Michigan City workshop reviews proposal for certified recovery residence in La Porte County

Michigan City Common Council President and Fifth Ward Councilor Tracy Tillman convened a joint workshop on March 5 to review plans for a certified recovery residence intended to serve La Porte County men leaving jail or treatment.

The proposal, presented by Mickey Webb, executive director of the La Porte County Drug Free Partnership Recovery Residents Leadership Team, would create a monitored, home-like Level 3 recovery residence certified by the Indiana Department of Mental Health and Addiction. "The disease of addiction and alcoholism doesn't discriminate," Webb said, arguing the county lacks certified recovery residences and that the facility would provide structured support for up to two years for people in early recovery.

The plan calls for a residential-style building with around-the-clock staffing, a resident manager and certified case managers; referrals would come from courts, the jail, rehabilitation programs and other behavioral health providers. Organizers described standardized screening, random drug testing and clinical supervision as part of admissions and ongoing monitoring. Webb and collaborators said the residence would follow state inspection and certification requirements and national residential-recovery guidelines.

Why it matters: La Porte County coroner data cited by presenters showed 37 confirmed overdose deaths last year; presenters said actual substance-related harms and hospital episodes are larger than that single figure. Supporters told the council the residence is intended to reduce recidivism, lower jail-related costs and provide a stable environment that complements treatment services offered by agencies such as the Swanson Center and PATH Center.

Funding and site: presenters said the La Porte County Council agreed in November to contribute $750,000 toward the project. Potential funding sources discussed included federal grants (SAMHSA), state Department of Mental Health funds, philanthropic foundations and recovery-work dollars available after state certification; presenters said they do not intend to rely on ongoing unrestricted taxpayer operating subsidies. Franciscan Health has signaled a potential donation of land for the facility but presenters said that donation is conditional on the project proceeding and is not yet finalized. Organizers said architectural and engineering services have been offered at a substantial discount by local firms and that they expect private trade partners to donate labor and materials.

Costs and timeline: presenters cited different cost estimates during the discussion. One presenter said an initial budget had been estimated at about $1.5 million; later in the meeting supporters described a broader figure of $3 million for the full project and noted a roughly $2 million fundraising gap. Organizers said they had already secured $750,000 from the county and planned to request an additional contribution from the city, possibly from opioid-settlement funds; Webb said the group would seek $250,000 from opioid settlement dollars if those funds are appropriate. Presenters described early-spring as a hopeful start target but said no firm construction or completion dates are set; the land donation and remaining fundraising must be finalized first.

Local experience and public-safety perspective: several speakers described experience operating similar facilities in neighboring Porter County (Respite 1 and Respite 2). Mitch Peters, who has led comparable residences, described the model as structured and disciplined: "We run these things very disciplined. The rules are very clear. Accountability. Zero tolerance for drugs," he said, describing curfews, chores, random testing and staff supervision. Valparaiso officials who operate respite houses told Michigan City attendees they have not seen sustained increases in local police calls tied to those facilities. Sheriff Ron Heade said he had reviewed data and spoke with local law enforcement partners and said, "I support it 100%." Supporters also described partnerships with local employers and trade apprenticeship programs that helped build and staff similar projects elsewhere.

Neighborhood concerns and next steps: several neighborhood residents and a former city council member asked questions about concentration of social services, potential effects on property values and whether the chosen site—parcels formerly associated with Saint Anthony Hospital—was appropriate. One resident urged that the community had hoped for a neighborhood park on that site. Organizers acknowledged those concerns and said they plan to hold neighborhood town-hall meetings (daytime and evening) targeted to the ward and nearby blocks; they also said they would present the plan to the full city council so all council members can hear the proposal directly. Webb said the recovery leadership team will share more detailed site plans, budgets and program rules at those meetings.

Measures of success and limitations: presenters described several proposed success measures, including ongoing negative drug tests, progress on mental-health screening instruments, stable housing and employment, educational milestones and improved family engagement. Speakers also acknowledged limits to measuring long-term outcomes: program leaders said they track qualitative success stories and periodic quantitative assessments but that relapses and long-term follow-up can complicate measurement.

No formal action was taken at the workshop. Organizers requested feedback and signaled they will return with more detailed plans, budget reconciliations and community meetings. The leadership team and partners urged continued public engagement as fundraising, conditional land donation and state certification progress.

Ending: Organizers said they will schedule neighborhood town halls (proposed for April) and follow up with the city council. They asked residents to watch upcoming drug-court graduations and other public events to see examples of recovery supports in practice.