ARC presents plans to public

Jan. 10—RUSSELL — A packed public hearing at Russell City Hall at times turned into courtroom drama when attorneys from the community and Addiction Recovery Care got into it Tuesday evening.

At the same meeting, city officials revealed that the Greenup County Joint Planning Commission will have the final say on whether or not to allow the subdivision of the campus between ARC and Bellefonte Hospital. Previously, Chairman Tom Saylor of the commission said it was ultimately up to Russell.

Mayor Ron Simpson said Saylor misspoke, much to the chagrin of local resident Chuck Jachimczuk, who called Saylor an outright liar and blamed ARC for not correcting the chairman at the November meeting of the planning commission.

Simpson said no decision has been made by the commission.

The presentation by ARC, who proposed in early 2021 to take over the former Our Lady of Bellefonte Hospital to turn into a drug rehabilitation center, fielded questions from the public as well as the city council.

Security was the No. 1 concern in the presentation, with market president John Wilson (also a former Judge-Executive of Garrard County) stating the cases of clients leaving against medical advice is less than 1%.

Wilson said when a client wishes to leave, attempts are made to talk them out of it. If the client still wants to leave, the staff will arrange transportation for them to go and in the event they decide to leave on foot there's little they can do unless the person is a threat to themselves or others, at which point police would be called.

Councilman Vincenzo Fressola zeroed in on the AMA risks, asking what would prevent folks from skipping out of treatment and grabbing a brew at the Beer Cave. Wilson said the biggest risk for that is in the first phase of the program when someone is detoxing and those people have highly structured programming and are constantly monitored the first 30 days.

If a person walks away from treatment without following proper protocols, they will temporarily be blacklisted from all ARC facilities for a time — Wilson said the threat of not being able to get back into treatment usually keeps a lot of people from walking off.

If a person decides to leave, they are taken to where they came from — Wilson dismissed stories about people being dropped off at gas stations in towns.

Jessica Burke, Counsel for ARC, made it a point to note that the monitoring of clients is actually in the regulations surrounding drug rehabilitation and is not an ARC policy — they have to maintain it to ensure their licensure.

After answering other questions from the council about the program — many about the job rehabilitation and where people would come from (mostly the local area, Wilson said, due to transportation costs and clients not wanting to be far away from home) — questions were opened to the public.

Dr. Sean Borst, a longtime doctor on the campus, asked if the facility will in any way disrupt traffic going to his office. Borst raised concerns after hearing about a gate that could be used to keep folks out.

Burke, Wilson and another attorney said no gate was in the plans and that patients would be able to access their doctor's offices like normal. Audrey Smith, another physician on the hill, raised a concern regarding the utilities, which would be on the ARC property if the subdivision went through.

Donna McKenzie, who used to work up there and is a patient to a doctor on the hill, raised concerns about patients not wanting to go see their doctors due to proximity to the rehabilitation center.

Wilson said that's a result of the stigma surrounding addiction and part of ARC's job is to educate the public that drug addicts and alcoholics aren't criminals, but sick people trying to get well. That response flustered McKenzie, who said that wasn't what she was getting at, but she had concerns for her doctors.

Burke said the patients would be contained to the old hospital and wouldn't be out on the wider campus near the doctor's offices.

Jachimczuk prefaced his comments with saying that he's a Christian and he would like to a see a program like ARC succeed, but he wanted assurances there would be no pedophiles at the rehab, even if they're drug addicts.

Wilson said ARC does not accept sex offenders, whatsoever.

Then he raised his concerns regarding the planning commission and whether or not ARC should've known that the city didn't have the final say. He claimed the city of Russell didn't want ARC.

Terry Gregory, a Russell resident, asked about if folks get money in phase 4, where they have vocational training. Wilson said they did, but that's coupled with financial literacy classes and their graduation from the program is a softer handoff than sending them out the door.

He said ARC tries to set folks up with jobs and places to live, on a case-by-case basis. He said, unfortunately, some folks in phase 4 relapse and die.

At this point, Kay Thompson, a council member, interjected to say that she spoke to a doctor and a business owner on the hill and neither one of them had a problem with ARC coming to Bellefonte. She said she did so when she believed the council would have the final vote.

Ralph Williams, a former member of the planning commission, told Jachimcuzk that it was "a mystery why who gets to make the decision changed" between the November planning commission meeting and Tuesday's meeting.

Things started heating up when former Greenup County Attorney Mike Wilson took the podium to ask if ARC would feel an obligation to compensate damage to properties or person if some who left the facility by foot were to cause damage in the community.

This led to a back and forth between John Wilson and Mike Wilson, which eventually resulted in Burke tapping John Wilson out to answer the inquiry.

"I handle everything from a stubbed toe to major medical events, so it's hard to say what the compensation would be," Burke said.

"I'm just asking the question, legal or not, would there be an obligation, either through insurance or just through ARC itself?" Mike Wilson asked.

Wilson finally rephrased the the question.

"If someone were to leave the facility and break into somebody's house and hurt their family and they determine it wasn't but for ARC that element would not be in the community, would there be an obligation or not?" Wilson asked.

Burke replied that "correlation would not equal causation."

"So there's no obligation?" Wilson said.

"No more than a jail would have if they released somebody who were to go out and cause damage in the community," Burke said.

Tim Huff, who lives in Russell and runs a nursing home, said he called around to find out about how ARC has operated in Louisa — he said he found some cases of a "one off" which was repeated several times until City Attorney Tracy Frye asked what a "one off" was.

Huff meandered and said he heard about people knocking on doors and asking to use phones when they left the Louisa facility and he heard about a car being stolen.

But Huff left that question aside to ask about staffing levels and asked how ARC would address the nursing shortage felt by area health care providers. He said his main concern was who would staff the evening shift.

When John Wilson said he would have to consult the numbers — because the staffing ratio is dictated by how many people in what phases comprise the 300-to-400 bed facility — Frye hopped in again to ask how many beds the facility would have.

"I'm just trying to get the answers here," she said. "It was 500 beds. You would think you would have that number off the top of your head."

Wilson said, "We addressed that earlier in our presentation, of which a packet is printed out and is in your folder."

"I'm just trying to get the answer here for this man, because you're not giving a straight answer," she said.

An ARC attorney stepped in.

"Ms. Frye, we are not in a court of law here. ARC came here voluntarily to give this presentation to the public. Mr. Wilson wants to give the best answer he can to this gentleman, so give him a moment to review his notes," the attorney said.

"Let's set the number at the bottom end of 300 — how many people would staff it with 300 people?" Frye asked.

After a moment of consultation, the answer was 40 staff members, not counting outside vendors.

"So there's no gate, no fence in the plans at this time?" Frye asked.

"No, there is not," the attorney replied.

"So what's to prevent 300 people from standing up and walking out into the community? They're there voluntarily, right?" Frye asked.

Burke replied, "What's to prevent the building from blowing up or having a herd of elephants trample through? You're testifying, Ms. Frye."

"I'm trying to get people the facts so they can prepare, since we can't vote on it," said the city attorney, who is not elected. "It only takes one."

Rep. Patrick Flannery (96th District), another attorney, threw his support towards ARC, stating they are a great corporate citizen.

"When I represented Lawrence County in the 96th, I can vouch for them and say they are a fantastic corporate citizen," he said. "I understand the concerns and the not in my back yard mentality. But I trust these people and I can vouch for the economic impact they will have."

Jachimczuk interjected again to say that despite the outcry, if ARC comes to Russell, they will find good neighbors in the city.

"We just hope you'll be as good neighbors to us as we will be to you," he said.

Susan Holland, another Russell resident, said the focus should be on saving people's lives.

"I had a great nephew who died three years ago to accidental overdose," she said. "If this can help someone and restore somebody's life and their families, we should support it."

To concluded the 2 1/2-hour meeting, Simpson said that while ARC dropped the ball by not having a public meeting earlier, he hoped Tuesday's meeting answered a lot of questions and he wants to have more conversations as things develop.

(606) 326-2653 — henry@dailyindependent.com