A public town hall meeting on the Bluebonnet Haven Youth Treatment Facility is set for next week.
According to Washington County Judge John Brieden, the highly controversial facility—in his words, “has been able to avoid a public hearing in their licensing process.”
Brieden says he was told by the Director of Field Services, at the Department of Family Protective Services, that since the facility plans to treat human trafficking victims, the state allows them to forego having a public hearing.
Brieden says what he was told is that the state would inspect the building and require a town hall meeting, before a license was issued.
Brieden has decided to hold a town hall meeting, next Tuesday at 6 p.m., at the Washington County Fairgrounds Events Center.
According to Brieden, Bluebonnet Haven owner Randall Bryant has declined to attend the public meeting.
Bryant has not answered KWHI’s request for comment.
Brieden says he has invited officials and representatives from the city and state, as well as the Brenham school district, Washington County Chamber, Economic Development Foundation, and the Brenham State School.
Bluebonnet Haven, which is located on Highway 36 South near the Brenham State Supported Living Center, has drawn opposition from a slew of local and county officials.
The Brenham City Council, Washington County Commissioners, and Brenham school board have all passed resolutions opposing the licensing, citing the facility’s potential harm to the community. State Senator Lois W. Kolkhorst has also voiced her concerns over the facility.
Bluebonnet Haven would act as a residential treatment center for troubled youths, and would also provide educational services through a contract with Trinity Charter School of Katy.
Bryant has said that, while he worked at two facilities that have come under fire over the years: Five Oaks Achievement Center in New Ulm and Prairie Harbor facility in Wallis, he told city and county officials at a special meeting back in January that he would do differently in Brenham.
Washington County has a moral obligation to have a facility(s) to house problems of society but I feel it should be in proportion to the population. Aftercall, Washington County has folks in prisons and other correctional facilities due to their conduct. However Washington County (and other like counties) should not be the dumping grounds for the state. And all those who do not live anywhere near this facility & want to stand on the pulpit to preach to those most affected about “moral obligations” need to shut up. If these kids are primarily from urban areas, that is where they should be kept.
These children will likely be either private insurance or Medicaid unless someone has deep pockets and pay cash. These kids need help. Sex trafficking is a huge problem in the Houston metro area. They will be fortunate to have access to treatment.
No one has asked what type of health insurance these individuals will have. Most
likely the answer is none. Therefore, the local hospital, clinics, and doctors will
be asked to treat uninsured patients resulting in additional financial burdens
for this community.
“Brieden says what he was told is that the state would inspect the building and require a town hall meeting, before a license was issued.”
It would be helpful to know what exactly is required by the process .. before going to the meeting.
Does anyone know the web-address to those state regulations?
Our community had the same problems in the 80s when TDC wanted to build a prison here. The citizens were opposed to having a prison here. Our loss was Navasota’s gain.
Washington county also had the opportunity to have the City of Brenham landfill. After millions of taxpayers dollars were spent on property, engineering and permit was secured and paid for. City council and mayor let that great opportunity also slip away. Again, Brenham loss is someone else’s gain.
I understand all the folks that live close to this having legitimate concerns. And those concerns need to be fully addressed by the owners. That being said, one of the reasons many people move to this community, to this county, is because we offer a much more relaxed and slow paced environment. When I moved here about 20 years ago, I was so impressed with how people actually cared for their neighbors, for their fellow workers, church members, and people they didn’t even “know”. That to me was incredible! To move into a community that was showing the love of Christ to others was a dream come true!
I feel that even though this is a for profit entity, it is a necessary job that must be done. Assuming these folks have the proper people in place to treat these juveniles that everyone else seems to think are disposable; why wouldn’t our community welcome it with open arms and hold it out as an example of what a difference one small community can make in the lives of people in this world that have already lost so much? There are many locally owned businesses that are for profit…..that’s kinda the point of being in business, right?
Perhaps the ones throwing stones, should take a step back and think about the message they are sending here! Why would we want to reject these kids and send this message of hatred? Let’s embrace the chance to show the best side of our town to these people and also the rest of the world as to what a town of loving, caring people can accomplish together! I have no affiliation with this facility and I do not even remotely know who the owners are. Those things are irrelevant……we are required to show the Love of Christ to ALL members of our society, whether we like them or not.
Our community is full of caring loving people who reach out to those less fortunate. We have many groups that care for the mentally handicap, we have a group that helps woman out of human trafficking, we have Miracle Farm which helps at risk boys, we have the Adult Teen Challenge which helps people recover from addiction and many more. I think the issue with this facility is the location, the failure of the owners to seek community support BEFORE building a facility, the poor experience this area had seen with other similar facilities, and what appears to be very minimal security. You can also include the potential burden on our already over burdened school system that cannot handle what they already have and it becomes easy to see why citizens are concerned. Our community is one of the most loving and caring places I have ever seen, but I am just not sure this facility is right for this area!
ChappellHillResident, their is no “we” on our road to heaven or hell. The path is yours alone, your actions and decisions will be weighed as an individual not as part of a collective. Paying your taxes, even though the money may eventually may help the poor in some way, is giving to Cesar. Nothing more. Have YOU given everything, since your “required to show” your work?
If you want Christ in government, I’d start with being able to hand out Bibles in schools and teaching Christian values in schools. You should bother to see how many kids will profess Christ today and compare that to the numbers that would so the same 25 and 50 years ago. Then ask yourself if the trend you will find is on course fix itself and what that means for the flock.
It’s a proven fact that the more multicultural the population, the more it fragements. Distrust not trust becomes the new norm. In place of common Christian values we are now getting moral ambiguity lessons that support diversity. You like the way it was 20 years ago when you moved here so much that you want to change it. How does that make sense?
Not a bad throw yourself.
I am assuming the facility is not going to be located next to your property.
There have been meetings, the only people that want it are owner and the tax collectors.
Put a 12 foot barb wire fence around the property and all will be happy, if not the people that live close to it will sleep light.
The word “plans” to serve human trafficking victims is not a guarantee. And, what is their definition of human trafficking victims? I am thinking that a true victim of human trafficking requires a very different environment and treatment plan than the typical troubled/ delinquent juvenile these type of facilities house. It appears the for profit owner is exploiting the public’s sympathies for human trafficking victims with this latest announcement. These for profit facilities are created for the sole purpose of just that, “profit on the taxpayers dime. “. Plus our school district pays thousands of extra dollars to put them in our schools. These facility owners should be providing their own educators / classrooms at their expense, much like any typical boarding school.
The facility in New Ulm was a disaster for Austin and Washington county, and this will be too. Our state senator and representative need to step up and stop the licensing of this facility with the same degree of enthusiasm they have for their personal legislation. They ARE the only hope of stopping this blight on our community. Let us all show up to this town hall meeting and let them know taxpayers are tired of producing profits for companies who have no interest in our counties welfare.
Concerned Senior, you made good points but it is illegal for a state lawmaker to intervene on a contract between the operator of Bluebonnet Haven and the state health department, if the local business vendors are following the law. It is the same mistake for you to ask a state rep to intervene on a bid for a government contract, that is also illegal.
The state senator and state rep can CHANGE the laws that allowed this Bluebonnet Haven facility to be built, as legislators, that is their power. We as concerned citizens should urge the state senator and state rep to change the law to have more oversight and demand public input. The contract for Bluebonnet Haven is handled like any other business contract done with the state, and the owners are refusing to meet with the public. If a state lawmaker were to intervene, and stop the contract when the applicant was following the law, then there could be a lawsuit for singling them out.
I’m sure you’ll be at the townhall meeting, but I suggest you read a little closer before voicing your concerns about the educational burden to the taxpayers; “would also provide educational services through a contract with Trinity Charter School of Katy.” I may not be an English teacher, but I feel pretty confident declaring that “Trinity Charter School of Katy” is NOT a part of the Brenham Independent School District.