Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Recovery Center Funding topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Benton County committee outlines $850,000 support plan for recovery center as Franklin County stops short on betterment payment
Summary
County advisory committee reviewed operational delays at the Columbia Valley Recovery Center, heard a staff proposal for roughly $850,000 in annual county support (split into three pots), and discussed Franklin County’s decision not to approve a separate $2.7 million betterment payment at its commissioners meeting.
Benton County’s recovery-advisory committee on Wednesday reviewed the Columbia Valley Recovery Center’s licensing delay and discussed a staff proposal for county support to cover unreimbursed services, transportation and on-site medical care.
Committee member Matt Rasmussen, who provided the operational update, said the center’s opening was briefly delayed by a Department of Health addressing mismatch but that staff expect the licensing issue to be resolved and the first phase to begin filling once the certificate is finalized. Rasmussen told the group staff had seen strong hiring and community referrals and said the county had negotiated a start-up agreement and an operating approach.
Rasmussen summarized a draft county contribution model, saying, “That pot of money I’m proposing to be $350,000 annually” to cover unreimbursed services, with an additional $200,000 for transportation and $300,000 for on-site medical care — a structure staff presented as a roughly $850,000 year-one estimate pending commissioner approval and legal review.
Committee members pressed staff on who would benefit from the county funds and whether Benton taxpayers would pay for nonresidents. Staff replied that contracts can be written to prioritize county residents and that Franklin County could choose to enter its own contract rather than be billed administratively through Benton. The group also discussed verification approaches (address checks and intake questions) to limit county-paid charity care to intended residents.
Jason Blood, who briefed the committee on outreach to Franklin County’s commissioners, said he attended that board’s meeting requesting approval of a $2.7 million betterment payment and an interlocal contract; Blood said Franklin County’s board did not approve payment at that meeting and left the presentation with “more questions than answers.” He recommended that Franklin-appointed advisory members carry the conversation forward with their commissioners.
Members agreed to keep tracking utilization, to require regular metrics from the center and to revisit funding once staff provide a near-term operating-cost update. The committee did not authorize disbursement of the $850,000 figure at the meeting; members described the proposal as subject to commissioner approval, legal review and periodic adjustment based on usage and data.
The committee also discussed sustainability options — contracting for billable primary-care or FQHC partnerships and tracking metrics such as emergency-department diversions and recidivism — to justify ongoing county support.
Next steps: staff will circulate a written version of the proposed funding pots, assemble the operating-cost spreadsheet for the committee’s subcommittee review and continue outreach with Franklin County-appointed representatives.
