse Services to approve a credentialing entity to develop and administer a voluntary certification program for recovery housing. The Act then required the designated agency to establish certification requirements, based on nationally recognized standards, for credentialed recovery homes to follow.
Following Act 160’s passage, DAODAS appointed the SC Alliance for Recovery Residences to develop and maintain clear and consistent standards for recovery residences in South Carolina. SCARR is also required to publish a registry of all certified recovery housing on its website, and update it at least every 60 days.
Although credentialing of recovery housing in South Carolina is voluntary, Act 160 stipulates that South Carolina courts may not require individuals to enter recovery housing as a condition of probation or bond unless the facility is credentialed under the Act. In addition, state agencies may refer individuals only to credentialed housing.
Act 160 may also be relevant to local zoning laws. The Fair Housing Act and the Americans with Disabilities Act require that local governments not discriminate against recovery housing. In most cases, recovery housing must be allowed as a permitted use in neighborhoods with single-family residential zoning.
Courts have recognized general exceptions, however, for public safety and for requirements that benefit the disabled. The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, in the 2007 case Cmty. House, Inc. v. City of Boise, has summarized the national majority rule as allowing regulation of recovery homes if the government can show “(1) that the restriction benefits the protected class or (2) that it responds to legitimate safety concerns raised by the individuals affected, rather than being based on stereotypes.”
Given that Act 160 is expressly designed to protect the residents of recovery homes, it seems likely that courts would uphold a requirement in a local zoning ordinance that requires recovery housing to be certified under Act 160. There are 23 states that require owners and operators of recovery housing to be certified or licensed at the state level, with mandatory rules that are comparable to the voluntary standards contained in Act 160.
Therefore, local governments might consider requiring certification under Act 160 for recovery homes operating within their jurisdiction. Whether such a requirement is legal will ultimately depend on the standards developed by the SC Alliance for Recovery Residences and the willingness of local jurisdictions to make reasonable accommodations for non-certified owners or operators.