A public hearing is set for Monday to discuss a proposed expansion at the Bluebonnet Haven Residential Treatment Center south of Brenham.

(Mark Whitehead)

The public hearing will be held Monday from 10 a.m. to 2 p.m. at the Salem Volunteer Fire Department, located in Brenham at 251 Salem Road.  The hearing is being held to address facility administrators’ intent to increase capacity at the residential treatment center, and gauge the public’s interest in its expansion.  The facility on Highway 36 South has already increased from its original size since beginning initial operation.

KWHI was notified of Monday’s public hearing by the office of State Senator Lois Kolkhorst, who received its information on the meeting from the Health and Human Services Commission (HHSC).  The information was confirmed by Washington County Judge John Durrenberger.

The state-required public hearing comes after the passage of Senate Bill 781, sponsored by Kolkhorst and State Representative Ben Leman, in the 86th Legislature.  The law was designed to strengthen the requirements necessary to obtain a license to open a youth treatment center, and to allow for further public input opportunities in a facility’s licensing process and operation.

The legislation came at least partially as a result of community frustrations with Bluebonnet Haven’s initial licensing, and the lack of public input in said licensing process.  The facility was granted an initial license to operate in mid-October of 2018, despite the Brenham City Council, Washington County Commissioners, and Brenham School Board all passing resolutions opposing the licensing.

Bluebonnet Haven owner Randall Bryant did not respond to KWHI’s requests for further information on Monday’s public hearing and the facility’s expansion plans.

Like Love Haha Wow Sad Angry


  1. I wouldn’t have any objections to this facility Erick and Concerned but for one thing; these children nor their responsible parties are residents nor from Washington County. Let the lady that started this, put the facility next door to her place out in Cat Spring. I understand she has horses and animals there, and I feel it would be good for her to have the facility closer to her.

  2. Taxpayer, Q and Concerned, what has this facility or the people who own it done to you that has you so upset?

    1. Erick,
      Who pays for the all of the ambulance rides to the emergency room?
      Who pays for the LE that are called out to this place?
      Who paid for the schools?
      Are these local kids?

      Business is good when you can put most or even just some of your expensive bills on the backs of local tax payers that think they are all paying for the services that help themselves and the local neighbor.

      If this business gave back more than they took that would be different. As it is, its a parasite that takes legal, medical, and educational money away from our own children we work hard to provide for and makes even more problems.

      If you want to address the children that are here. Human trafficking, and drug distribution just need to carry the death penalty.

  3. It’s amazing how people grip about troubled kids in school and making mischief in the community, but then don’t what do have a treatment center that actually tries to help these kids. For those against this center what do you want to do with these troubled kids, shoot them!

    1. It is not the issue of doing the right things for troubled youth. Evidently it is the issue that Brenham government originally condoned and approved the facility and then passed a resolution opposing the facility after the Planner, Brenham Reps, already approved the utility extensions.

  4. Why did the city of Brenham managers approve utility expansions to a facility that they do not approve of? Why is Randall Bryant and his investors requesting a state license to expand after new buildings have been built? Why did city of Brenham head development planner allow an expansion to a facility that city does not condone? Owner and city of Brenham representatives need to be at the meeting to address all taxpayer questions.

    1. Tax payer I agree. But I doubt that we will see a city planner or city representative at this meeting. Don’t expect your questions to be answered. That all would require thinking. The city planner representatives obviously didn’t think about this from day one.

  5. There was a public hearing in the beginning and no one wanted the place at all. So why ask for the public opinion again? You know what the public wants, we want it not in Washington county.

  6. They have already built, 2 new buildings. So the hearing is useless, Bryant is going to expand regardless!

    1. Sounds to me the owners of Blue Haven outsmarted the local leaders and politicians, and one day they will be laughing all the way to the bank once they sell it.

      1. All of these nay sayers, have any of you gone to the facility? Seen what they offer the girls treated there? Even tried to take the time to get to know the facility you’re so quick to judge?

Back to top button