Public Comments for: HB931 - Recovery residences; regulations.
Last Name: Drew Locality: Henrico

Please amend this bill to allow medical marijuana. This bill will force addicts into homelessness's or back on medication they are trying to stay away from

Last Name: Tillem Organization: GreenhouseRVA Locality: Henrico

My name is Jeremy Tillem founder of GreenhouseRVA -A cannabis inclusive recovery organization located in Richmond. Im asking for a critical amendment to HB931 : To permit medical cannabis in certified recovery residences. Without it, this bill forces Virginians in recovery to choose between their doctor-prescribed medicine and stable housing- a choice that could derail lives and exacerbate our states addiction crisis. Imagine a place where recovery thrives not despite medical cannabis, but because of it. At GreenhouseRVA, we house 25 residents with a growing waiting list. Calls flood in daily from desperate individual's thrilled by our innovative model: A structured environment that integrates medical cannabis to manage chronic pain, anxiety, PTSD and more. We enforce random drug tests, strict curfews, mandatory meetings and weekly chores to foster accountability. Our residents all range from participating in Partial Hospitalization or Intensive Outpatient programs, others holding full-time jobs and rebuilding their futures. Astonishingly, 85% stay over 8 months, a threshold that dramatically boosts long term-term sobriety rates. Every resident holds a medical cannabis card, mostly using it as a safer alternative from more harmful pharmaceuticals. The science is undeniable. Medical cannabis reduces anxiety, depression, chronic pain and insomnia with fewer side effects than traditional pharmaceuticals. It slashes opioid use from 40-60% in chronic pain patients, curbing cravings, withdrawal symptoms, lower relapse rates and improves treatment-retention-acting as a harm reduction lifeline without the addiction potential of harder drugs. Studies even show medical cannabis users in treatment fair equal to or better than non-users in key outcomes like completion rates and reduced criminal involvement. 70% of our residents are involved with Henrico probation-not court ordered, but voluntarily choosing us because it works. Just last week, Clint, a greenhouse participant, completed his probation officially and has been working full time as a welder. Shout out to Clint! Yet probation officers threatened to bar residents here without HB931 certification, even when medical cannabis aligns with their conditions. This arbitrary hurdle punishes success and ignores Virginias own medical cannabis program. Without this amendment, HB931's blanket marijuana ban in certified homes would devastate programs like ours, potentially shutting the doors and leaving 25 people homeless- rippling to hundreds or thousands statewide. Why force Virginians into abstinence-only models that fail many, when inclusive approaches save lives? Even the National Alliance for recovery residences endorses policies allowing medical cannabis with safeguards for states like Pennsylvania and Ohio. Virginia can join them, aligning with our progressive cannabis laws to reduce opioid dependence and harm reduction recovery. On behalf of medical cannabis patients fighting addiction without resorting to deadly alternatives, I implore you: Amend HB931. Build an inclusive system that empowers, not excludes. The lives of countless Virginias depend on it. www.pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC2848643 www.sydney.edu.au/news-opinion/news/2019/07/16/cannabis-treatment-counters-addiction-first-study-of-its-kind.html www.recoveryreview.blog/2025/12/02/.research-article-review-medical-cannabis-for-addiction-treatment-in-a-residential-sud-setting

Last Name: Shinholser Organization: greenhouse rva and the future plant base recovery friendly recovery homes Locality: Ashland

Please add an amendment to be inclusive of medical cannabis; it is the fastest-growing pathway to recovery in the U.S. I opened my first recovery house in 1985 and have opened or provided technical assistance to over 500 recovery houses in Virginia and nationwide. I am the co-founder of VARR and McShin, I established 4 Oxford homes in the late 80's and early 90's. I'm a past board member of SAARA. . I have a cannabis healthcare certification from Syracuse University. Also, over 43 years clean and sober. I am currently a national harm reduction advocate.I say these things to verify the depths of my institutional knowledge on this matter. The point is, medical cannabis recovery homes are real and work as well as most any other recovery residences. Harm reduction, including harm reduction recovery residences, is the future. Addiction still has a 97% reoccurance rate. Where do they go? I'm sure banning medical cannabis in this bill is an unintentional error. Please amend it. I only support this bill with the requested amendment. PS, how will we continue to get good data and participate in clinical and scientific studies if they are outlawed? It makes no sense why discrimination is in this bill.

Last Name: Starliper Locality: Richmond City

I am writing in my comments today as a resident in Richmond City that has seen a vary large number of recovery homes enter our very small neighborhood footprint (16 homes within our three block boundary which includes a school zone). While this bill does have my support with regard to regulations and the sharing of data with the public, elements of concern remain unaddressed. For example, public access to a full listing of certified and conditionally certified residence addresses to be able to identify them accordingly within the neighborhood. Many of the recovery residences in my area are being operated out of properties that are owned by companies and are rented out to recovery management teams. This obscures the facilities and a list of those certified or conditionally certified would help with zoning enforcement of any residences that are operating outside of this framework. In addition, stipulating a length of time required for conditionally certified residences to reach certification or face rescinding of said conditional certification. Generally speaking, there is a lack of enforcement or penalty language for residences that do not comply with the regulations stipulated in the bill or fail re-certification. I ask that the committee consider these additional points either in this bill or a future bill. I reiterate my overall support for HB931 which will improve the safety of recovery residents, begin an oversight process, and close loopholes that have allowed for the exploitation of these residences for profit. Thank you.

End of Comments