Daily Sound — Despite neighborhood concerns, Santa Barbara City Council OKs detox facility

In a meeting filled with passionate pleas on both sides, the Santa Barbara City Council approved an $865,000 grant to move the Project Recovery Detox Center to 1020 Placido Avenue.

The detox center, currently the only one outside of Cottage Hospital, has been housed in the same building as Casa Esperanza at 816 Cacique Street.

but the presence of so many Casa residents that still use drugs and alcohol hasn’t been good for detox center clients, and the center’s presence is starting to suffocate the space-strapped Casa.

The new building will add two beds, a quieter environment, and allow mixed gender services in the center’s 14-day recovery program run by the Council on Alcohol and Drug Abuse. but some neighbors don’t like the idea of a detox facility going up on their street and supporters and protestors of the facility turned out in force during public comment.

“I believe having a place to detox with professional guidance and understanding helped me with one of the best decisions I have made in my life,” said Victoria Mather, a previous participant of the Recovery Project.

Rebecca Long, whose property shares a backyard fence with proposed center had concerns about smokers and addicts being a short climb away from the yard where her nine-month-old daughter plays.

 “I don’t think it’s fair for CADA or the Housing Authority to say this is going to be any kind of improvement on the neighborhood, it’s not. If you live behind it, it’s not. If you lived around it, it’s not,” Long said.

The council expressed sympathy for the neighbors’ viewpoint, but ultimately sided with CADA staff.

“when the boat is leaking and you have a way to plug the hole, you go forward and do it,” Council member Bendy White said.

White suggested some of the neighbors’ concerns about privacy and fence height could be addressed when center gets its standards permit—the permit that ensures the facility meets all the qualifications for a detox center.

Dale Francisco also supported the center, believing that the neighbors’ fears would be put to rest once they saw the facility.

“I think many of the concerns the neighbors have about this facility would probably be allayed if they had been around the functioning detox facility,” Francisco said. “It would be quiet and well run.”

Even Council member Frank Hotchkiss, who had earlier opposed the Wilbridge project near Peabody School, supported the center. after questioning some CADA staff, Hotchkiss said that there is some misconception about the types of people who would be staying at the center, pointing out the center wouldn’t be used exclusively by homeless people.

“I think you’ll find a very controlled, conscientious neighbor,” Hotchkiss said.

Mayor Helene Schneider believed that the presence of the detox center could even be a good thing for the neighborhood given the controlled schedule detox patients must abide by.

“in fact, if they could be a good neighbor and working with the neighborhood, I think it’s going to create a safer overall environment in the area,” Schneider said.

Council member Michael self cast the only dissenting vote. while self applauded CADA’s work and acknowledged the need for a detox program, she believed that a better site for the center could be found.

 “with all the vacant properties in economic distress, it seems like something in another location would be more suitable for this.”

The measure passed 5-1 with self voting no and Council member Randy Rowse recusing  himself as his wife is an active member of CADA. 

How ironic. Randy Rowse a tavern owner makes his living off of selling alcohol. Alcohol is known to cause dependency and medical problems and drivers under its influence are responsible for the deaths of others. we as a community are asked to pony up almost a million for a detox center to deal with the ravages of alcohol. then there’s cannabis….which has never killed anyone. but Randy calls that evil and wants all dispensaries shut down. CADA connection anyone? A bit of hypocrisy there? Follow the money trail.

I live 5 houses away, and I saw that the house was listed for $975,000…and was not selling. I didnt read the report, but I believe that the only sale that would happen is something like this; noone would spend 3/4 million to live on that alleylike street. The seller basically won the lottery on this sale. This is a safe neighborhood already. but because its so dark, creepy lurking drunks would change it all. I believe they legally dont have to get public input at all. I demand that they have a 6 month review process, and have the option to close, if it doesnt work. There will always be nimbys, we just need accountability, not promise and reassurance. If it works, then keep it. at least there is a liquor license for a property 150ft from there, in case they want a quick beer.

City owns most of the housing around this facility anyway. They already bought the votes of the neighbors. Why insult us these are open and fair hearings showing neighborhood support. There are more Housing Authority units in this part of town than almost any other place. Watch out other neighborhoods once the city moves in, you are also doomed. no more private property interests against the Big City Housing Machine which buys every Democratic vote they can with your very own tax dollars.

City owns most of the housing around here. who is going to complain? This is what happens when you become a company town. SEVENTEEN PERCENT of Santa Barbara housing units are government owned, regulated and/or subsidized. People want even more taken on and become dependent upon taxpayer support. This is just one city subsidized and regulated housing unit taken off the private market and increases the percentage of government owned housing even more. you are doing this to yourselves, Santa Barbara. only you can stop this insatiable government housing monster devouring the heart and soul of this city until nothing but government projects remain.

A city-funded drunk tank should not look any better than Arizona’s correctional tent city. Drinking yourself to death is a choice and a choice that carries consequences. no one gets better without making better choices for themselves. The AA door is open 24/7. The city just needs to hand public drunks a list of AA meetings and a citation for public drunkeness. Stop treating public drunks like V.I.P’s. This is crazy. If private individuals and groups want to take them in, fine. They can do this on their own dime. but not with my public money. I want law enforcement with my public money, not enabling and excusing lawlessness.

Michael self appears to be the only true conservative on the Council. This stuff about the conservative takeover of the Council is nonsense. Hotchkiss and Francisco have been huge tax and spending disappointments.

Hotchkiss and Francisco are a thousand times better than the Bendy White betrayal. not a good idea to use Brian Barnwell as your role model, Bendy. you ran on neighborhood protections and you got votes because of this and you turn around immediately and sell out to the wacko progressive crowd. no need to have done that Bendy. but you did. Hope you can spell one-term council person.