The West Virginia House of Delegates on Wednesday approved legislation that would limit the number of licensed addiction treatment beds to no more than 250 per county.
House Bill 3337 was approved in the House and sent to the Senate, where a provision was removed that would have exempted existing facilities, before it was approved by that body.
On Wednesday, the House concurred with the Senate amendment and approved the bill by a vote of 77-18 with five delegates absent. The bill now goes to Gov. Jim Justice for consideration.
Three of the bill’s sponsors hail from Wood County, which, according to them, has a disproportionate number of beds compared to the rest of the state.
“There’s plenty of room for people that want them in the counties that have them already and they want more. Wood County has 281 and, I promise you, it will turn your town into The Walking Dead,” the bill’s lead sponsor Scot Heckert, R-Wood, said.
Another of the bill’s sponsors, Delegate Vernon Criss, R-Wood, said many individuals filling those beds are from out-of-state, and those who quit their treatment programs are staying in Wood County, where they are putting a strain on local law enforcement agencies. It’s gotten so bad that the city of Parkersburg has started paying for bus tickets to send people back home, Criss said.
“If they took their treatments and did what they said they were going to do to get better, that’s all fine and well. They become productive citizens again. But they don’t do that. They get into the program, they quit the program, and become problems for the city of Parkersburg and the county of Wood, for all of the social ills that we have. Our petty crime is way up tremendously,” Criss said.
The county is not equipped for “the next step” and more resources are needed to provide the necessary care to people with drug and alcohol addiction after they leave treatment, Delegate Bob Fehrenbacher, R-Wood, said.
“People can come to Wood County to these beds but, after four weeks, when they are discharged, there are very few ongoing recovery beds and support facilities,” Fehrenbacher said. “My belief, in looking at this number and talking to local stakeholders, including people who provide these services, is before more beds come to Wood County or any county, you need to look at your ongoing capabilities to provide support, because otherwise the recidivism rate for substance abuse disorder patients is astronomical.”
Heckert, Fehrenbacher and Criss all acknowledged that the beds were requested by a former House member from Wood County in a previous legislative session.
“We, indeed, frankly, probably brought this upon ourselves, but we are ill-suited to support the people that come to Wood County for support,” Fehrenbacher said.
An arbitrary number got Wood County into this situation, and another one won’t solve the problem, Delegate Mike Pushkin, D-Kanawha. In fact, it could create the same problem in other counties, he said.
“We’re undoing what some feel was a mistake that was made years ago by a former colleague and friend from Wood County, when he inserted another magic number in a bill that said he wanted a certain amount of treatment beds in Wood County,” Pushkin said. “I agree with the intent of what he was trying to do, but the mistake was when he just made up a number not based on need, just based on what he thought he wanted for his county ... What they got was more than they actually needed.”
Placing a cap on the number of beds permitted in each county will make those licenses valuable, which may mean more beds in counties that don’t necessarily need them, Pushkin said.
“You think licenses will not be bought and sold when you put that limit on it? What you’re going to have to do in a few years is come back and undo this,” Pushkin said. “I’d hate for someone to have to get up in a few years when we’re undoing this and say, ‘I told you so.’ It’ll either be me or some other guy they stick in the corner. Where did this number come from? You put 250 in each county, you’re all going to be Wood County.”
The proposed legislation would also be a disservice to the providers who have come to Wood County to provide care, Delegate Heather Tully, R-Nicholas, said. She noted that when the beds were originally approved for Wood County, they came with $4.4 million in grant funding, for which other counties were competing.
“They wanted the treatment beds, and they got them. I’m sorry they’ve come forth with some problems, but I also don’t think that this amendment by the Senate striking out the proviso does any good for the people who are there providing services to these clients,” Tully said. “You’ve had investors who’ve come from out-of-state and bought facilities, and I think capping it at 250 beds flat really does kind of a disservice to some of those providers.”
