Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Local Services And Ldc topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

County to cover Sunset Lake LDC tax obligation amid public complaints about adult care center operations

2144176 · January 23, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Public commenters pressed the legislature about the adult care center's staffing and finances; the legislature approved a county transfer to cover a Local Development Corporation tax obligation after the LDC confirmed it lacked funds.

Legislators on Jan. 21 voted to authorize a county payment to cover an outstanding tax obligation held by the Sunset Lake Local Development Corporation after the LDC told the county it lacked funds to make the payment.

During public comment, residents and speakers raised long-running concerns about the adult care centerincluding the facility's financial management, staffing shortages and the role of the county-created LDC. A resident, Lou (surname in record: Setram), told the legislature its earlier decision to form an LDC had created an extra layer of expense and complexity, and urged further discussion about dissolving the LDC and negotiating direct leases instead. The transcript records another speaker identified as Catherine, a former care-center employee, who described alleged understaffing, an on-the-job injury she said was not processed for benefits, and problems she described with facility management and supervision.

Legislators said the LDC originally should have made a tax payment but, according to an LDC board meeting held during the legislature's recess, the LDC did not have funds to pay. A motion was adopted to have the county make the payment to avoid late fees and penalties; a legislator noted that failing to act could have resulted in up to $24,000 in additional costs. The motion was approved by voice vote.

Why it matters: The exchange brought public complaints about staffing and care at the adult care center into the formal record and prompted a near-term county financial action. Lawmakers signaled that the county payment is an interim remedy while they explore potential structural changes to the LDC and options for negotiating leases or other arrangements with prospective operators.

What speakers said - Lou Setram (public commenter): Said the LDC created unnecessary expense and complexity, urged lease negotiations rather than LDC formation, and welcomed further legislative discussion. - Catherine (identified in the record only by first name): Described workplace injuries and alleged failures by facility administrators to file injury paperwork, understaffing that left one worker alone on Hoyer lift duties, and disciplinary write-ups resulting from staffing shortages.

Legislative response: A legislator explained the LDC confirmed at a recent meeting it lacked funds to make the payment, and the county will make the payment to prevent additional costs while the legislature pursues possible changes to the LDC's role.

Next steps: The legislature indicated it will consider further discussion of LDC structure and possible dissolution, and county finance staff were tasked to execute the payment and report back.