Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Mental Health topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Pecan Valley Centers briefs Johnson County on services, funding cuts and request to use opioid-abatement and indigent-health resources

Johnson County Commissioners Court · July 27, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Pecan Valley Centers' executive director outlined declining state funds, a new suicide-prevention grant (~$400,000/year for five years), and asked the county to consider using opioid-abatement funds and indigent health program partnerships to sustain a primary-care provider and services in Johnson County.

Representatives from Pecan Valley Centers presented a detailed update to the court on July 27 about behavioral health and developmental services they provide across six counties, including Johnson County as their largest service area.

Dr. De Hoyos (S17) described service lines — case management, therapy, psychiatric care, youth services, residential programs — and reported recent budget pressures and staff reductions. He told the court the center was notified that a suicide-prevention grant will bring roughly $400,000 per year for five years, which is a positive development, but said other funding streams have declined and the center has struggled to sustain a primary-care nurse-practitioner role created with earlier ARPA support. "We're a safety net for the communities we serve," Dr. De Hoyos said, and asked the court to consider directing opioid-abatement funds and integrating the center into the county indigent-health provider network to help bridge funding gaps.

County staff said they are already reviewing a potential interlocal update and expect a lease renewal for county properties used by Pecan Valley to appear on the consent agenda at the next court meeting after minor edits. The court took no immediate action but indicated continued discussion on using opioid-abatement funds and indigent-health arrangements.