A more than hourlong meeting held Thursday afternoon to clear the air did little to calm fears that a drug rehab facility planned for Trinity Episcopal Church’s old school building would be a detriment to the neighborhood.
More than 30 people attended the meeting, held in the church’s parish hall, with several voicing their objections to the plan for as many as 96 patients to be treated in the facility.
“I have no problem with people being treated for drug addiction,” said Lloyd Holcomb Jr., a Pine Bluff City Council member who lives nearby. “But you don’t put something like this in a residential area.”
The residential treatment facility, which is being called Back to Life Treatment Center, is being proposed by Samantha Johnson of Kingsland, who set up Thursday’s meeting and who would be in charge of the drug treatment element of the center. She was joined by Kasey Wilson, whom Johnson introduced as the chief operating officer of the center. Both described themselves as being in long-term recovery from drug addiction. Johnson said she had been clean for eight years while Wilson said he had relapsed once during the same time period.
The deal to buy the property, which is located at 708 W. Second Ave. and is still for sale, hinges on whether Johnson receives $2.2 million in state and federal grants. She said Thursday that she expects word on her application in the next few weeks. The money, she said earlier, is part of a $200 million grant the state received through an opioid settlement.
Independent reporting for Pine Bluff & Jefferson County since 1879.
“This is just a dream,” Wilson said. “Everything starts with a dream. This is Samantha’s vision. She wants to help, We both just want to help.”
Johnson defended her decision to locate the facility on the Trinity property, saying that in the southeast part of the state there was only one opioid rehab facility, that being in Warren.
“We saw the building was for sale and saw that Pine Bluff is dealing with population loss and crime and we saw this as a way for people to get help and turn their lives around,” Johnson said. “We are living proof that people can turn their lives around.”
After the introductions, the sometimes-heated conversation took a variety of turns, with the church being accused of “sneaking” the project through the Pine Bluff Planning Commission, to accusations that not enough neighbors were notified of the April Planning Commission meeting — a forum where they could have opposed the plan, which was approved — to what appeared to be the collective belief that having 96 people addicted to drugs living in the neighborhood would present a safety risk for families as well as be a disincentive to homeowners and investors to live in and improve the area.
The Rev. Jess Reeves, the church’s pastor, said the church put the property up for sale with a real estate agent, who presented Johnson to the church as a potential buyer. He said, however, that once he researched what such facilities do to a neighborhood, he was supportive of Johnson’s plan, saying the increase in lighting and security would make the neighborhood safer.
Still, some compared how the church reacted when a noisy, electricity-hogging cryptocurrency mining operation was planned for the old Pine Bluff Commercial building across the street from the church. At that time, neighbors said, the church went door to door to drum up opposition to the plan, which was denied two years ago by the Planning Commission. But for the rehab proposal, the church contacted only as many neighbors as the Planning Commission said was legally necessary. One estimate was that six people had been contacted.
“You have no problem with it,” Holcomb said to Reeves, pointing his finger at the pastor. “What about your neighbors?”
“I haven’t talked to my neighbors about it,” Reeves responded.
One woman who owns a bed and breakfast in the area said studies show that those in rehab relapse at a high rate.
“When they do, they’ll be looking for something to support their habit,” she said. “Do you think anyone will want to stay in my bed and breakfast with that in their front yard? When we already have people coming through and breaking in and stealing from us? I support your program, but I don’t support the location of it. This is a historic district. Many people in Pine Bluff don’t care about that distinction right now, but someday they will.”
Karen Lee, another neighbor, said she knew from her experience as a volunteer in drug court that those experiencing drug addictions can have other issues.
“Yes, they have drug problems,” Lee said. “But many times they also have mental health issues they don’t even know about. The odds are, the people in this neighborhood are going to be the ones suffering the repercussions of your plan. It’s ill-advised. It’s too loose for what you are trying to do. That’s my professional opinion.”
Neighbors also complained that two security guards were not enough to handle 96 people who could walk away from the facility at any time, day or night, and the fact that Johnson would be actively seeking to treat patients who were there by court order, meaning that some of those in treatment would have been forced to be there.
“I would take everything from you and your 10th generation if something happened to me or my family by one of those in treatment,” Lee said.
John Ware, who works for Abbott Enterprises, which is a couple of blocks from the church, said the situation in Pine Bluff is not unique.
“It’s happening in other communities,” he said. “What’s going to happen is that the predators know where the prey is. You’re going to have drug dealers in the area, trash and homelessness. To have it here in this community is not going to fly and I will fight it tooth and nail.”
Democratic nominee Vivian Flowers, the presumptive next mayor of Pine Bluff, said she has a relative who lives nearby and that she herself lives only a few blocks away. Flowers, like Holcomb and others, said she did not believe the required number of people had been informed about Johnson’s plan, which was an application for a “use permit on review” or UPOR that was submitted to the Planning Commission.
“This is not a discussion about people who need help,” she said. “We are trying to improve this neighborhood, but that will not happen if a 96-bed substance abuse facility lands in this community. Anything I can do to prevent that from happening, I’m going to do it.”
Council Member Bruce Lockett suggested an alternative solution would be for the city to help the church find another buyer for the property and help Johnson find another location for her facility.
Flowers agreed that Lockett’s proposal might work.
“I ask you all to think about that,” she said, “since this is not a done deal.”
In the meantime, Flowers, who is still a state representative, said she was going to contact the state attorney general’s office and the Arkansas Municipal League to find out if there are other ways to fight the proposal.
Assistant City Attorney Joe Childers said earlier that there was no appeal protocol for the current situation but that the case could be taken to circuit court in an attempt to overturn the Planning Commission’s decision to approve the UPOR application.
For years, the church operated its own elementary school, Trinity Episcopal School. More recently, Lighthouse Charter School rented the space for $6,000 a month. When that school closed about a year ago, the church lost that revenue as well as having to pick up the tab for the building’s $3,000-a-month insurance premium — a $9,000-a-month swing to the negative, as one church elder put it.
While the financial pressure had no bearing on the decision to sell the property to Johnson, Jay Cromwell, one of the church’s elders, said the pressure was nonetheless real.
“We can’t go on like this,” he said after the 75-minute meeting ended. “We have a negative balance every month. Even without the building, we’re in the hole every month. If we don’t sell it, it might be better to just tear it down, although we don’t know how much that would cost.”
After the meeting ended, Johnson was asked if any of the comments had swayed her decision to locate the rehab facility on the church property. She shook her head, “no.”