The recent article in the Altoona Mirror, which indicated “Some Altoona residents might think that the city is being harsh in ordering that two recovery homes be closed because the operator opened the facilities prior to them having passed life-safety inspections that are the responsibility of the Fire and Codes departments,” suggested that those who opposed the ordinance, adopted Jan. 6, 2026, were against the city for establishing measures that would protect the lives and well-being of those who would benefit from these types of residences.

This is far from the truth. I attended the January meeting in support of ordinance changes; however, suggested council to rereview the proposed ordinance, as the language was discriminatory against people who are protected under the American with disabilities Act and fair Housing laws and sets the city up for lawsuits.

As an Altoona citizen, I provided case law examples, and requested council to review specifics portions of the proposed ordinance, as ordinances that place space limitations, caps on the number of homes in a specific area, and occupancy limits that are different than other housing situations, are discriminatory in nature and I felt that the ordinance as proposed, would eventually get the city into a lawsuit.

This isn’t about ignoring the safety and conveniences with which residents residing near these types of homes have traditionally enjoyed, but it is about encouraging the city, its solicitors, and all involved, to address safety while also being mindful of other state and federal laws.

Autumn Temple

Altoona