Brad Bruns, a member of the Washington County Quorum Court, and quorum court colleague Vladimir Lopez briefed the Springdale City Council on county programs and policy items that affect the city during the council’s July 22 meeting.

The presenters described a Community Building Initiative (the county’s program repurposing the former crisis unit) that provides post‑detox social supports and matching grant seed funding to help people re‑integrate after treatment. Presenters said the program has monthly reporting and that local officials have seen early positive results; the briefing included a reported recidivism rate for program participants of less than 5 percent compared with about 50 percent for people who do not go through the program. Bruns said the county provides ongoing funding and monthly oversight for the initiative.

Why it matters: County programs that serve residents inside Springdale — especially those tied to criminal‑justice diversion and public health — can affect demand for local services and influence how the city coordinates with county departments.

Presenters also reviewed several county matters that intersect with municipal planning. Bruns and Lopez discussed an ongoing push to revise the county’s conditional use permit (CUP) and zoning documents, which county leaders said are long and difficult to use in their current form. They told the council the proposed county zoning changes had generated pushback from rural residents and that the county had delayed final action; the briefing noted a recent change in state law that removes a two‑mile extraterritorial jurisdiction (ETJ) buffer and that this change takes effect August 5.

Bruns said the county has invested in an Emergency Operations Center (EOC) with grant funding and that county accounting practices require unspent funds to be moved into the general fund at year‑end and reallocated when needed. The briefing also touched on a recently closed HIV clinic that county officials said was relocated and continues to receive county support through other providers.

Bruns described internal county controversy over a late change to a salary increase that, he said, was added to the budget after citizen input had already been collected; the proposed change failed on the quorum court.

Discussion vs. formal action: The briefing was informational. Council members asked questions about whether there are county programs for victims of crime, how detox is handled before entry to the re‑entry program and the status of the county’s zoning deliberations. Bruns suggested the sheriff’s office could provide additional information on victim services; no council or court action was taken during the briefing.

Ending: Bruns and Lopez invited further engagement between city and county staff as county zoning and ETJ matters move toward final decisions, and they encouraged the council to continue coordination on emergency management and downtown/regional planning.