La Porte County group proposes 20‑bed certified recovery residence at former St. Anthony site; council and neighbors ask questions

The La Porte County Drug Free Partnership on Tuesday presented the Michigan City Common Council with plans for a certified level‑3 recovery residence for up to 20 adult men at the former St. Anthony Hospital site on Wabash Street.

The presentation, by Dr. Mickey Webb, executive director of the La Porte County Drug Free Partnership, described a two‑year residential program operated to state standards and overseen by the Indiana Department of Mental Health and Addiction. Webb said the partnership is a 501(c)(3) with more than 35 years of local work and will pursue “Recovery Works funding,” which reimburses part of the resident stay at about $30 per day for eligible clients.

Why it matters: The presenters linked the proposal to local overdose mortality and treatment gaps. Webb told the council that La Porte County reported 37 overdose deaths in 2024 and currently lacks recovery residences while neighboring counties have several. Proponents argued a local facility could reduce jail recidivism and offer case management, random drug screening and vocational support for people leaving inpatient treatment.

Program design and referrals Dr. Webb said residents would be carefully vetted and “referred by the director of treatment from La Porte County Jail, Tyra Robinson Walker,” local judges and rehabilitation programs. She said the home would be an open residence with policies including random drug tests, nightly meetings and case management, and that the program would “operate in accordance with state and national standards under the oversight of the state of Indiana.”

Construction and budget Webb said the current construction estimate is $3,100,000 and that Ton and Blank has pledged $90,000 in architectural and engineering services and other in‑kind contributions. She said the project already has a $750,000 contribution from the La Porte County Council and a property donation valued at $114,000; the group has also submitted a proposal to the Health Foundation of La Porte.

Council questions and public concerns Council members asked detailed operational questions. Councilman Beatrice asked whether Recovery Works funding is state or federal; Webb replied it “comes through the state.” Councilman Przybylinski requested written findings on neighborhood impact; Webb said she had only informal observations (Zillow comparisons and Valparaiso case studies) and offered to provide written materials later.

Residents and neighborhood representatives voiced both support and concern during public comment. Tommy Kolovic, who said he lives near the proposed site, and others described the property as on a bus route with sewer and water access and urged support for redevelopment. Other neighbors, including Tom Nazamek and Paul Frisboinski, said the site sits in an established residential neighborhood near schools and taverns and asked that the council and developers ensure strong security and screening to protect nearby families and property values.

Operational detail gaps Presenters and contractors answered several operational questions but also acknowledged some policies were still being finalized. John Gilmore of Ton and Blank described rules used at a Valparaiso recovery house: nightly meetings and dinner, a 10 p.m. curfew, multiple weekly AA/NA meetings, frequent drug testing and a rule that residents who leave overnight without authorization may not be allowed to return. Webb said specific policy details (for example exact curfew enforcement) would be modeled on state guidelines and the Valparaiso example and added that the project team would hold town halls and site tours of the Valparaiso house.

Next steps Webb said the presentation was informational and that Homeward Bound and the partnership plan to request city funds in future requests and to braid state, federal, foundation and private funding for construction and operation. She emphasized sustainability and that the facility would seek Recovery Works reimbursements to cover a portion of operating costs.

The council did not take formal action on the proposal at Tuesday’s meeting. Officials and the project team said they will schedule town halls and provide additional written materials on neighborhood impact, policies and funding.

Ending: The presenters asked the council and residents to continue discussions and promised more detailed operating policies and written impact findings at future meetings or community sessions.