Sale exhibits why transparency issues

Studying Time: 3 minutes

On Tuesday, Sept. 17, the Sauk County Board voted to spend $40,500 to purchase a sheriff’s division automobile to switch one totaled in a July incident. The decision printed on the agenda included particulars of the incident, the automobile vendor and a fiscal observe explaining that the cash would come from insurance coverage accounts.

This show of transparency occurred one week to the day after the identical county board authorized contracts to promote the county-owned nursing residence to a personal entity. That agenda acknowledged the board would meet in closed session to debate the sale. It didn’t identify the customer or embrace the sale value. Whereas the customer was disclosed within the 45-minute public dialogue following the closed session, the sale value was not. The $5.1 million value was revealed the next day in an attachment to a press launch. There was no fiscal observe on the agenda. 

A observe might need defined why the county accepted a suggestion $3.4 million lower than the $8.5 million sought when it first marketed the nursing residence, which has 48 residents. Nor did the county clarify why the value was a lot lower than the $19 million worth for which the county insures the nursing residence. All these numbers are from data I obtained.

The December 2023 decision that began the method included as a situation: “The potential purchaser shall show a historical past of 5-star care rankings within the senior well being care trade.” That was the county nursing residence’s ranking on the time. 

Medicare’s star system for ranking nursing houses is predicated on common inspections and quotation historical past. 5-star is far above common, 4-star is above common, 3-star is common, 2-star is under common and 1-star is far under common. The customer, Aria, operates three nursing houses within the north Milwaukee suburbs that presently have one- and two-star rankings. 

The five-star situation was interpreted by most as which means that the county would search a personal purchaser with a historical past of high-quality care just like that offered by the county nursing residence, which had a 5-star ranking in December 2023. That was the county’s official public place regarding the sale, up till Sept. 10, when the board voted to approve the sale to Aria. Within the Sept. 10 movement that handed, the entire situations within the December decision have been outmoded by the sale contract.  

Between December and September, the board held two closed-session conferences. The one data that got here out of these conferences was that the county had chosen to barter with a single purchaser, whose identify was stored secret, although it leaked out in late July. A petition drive collected 1,300 signatures opposing the nursing residence sale that have been introduced to the county.

After quite a few residents expressed dismay about Aria’s care ranking in public touch upon Sept. 10, the board met in closed session with an Aria consultant, which was stated to be reassuring. After the board got here again into open session, one board supporter of the sale turned to the viewers and stated, “I actually want you could possibly have all been right here for the assembly.”

Sure. The viewers — product of residents and taxpayers and folks with family members within the residence — would even have preferred to listen to the presentation. That this was not allowed was typical of your complete course of, during which the general public was given much less details about the sale of the house for 48 Sauk County residents than it was about changing a broken squad automobile.

Why is the state’s custom of open authorities vital? Simply ask the residents of Sauk County, who’ve been handled as if it isn’t.

Your Proper to Know is a month-to-month column distributed by the Wisconsin Freedom of Info Council (wisfoic.org), a gaggle devoted to open authorities. Jeff Seering, a retired journalist, is a Sauk County resident.