Clackamas County updates plan for Recovery Campus; provider selected, zoning and design contracts next

Clackamas County commissioners heard an informational update Feb. 11 on the planned Recovery Campus, where staff said they have selected Fora Health as the clinical services provider, plan to file a zoning and comprehensive‑plan application by March and will return to the board with a subrecipient grant agreement to fund pre‑construction design work.

County administration official Cindy Becker told the Board of County Commissioners the evaluation committee selected Fora Health and that staff will bring a subrecipient grant agreement focused on design development and pre‑construction for both the clinical facility and an adjacent housing facility. "I'm really happy to say that that's moving," Becker said.

The item was presented as an update rather than an action item; staff said they would return with formal agreements and any required approvals. The board did not vote on contracts or appropriation changes at the meeting.

Why it matters: Commissioners and staff described the campus as addressing a regional gap in behavioral‑health and recovery services and as the start of a phased campus that could expand later. Staff said final design and construction decisions — including whether to retain or demolish the existing building on the site — will be made in the first design phase.

Key details

Funding and finances: Staff outlined funding committed to the site and early work. American Rescue Plan Act funds of $2,000,000 and $500,000 in what the presentation called "SHS dollars" were identified toward the project; staff said increased ARPA dollars reduced the amount of SHS used for the property purchase so more SHS funds can be applied to construction. Becker said staff expect additional federal earmark funding and that the county previously approved an initial opioid‑settlement allocation (about $2.1 million) and is expecting another roughly $1.4 million in March; staff said the board had committed opioid dollars to the campus. Becker also described the county’s option to issue a short‑term loan repaid from future opioid settlement receipts if cash‑flow timing requires it.

Scope and schedule: Becker said the subrecipient agreement to be returned to the board will cover pre‑construction design development work and is expected to be about $3,000,000. Staff said the land‑use application for the zoning change had been started and the consultant intends to submit it by March 1; the primary outstanding scope item was the transportation/traffic‑study footprint. Becker described planned tours of existing Fora Health facilities with the Good Neighbor Group and county officials.

Service capacity: Commissioners asked about facility size and service volume. Staff described a model combining residential detox/acute beds and higher‑volume outpatient services; commissioners referenced an estimate of about 20 residential beds and outpatient capacity in the range of 200–250 people per quarter (roughly 800–1,000 outpatient encounters per year), a figure staff said was based on Fora Health’s experience. Commissioners and staff emphasized that final capacity figures will be refined in design and the subrecipient agreement.

Public outreach and partners: Staff said outreach with a "Good Neighbor Group" had been paused to wait for the provider to participate and that tours and further public meetings would follow approval of the initial subrecipient agreement. Commissioners and staff described prior outreach to mayors, city councils, businesses, first responders and peer groups; staff said earlier town halls and stakeholder meetings produced substantial support but also noted the common local concern of "not in my backyard" for siting such facilities.

Board direction and next steps: Commissioners asked for timelines and additional detail; Becker and Mary Rumbaugh, director of Health, Housing and Human Services (H3S), said staff will provide a timeline for pre‑construction design and will return to the board with the subrecipient agreement and subsequent materials. No motions or votes were taken; staff characterized the session as informational and said they will continue moving forward.

Ending: County staff said they will bring the subrecipient grant agreement and zoning application back to the board for formal approval, and that outreach with the provider and the Good Neighbor Group will follow those approvals.