Residents oppose Pascal crisis center on Mount Wolf Road; commissioners say formal approvals pending

Dozens of Charlotte Hall residents told the Board of County Commissioners of St. Mary's County on May 6 that they oppose locating the proposed Pascal Crisis Services Center on Mount Wolf Road, saying the rural road lacks sidewalks, lighting and other infrastructure and that the parcel borders homes and a daycare.

The dispute centers on whether a 16‑bed crisis stabilization facility should be placed in a residential neighborhood. Supporters said the county needs local crisis care to reduce emergency‑room visits and law enforcement responses; opponents said the selected site is unsafe and inappropriate.

The Pascal proposal drew the largest public turnout at the commissioners' May 6 public forum. Christina Stone, who identified herself as a resident of Great Mills, opened public comments urging support for the Pascal Crisis Services Center, saying the county is designated a health‑care shortage area and “a lack of crisis support services is a serious problem for anyone in Saint Mary's County experiencing a mental health crisis.”

Several neighbors objected to the Mount Wolf Road parcel. James Scheffel, who lives on Mount Wolf Road, said the stretch is “2 and a half miles down the road where there's no sidewalk, there's no shoulder to walk on,” and called it “dangerous.” Heidi Lichtenberg, who said she lives about 350 yards from the site, told commissioners the road is “unlit” and that released patients who can “sign themselves out at any given time” would be walking on a road where drivers “go over 40 miles per hour up and down hills at night.”

Residents cited specific local concerns repeatedly during the public comments: absence of sidewalks and shoulders, steep hills and limited sight distance on Mount Wolf Road; proximity to a home‑based daycare and to private residences; and perceived lack of on‑site security. Sandra Edelen told commissioners the center would “service all of the state of Maryland…you you're talking 16 beds,” and asked where people would go after a 4‑to‑10‑day stay.

Clinicians and other supporters said community‑based crisis centers reduce hospital visits and downstream strain on emergency departments. Jessica Jolley, who identified herself as a mental‑health practitioner with more than a decade of local experience, said crisis centers “provide alternatives to hospitalization and law enforcement specific interventions” and pointed to similar centers elsewhere in Maryland. Sabrina Sapulveda, a psychiatric nurse practitioner, said placing crisis stabilization centers “in residential areas significantly reduces barriers to access” and noted such centers help “prevent [crises] from escalating to a point where more restrictive care such as involuntary hospitalizations become necessary.”

Speakers referenced county and state processes. Sharon Scott said Saint Mary's had received a state appropriation of $500,000 in the 2024 legislative session toward construction of the project and that the proposal had been discussed in Annapolis. Several speakers urged exploring alternative sites, including an empty prerelease facility in Hughesville and other underused commercial properties in the county.

Commissioners and staff described the matter as subject to land‑use approvals outside the immediate authority of a single commissioner. In public comments and later exchanges residents noted that a Board of Appeals hearing was scheduled for May 22 to consider related applications; commissioners told speakers that no county approvals were final. Commissioner Mike Alderson posted on social media saying he “strongly oppose[s] any county funding for this project at its current location and will actively work to explore alternative solutions,” and told a resident at the forum he would follow up by email.

The public forum produced no formal commission votes. Speakers on both sides urged more and earlier public notice; multiple residents said they only learned about the specific Mount Wolf Road parcel within days. Several commenters asked the county to pursue alternative, commercially zoned sites that they said would be easier to staff, serve and connect to transportation and services.

The conversation continued beyond the forum: commissioners and staff said future follow‑up would include communications with residents and coordination with planning and appeals processes. No final land‑use decision or county funding commitment was announced at the forum.

The county's process will next involve the Board of Appeals and the planning and zoning reviews required by county code; residents were told those hearings and submissions have not resulted in final approvals to date.

(Reporting note: quotes and attributions above come from public forum speakers who identified themselves on the record.)