Trout Run

The main entrance to Trout Run on Catoctin Hollow Road.

Frederick County has settled a long-running lawsuit with a Church of Scientology-linked real estate company over plans to build a controversial drug rehabilitation center on Catoctin Mountain.

Frederick County Circuit Court approved a joint motion March 20 to dismiss the case of Social Betterment Properties International v. Frederick County over the former’s plans for the Trout Run property, a 40-acre site near Thurmont. SBPI is now moving forward with plans for an eight-bed rehabilitation home based on Scientology teachings that would operate within the property’s long-standing zoning restrictions.

The settlement agreement reached between SBPI and the county allows the company to “do what it’s been allowed or permitted to do all along, and nothing more,” county spokeswoman Vivian Laxton said in an email Wednesday.

SBPI brought the suit over a 2015 Frederick County Council decision to deny a historic designation and zoning exemption for the Trout Run property on Catoctin Mountain. SBPI had purchased the 40-acre property in 2013 with the intention that the Scientology-based Narconon International rehabilitation program would open a 16-bed center there.

That use was not approved under Trout Run’s resource conservation zoning and would have required the council to add the property to the county’s Register of Historic Places. Although the Frederick County Historic Preservation Commission recommended the designation, the council voted against it following a wave of public concern expressed during hearings.

According to a history of Trout Run, gates were installed on the county road that runs through the property to create a private area for President Herbert Hoover to fish. At one of a number of public hearings in 2015 related to the request to get the designation added, SBPI argued that, among other things, the site was a “rare surviving example of an early twentieth-century private recreational camp.”

Under the settlement agreement, Trout Run still doesn’t have the historic designation or any of the accompanying zoning exemptions.

SBPI still plans for the Narconon program to operate at Trout Run, just on a smaller scale, according to attorney Bruce Dean.

“My client, in the spirit of partnership with local government, has chosen to move forward with the operation of an eight-bed residential drug rehabilitation facility that will be operated by the Narconon organization,” Dean said Friday.

Narconon is controversial for its approach to substance abuse treatment, which prohibits medically assisted treatment and psychiatric services in favor of aerobic exercise and long periods in a sauna.

Former program staff and participants have called Narconon ineffective at best and traumatic and deadly at worst. At least four clients of the 200-bed Narconon facility in Arrowhead, Oklahoma, have died since 2009, according to The Oklahoman.

Narconon, meanwhile, sees its service as a part of the solution to the ongoing national opioid addiction crisis.

“We are pleased that we were able to come to an accommodation with Frederick County that will allow the proposed residential drug rehabilitation facility at Trout Run to contribute to the vital work of saving lives and repairing families,” Dean said.

Court proceedings in the litigation against the county have been relatively inactive since 2016. Frederick County Circuit Court judges approved a dozen extensions of SBPI’s deadline to file a memorandum of support for their legal challenge to the county’s decision. In November, Judge Julia Martz-Fisher stayed the litigation to allow the settlement talks to continue.

Follow Cameron Dodd on Twitter: @CameronFNP.

(60) comments

mrnatural1

public wrote:

"For legal purposes in the United States, Scientology is considered a religion. "Cult" is a term not found in the constitution while "religion" is. What is permitted or not permitted at Trout Run by the county government is a legal issue. FredCo was well within its authority to deny the historical overlay of Trout Run on the grounds that it wasn't historically significant. FredCo was not within its authority to do that only to Scientology because Scientology is icky."

~

To the best of my knowledge, no one in the FredCo gov't declared that they were discriminating against Scientology. They had legitimate reasons to deny the historic overlay. That should really be the end of it.

Some may suspect that there was more to it, but there is no proof.

Scientology is more than icky, and it obtained its IRS tax-exempt status through harassment and coercion.

I agree that all "religions" were "cults" at one time. Instead of the gov't attempting to differentiate between the two, how about we eliminate the tax-exempt status for all religions (as I said below)? No special groups, no favored status. Religious groups could be treated like any other group -- the Elks; Moose; Eagles, etc. Groups that have no special protection under the constitution.

It can be argued that the status quo is unconstitutional, because the gov't is favoring religious groups by allowing them to not pay taxes. That means we all pay more. We are being forced, under penalty of law, to subsidize religions that we may not support or agree with.

The gov't should just get out of it completely.

The alternative is endless discussions about what constitutes a "religion" vs a "cult" -- and that's a waste of time.

public-redux

It seems you have by and large agreed to almost everything I've said.

"To the best of my knowledge, no one in the FredCo gov't declared that they were discriminating against Scientology."

I agree with this -- and my writing was sloppy, for which I take responsibility. There should have been a conditional "if" in there somewhere. A lot of the community commentary on Trout Run focused on Scientology. LTEs, public comment to the County Council. The issue was whether Narconon was being treated differently. I've spent years in the FNP comments defending the County's decision and arguing that the county would have made the exact same decision had the applicant been, say, Catholic Charities.

It is rare (but not unheard of) for local government officials to overtly state that they are discriminating on the basis of religion. It is not so rare for them to do so in practice, however.

"Scientology is more than icky..."

Irrelevant.

"...it obtained its IRS tax-exempt status through harassment and coercion."

You keep repeating this. Do you not realize that you are acknowledging that Scientology is a religion?

"I agree that all "religions" were "cults" at one time."

Thank you.

" how about we eliminate the tax-exempt status for all religions (as I said below)? No special groups, no favored status. Religious groups could be treated like any other group -- the Elks; Moose; Eagles, etc. Groups that have no special protection under the constitution."

You're generally preaching to the choir here. I've argued for equal tax treatment under the law in FNP comments for more than 15 years now. Welcome to the fight. Expect to be called names.

But you don't quite have the issue correct so let me help you out there. Tax-exemption is not a constitution protection for religion/religious groups. Tax exemption is available to most non-profit organizations regardless of whether or not they are religious. (Religious groups do get one special tax privilege: they are exempt from filing Form 990. Non-religious non-profits have to file Form 990.)

The issue is whether or not to grant tax-exemptions to non-profit orgs. And I agree we should not. If a government is going to tax property, tax all property regardless of the owner. If a government is going to tax income, tax income to everyone. It would be unconstitutional to tax religious groups but not the Elks, Moose, Eagles, etc. That would be government discrimination on the basis of religion.

"The alternative is endless discussions about what constitutes a "religion" vs a "cult" -- and that's a waste of time."

I wondered why you were spending so much time arguing that Scientology is a cult and not a religion.

mrnatural1

public, you wrote:

"With respect to religious discrimination, yes, that is my entire point! By gosh, you’ve finally put your finger on it. If our county government refused a zoning request because the applicant is Christian or Jewish or Scientology or Flying Spaghetti Monster or The Satanic Temple or Hindu or Jain or Muslim or atheist, that would be discriminating on the basis or religion. I don’t want government to have that authority. Do you? Do you want government to have the power to deny a zoning request because the applicant is a Catholic organization? Do you want government to say Catholic Charities can’t build a rehab treatment center because the RCC asks for donations and can’t show that prayer works? I sure don’t."

~

Generally speaking, I agree.

In this case -- speaking as an Agnostic with no ax to grind -- Scientology is not a traditional religion. It is more accurately described as a cult -- a cult that primarily exists to make money. A cult that destroys families. A cult that threatens anyone who it perceives to be an 'enemy'. They use intimidation and harassment tactics that are borderline illegal. They spy on their adversaries and videotape them.

The wife of the leader/CEO of Scientology has been "missing" for years yet there has been no investigation. We are told she is "fine" and being held in an undisclosed location.

They protect and defend their largest contributors against any and all charges, including assault and rape! They force cult members to submit false statements to cover for the wealthy members.

Scientology only has tax-exempt "church" status because they badgered and harassed IRS employees until the agency caved and gave it to them!

In a perfect world, Scientology would be shut down. So when it comes to the county government's decision in this case to not grant the "Historic" overlay in an attempt to keep Scientology out, I agreed wholeheartedly.

In cases involving actual religions the First Amendment should be the guide.

BTW -- your point was clear to me, but I can see how a person might misconstrue it as support for Scientology. IOW, both a) people who support the First Amendment, and b) Scientologists might have written a post similar to yours.

public-redux

Luke 14:25-27

“25 Many people were traveling with Jesus. He said to them, 26 “If you come to me but will not leave your family, you cannot be my follower. You must love me more than your father, mother, wife, children, brothers, and sisters—even more than your own life! 27 Whoever will not carry the cross that is given to them when they follow me cannot be my follower.

Ah, traditional religion!

mrnatural1

That's some hardcore stuff on Jesus' part, huh? [wink]

Again, I'm not a religious person. From my perspective it's all pretty odd. I do not support one over the other

What we're discussing though is the current/modern day behavior of the various organizations. There is ample evidence that Scientology is not a religion (see my post above). The only reason they have tax-exempt status is that they launched one of their harassment campaigns against IRS employees. They found out where they lived, had people follow them everywhere, videotape them, and generally make their lives miserable. Finally the IRS gave in just to get Scientology to leave its employees alone.

So we are not talking about discriminating against a "religion" -- even though Scientology was able to coerce the IRS into giving it tax-exempt status.

Scientology is a scam. A cult. It exists to rip people off, to take advantage of them and get all of their money. It destroys lives and families.

Personally, I don't think there should be any special treatment for religions. No tax breaks. Then they would be free to campaign openly for specific candidates, lobby representatives, etc.

When we create a special classification like "religious groups" and allow members of the class to avoid paying their fair share of taxes, we bring these problems upon ourselves. There is no reason why "freedom of religion" should mean "freedom from paying taxes" (which means we all pay more).


public-redux

I get that you are trying to argue for True Religion versus Just a Cult and Not a True Religion. Here are some problems with that. Anything you would regard as a religion today was regarded as a cult when it started. So the New Testament is out of date? How about something modern: SDA disfellowshipping? Family members are told to never again speak to another family member who has been disfellowshipped? Is SDA a religion or a cult that destroys lives and families?

Whether you like it or not and no matter how it happened, Scientology is legally recognized as a religion in the US. Which means the phrases in the constitution having to do with religion apply to Scientology. You don't like Scientology. Other people don't like Satanism. Some folks see the Roman Catholic Church as a racketeering and criminal enterprise. ("Oh, the Catholics hate the Protestants; and the Protestants hate the Catholics; and the Hindus hate the Muslims; and everybody hates the Jews" Tom Lehrer, "National Brotherhood Week"). I can tell you that it used to be illegal for someone like me to hold public office in Maryland because I didn't have one of the governmentally-favored religions.

Is Scientology a scam? Sure seems like it. Is an organization that wants you to inculcate your children from the earliest age into its beliefs, wants your money, tells you that you are risk of eternal punishment unless you follow the rules a scam? Hmmmmm. Hmmmmm. Are there differences besides tradition and popularity?

I'm with you on getting rid of special tax treatment. But I'm not in favor of our county government acting unconstitutionally and risking taxpayer dollars. And that is what it would have been doing had it treated Scientologists differently than Catholics just because lots of people don't like Scientology.

public-redux

“So when it comes to the county government's decision in this case to not grant the "Historic" overlay in an attempt to keep Scientology out, I agreed wholeheartedly.”

Are there any other “non-traditional” religions you would have government discriminate against?

mrnatural1

: Bwaa-ha-ha! I shall force the gov't to discriminate against them ALL![rolleyes]

What this comes down to is the definition of a religion.

If Scientology is a "religion" then so was/is the Jim Jones group -- The People's Temple; The Branch Davidians; the Sullivanians; the Children of God – Family International; and Heaven’s Gate.

If a person truly believes that Scientology is a religion in the usual/customary sense, then it is understandable that they would see the actions of the FredCo gov't as discrimination.

I have to question though how anyone -- outside of indoctrinated members of Scientology -- can honestly consider it a religion (assuming they have all of the facts about how Scientology operates).

I strongly support the First Amendment, but it applies to religions, not scams/cults.

public-redux

A religion is an old cult. A cult is a new religious movement.

A religion is a formal organised body who generally meet various criteria such as:

Belief in some kind of supreme being or principle.
Belief in the importance of certain spiritual books as a source of spiritual truth. (Bible, Qu’ran, Bhagavad Gita)
A set of principles to guide living of members.
Membership in religion often tied to ancestry or bloodline.
An established organisation, often with a hierarchy of priests.
The geographical existence of holy places to visit.

https://www.biographyonline.net/spiritual/articles/difference-religion-cult.html

"I have to question though how anyone -- outside of indoctrinated members of Scientology -- can honestly consider it a religion (assuming they have all of the facts about how Scientology operates)."

For legal purposes in the United States, Scientology is considered a religion. "Cult" is a term not found in the constitution while "religion" is. What is permitted or not permitted at Trout Run by the county government is a legal issue. FredCo was well within its authority to deny the historical overlay of Trout Run on the grounds that it wasn't historically significant. FredCo was not within its authority to do that only to Scientology because Scientology is icky.

public-redux

So here's the thing about the First Amendment. It isn't there to protect someone's freedom to say "Have a nice day" (though it does) or to protect a Methodist's freedom to recite the Lord's prayer (though it does) or to protect a newspaper's freedom to publish pictures of cute cats in need of forever homes (though it does).

The First Amendment is there to protect the most despicable, vile, offensive, ridiculous, moronic, despised, hated, loathsome, reprehensible, awful, heinous, ignoble ideas, speech, religions, and public assemblies imaginable.

shiftless88

While not a fan of scientology I have looked into a number of rehab centers and I am not convinced that any are scientific in their approach. One cannot even find anything about success rates. This probably isn't going to be any worse than other religious-based treatment centers (note that the twelve steps are generally considered religious).

public-redux

One big problem with the religious approach and success rates is that lack of success can be laid at the feet of the clients because they weren't faithful enough. But there is no way to measure that. Indeed, it leads to circular logic: You must have faith to succeed. If you didn't succeed, you must not have had (sufficient, appropriate, etc.) faith. It is non-falsifiable.

mrnatural1

Exactly public. [thumbup]

mwoerner

Clowns to the left of me, Jokers to the Right, here I am stuck in the Middle with you!!!!

werewolflawyer

I just want to join my voice to the dissenters. Narcanon IS NOT a valid treatment option. Scientology is a cult through and through. Their entire treatment plan is based on something that was made up on the spot by their "glorious leader". They have a history of killing people "indirectly" and sweeping it under the rug. Their entire organization is a nightmare and anything to do with Scientology should be viewed as a scam.

public-redux

Agreed, They have faith.

lewisantq

Good for Frederick County for standing firm against the Scientologists. Bob Lewis

public-redux

I certainly hope the county’s action would have been same had the owner been Catholic Charities.

freeglemeep

Your "Scientology" practices are not approved by the american medical association and catholic charities are treated better because they opperate hospitals approved by the AMA and they do not cause people to die because of unnecessary and irrelevant practices. You Scientoligists dont relize that Scientology is a CULT!
We do not want your family-seperating secretive ways here in Frederick County.

public-redux

Dafuque?

How in the world did you come to think I’m a Scientologist? My point was simply that government can’t have different rules for different religions or for religion vs. no religion.

freeglemeep

It is totally clear. Plus, Scientologist are known for sueing, seperating family's, and for there brainwashing practices. this "Narconon center is one of the ways Scientology can get more money and gain more "believers". Also, you have been trolling the whole Scientology story. Scientology has done MORE BAD than good.

freeglemeep

You litteraly sung praise for this narconon center, because it is backed by Scientology.

public-redux

“It is totally clear.”

I can’t argue with logic like that.

“Scientologist are known for sueing, seperating family's, and for there brainwashing practices.”

Have I done any of those things?

“this "Narconon center is one of the ways Scientology can get more money and gain more "believers".”

Undoubtedly true. What does that have to do with me?

“Also, you have been trolling the whole Scientology story.”

Calling out a commenter’s NIMBYism is trolling?

“Scientology has done MORE BAD than good.”

You’ll get no argument from me on that point. I regard faith as a vice and not a virtue.

freeglemeep

Its not that you're doing that, its that you are PROMOTING that

public-redux

“You litteraly sung praise for this narconon center, because it is backed by Scientology.”

Could you quote where I did that?

freeglemeep

Yes. This article
The trout run editorial
“Council shows Trout run findings nearly a year later” article

And you have been following the whole Scientology story and have a lot of LOVE for Scientology.

freeglemeep

Anyone in there right mind would know that Scientology is a cult through and through.
There is so many evidence backing it up that you dance around and pretend doesn’t exist.

public-redux

Since you didn’t quote me, I looked up the article you cited. I made two comments. Here they are:


public-redux
public-redux Apr 20, 2016 10:50am
"Does he mean Narconon was dishonest or the Council."

I wondered that too. A proper noun would have been efficacious.

Report Add Reply
public-redux
public-redux Apr 20, 2016 9:34am
Is Kirby essentially admitting that his vote was indeed based on religious discrimination? Kinda seems like it. And he is being "honest" now by refusing to sign a document stating otherwise.

Which of those two comments is the one where I am singing praise for this Narconon center because it is backed by Scientology?

public-redux

Broader point: Do you want government to discriminate on the basis that of religion?

freeglemeep

your two comments are implying the fact that you are a supporter of narconon

freeglemeep

just because the IRS says its a religion, does not mean its a religion.
anyone in there right would know that it is a cult and you still contenue to avoid the fact that scientology is a cult.

freeglemeep

plus, you forgot to check your comment on the editorial on trout run which shows you actively promoting it

public-redux

When you use "literally" and "imply" as synonymous, that indicates you don't know the meaning of those words. So, again, please quote me when I am literally expressing support for Narconon. Or even implying it. Don't just reference some article or editorial. Quote my comment. C'mon, you can do it.

Do I even live in FredCo? Oh, I can hardly wait to see what I've said that leads you to think I might not.

public-redux

"plus, you forgot to check your comment on the editorial on trout run ..."

Let me fix that for you: You forgot to quote it.

public-redux

Let me try to help you out with this "quoting" thing you're so bad at. I searched the character string "Trout Run". There were 69 hits in the FNP archives. Two of those were editorials. I did not comment on one of those. I had one comment on the other one. Here it is:

public-redux Jun 5, 2015 1:25pm
Let’s just say saunas, vitamins and wishful thinking sound about as effective as “praying away the gay.”

You could have omitted the last three words from that sentence. There is no evidence for the efficacy of prayer.

Now I read that as me saying that Narconon's methods are as effective as prayer, which I describe as not effective at all. Could you explain how me saying that something doesn't work is an example of me touting its wonderfulness? Thanks in advance.

freeglemeep

Oh yeah and here's your quote!


This identical LTE was published just a few days ago under a different headline. It hasn't improved with age.

If the council has the authority to deny one organization the ability to operate in Fredco, then it has the authority to do the same to others. I don't the government to have that kind of coercive power.

The one and only issue the council need concern itself with is whether the property has historic significance. That would be true even if the intended use of the property was to employed wounded veterans to repair American flags that were damaged in battle and fostering exceedingly cute orphaned kittens or to house Narcanon.

freeglemeep

Remember this?

freeglemeep

you keep calling this religious discrimination, would you say the same if this was a christian or jewish operated center?

freeglemeep

it seems you have forgot you have post this on the editorial.

freeglemeep

if you did not just read the quote that YOU WROTE, you in commented on the editorial. i'm actually better than this than you are because you seem to forget what comes out of your own computer

freeglemeep

This identical LTE was published just a few days ago under a different headline. It hasn't improved with age.

If the council has the authority to deny one organization the ability to operate in Fredco, then it has the authority to do the same to others. I don't the government to have that kind of coercive power.
This is the quote that YOU SAID

"The one and only issue the council need concern itself with is whether the property has historic significance. That would be true even if the intended use of the property was to employed wounded veterans to repair American flags that were damaged in battle and fostering exceedingly cute orphaned kittens or to house Narcanon."

public-redux

If you think I’m smarter than you, that’s your business.

I do remember that comment! One of my better ones, if I do say so myself.

So, first of all, do you not know the difference between a letter to the editor and an editorial? You incorrectly specified editorial.

If you think I’m singing the praises of Narconon in that comment, your reading comprehension is as bad as your logic and vocabulary (not for nothing, I didn’t even comment on your incorrect use — and misspelling — of “literally” some posts ago; the word you wanted was “figuratively”; one cannot “literally” “sing” in print).

With respect to religious discrimination, yes, that is my entire point! By gosh, you’ve finally put your finger on it. If our county government refused a zoning request because the applicant is Christian or Jewish or Scientology or Flying Spaghetti Monster or The Satanic Temple or Hindu or Jain or Muslim or atheist, that would be discriminating on the basis or religion. I don’t want government to have that authority. Do you? Do you want government to have the power to deny a zoning request because the applicant is a Catholic organization? Do you want government to say Catholic Charities can’t build a rehab treatment center because the RCC asks for donations and can’t show that prayer works? I sure don’t.

So you live in FredCo, eh? In front of which store is the original but terribly eroded mile marker for the National Pike? Which ale at House Cat brewery has an aroma reminiscent of blue cheese? Which restaurant on East Patrick was demolished years before it was necessary for the runway extension project at the airport? How many days of water did Frederick City estimate it had remaining before it would need to truck in water during the 2002 drought when we finally got rain.

public-redux

Boo!

public-redux

Dear FNP Moderators,

I don't know why you have repeatedly (three times now) deleted comments of mine that did not violate the TOS. It shows a lack of integrity on your part. Another commenter told me "not to reply" (in a comment since deleted, also for reasons unknown). I truthfully and accurately replied -- three times now -- that I don't take direction from him/her. I'm not belittling or baiting or inciting. I am stating a simple truth. I have no clue who that commenter is but I do not take direction from him or her.

I hope you will adhere to your TOS. I have.

Thank you,
your adoring public

ad_s_towel

Narconon uses pseudoscience as a backdoor recruiting tool for the cult. They prey on the most vulnerable -- recovering addicts -- in order to keep the scheme going to benefit the upper echelons with a cost of over $30,000. Large doses of niacin combined with intense exercise and saunas do nothing to treat the very real sickness that manifests from detoxing cold turkey. They replace the addicts physical need for drugs with a psychological addiction to the tenets of Scientology. They do not even allow meds for addicts with other conditions such as asthma, diabetes, high blood pressure, high cholesterol etc. that lead to negative medical outcomes. They have been sued over a hundred times in jurisdictions around the world and they have been banned in several countries for their quackery.

mrnatural1

Quote:

"Former program staff and participants have called Narconon ineffective at best and traumatic and deadly at worst. At least four clients of the 200-bed Narconon facility in Arrowhead, Oklahoma, have died since 2009, according to The Oklahoman."

To be fair, I imagine most large rehab centers have had fatalities -- but 4 since 2009 seems like a lot.

Just as serious a problem is the spread of a money-making scam/cult like Scientology. I say that as a non-religious person.

Scientology has harmed innumerable people and their families. It is incredible that the government allows it to continue to operate -- with tax exempt status no less!

Remember -- when any person/family/group/corporation pays less -- we all pay more.

Warn any family members and friends who are not already aware to stay away from Scientology.

pappyjoe

Not that far from Camp David maybe about 4 miles driving. When one of those patients come out of the oven dehydrated, thinking psilocybin mushrooms maybe in the woods beyond their confinement area, Camp David is not that far away as the crow flies. If he/she should run across one of those Master Sargent's in a ghillie suit guarding Camp David, that poor soul treatment has ended and Tom Cruise will mark that down as a patient that will never use drugs again from the treatment scientology treatment gave to him/her.

CDReid

[thumbup][thumbup][thumbup] Good way to put it pappy. [lol][lol]

ad_s_towel

They would not make the four miles in that terrain after undergoing the niacin/sauna/exercise nonsense the "rehab" center puts them through in order to break them down so that they join the cult.

Lev928

... and here comes fake treatment based upon a fake "religion" to the border of Thurmont. When it comes, here also comes the uprise in drug use and crime, relocated families of abusers being treated, and the downward spiral of what was a once a natural, environmentally sound and stable location.

If you still think that Frederick County government is looking out for your best interest and isn't out for tax revenue, you're either dumb or part of the problem.

A place like this has NO business being anywhere near Thurmont. You see where the Victor Cullen Center (state juvenile jail) has done well .... not.

public-redux

Where in Frederick County would be a better location?

CDReid

As has been noted public, Frederick County already has a rehab center in Emmitsburg. If another one is needed, why not in the southern part of the county? I'm sure there's enough of a need for one there, what with all the transplants coming up from MontCo.

public-redux

But what is the benefit of an uprise in drug use and crime, relocated families of abusers being treated, and the downward spiral of what was a once a natural, environmentally sound and stable location in two parts of the county instead of only one?

CDReid

Sounds to me like you're inferring that another one of these types of establishments isn't good for the county, correct public?

public-redux

No, I wasn’t implying that. I was pointing out Lev’s NIMBYism. Lev seems to think a rehab center would bring problems to its immediate locale— and therefore it shouldn’t be in Thurmont but somewhere else.

CDReid

OK, point taken public, but you still didn't reply to my suggestion that a rehab center could be used in the southern part of the county. Your thoughts on that?

public-redux

It hardly matters to me where one is located.

threecents

I guess it makes sense that a cult would target vulnerable people.

Lev928

Pretty much, threecents ... and targeting the money of the addict's family and county taxpayers to pay for it. Lucky for Thurmont, it's just outside of town limits to tax its residents. But it will still bring plenty of trouble for the town in the long term (families moving closer to their addict), and require the already under-staffed county sheriff's office to respond to the facility for routine problems and emergencies.

So much for a peaceful, quiet northern Frederick County.

Samanthapowers

Quiet? Isn’t Thurmont full of meth heads, junkies, and klan? Disclaimer: no disparagement intended to the many fine citizens residing in the area. That said, instead of klan flyers on car windshields we’ll be finding join the cult propaganda.

Welcome to the discussion.

Keep it clean. No vulgar, racist, sexist or sexually-oriented language.
Engage ideas. This forum is for the exchange of ideas, not personal attacks or ad hominem criticisms.
TURN OFF CAPS LOCK.
Be civil. Don't threaten. Don't lie. Don't bait. Don't degrade others.
No trolling. Stay on topic.
No spamming. This is not the place to sell miracle cures.
No deceptive names. Apparently misleading usernames are not allowed.
Say it once. No repetitive posts, please.
Help us. Use the 'Report' link for abusive posts.

Thank you for reading!

Already a member?

Login Now
Click Here!

Currently a News-Post subscriber?

Activate your membership at no additional charge.
Click Here!

Need more information?

Learn about the benefits of membership.
Click Here!

Ready to join?

Choose the membership plan that fits your needs.
Click Here!