Citizen Portal
Sign In

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

Get email alerts on the Gathering In Subpoena topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Lincoln council authorizes subpoena for records tied to Gathering Inn purchase at 1660 Third Street

Lincoln City Council · September 11, 2024
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

The Lincoln City Council voted unanimously to adopt a resolution authorizing a legislative subpoena for documents related to the Gathering Inn's acquisition of 1660 Third Street after days of public comment and council concern that records had been withheld.

The Lincoln City Council voted unanimously to adopt Resolution 2024-188 authorizing a legislative subpoena for records related to the Gathering Inn’s acquisition of 1660 Third Street in Lincoln.

City Attorney (reading the resolution) said the subpoena seeks a broad set of documents — nearly 50 categories when subparts are counted — and cited the council’s authority under state law. “The subpoena would then be issued by my office to… Keith Diederich, the CEO, who is also the agent for service of process for the Gathering Inn,” the attorney said, and set the production deadline for the next council meeting unless other arrangements are made.

The action followed an extended public-comment period in which dozens of residents pressed the council to scrutinize the Gathering Inn’s plans and asked that the city review the facility’s application filings, neighborhood impacts and safety protocols. Speakers alleged discrepancies between the organization’s public statements and the content of the grant application; one parent said the grant language referenced substance-abuse and recovery services near a school and asked the council to examine proximity to First Street Elementary.

Keith Estes, chairman of the Gathering Inn board, described the organization’s medical-respite program as ‘‘a place for unhoused people, mostly senior citizens, to recuperate from serious illnesses or surgery under medical supervision,’’ and said the program does not permit visitors and is not a shelter. Still, multiple residents recounted visits to other facilities and reported observations — including loitering, parked vehicles, and calls for police — that heightened neighborhood concerns.

Council members said staff had attempted to obtain supporting documents directly from Gathering Inn leadership but were told the materials would be provided and then were not produced. Councilmember 2 summarized the council’s position: staff has requested records, and when those requests were not fulfilled, the council had limited options other than issuing a subpoena.

The subpoena is intended to compel production of grant applications, correspondence, contracts, site plans, operational protocols, and related records identified in the resolution’s recitals. The city attorney warned that failure to comply could lead to contempt proceedings under the Government Code provision cited in the resolution.

Next steps: staff will attempt to coordinate production schedules with the Gathering Inn; if documents are not produced by the stated deadline, the city may pursue court enforcement. The council urged that, if a negotiated agreement is possible, it should proceed transparently with public notice and community involvement.