Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Facility Management topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Daniels County commissioners debate upkeep, rental terms for vacated hospital facility
Summary
Commissioners discussed options for a vacated hospital building — including possible rental payments, maintenance responsibilities and safety concerns — and criticized past decisions that deferred needed repairs; no final decision to assume the building was made.
Daniels County commissioners spent a significant portion of their Aug. 18 meeting debating what to do with a hospital facility the district plans to vacate, weighing possible rental terms against long-standing maintenance and safety needs.
The discussion was prompted by commissioners and staff who said the district has paid little toward upkeep and that the county could be left with recurring costs for street lighting, grounds and building repairs. "We're going to ask that whole article," one commissioner said when describing a proposed rental arrangement that could include an annual payment — an example figure mentioned during discussion was $50,000 — to cover basic services.
Why it matters: commissioners said the facility has known water and sewer problems documented in recent memoranda and an earlier facility-assessment report that flagged electrical hazards. One commissioner summarized past direction to staff, saying a memo from Danny Schumacher indicated staff had been told to "hold your water" and not to perform certain maintenance; that history complicates any move to transfer or retain the property.
Board members pressed for clarity on who would maintain the building daily and whether liability and property insurance would be adequate if the county assumed responsibility. "You almost need somebody to at least check on it daily because those are some big water lines that go in there," a commissioner said, arguing for a formal maintenance plan before any transfer or leasing arrangement proceeds.
Participants discussed grant-funded alternatives, such as repurposing parts of the facility for assisted living or community services, citing a nearby example (Savage) that had used grants to create assisted-living space. Commissioners noted that while parts of the building could be suitable for conversion, upfront costs to heat and retrofit the structure could be substantial, and the county is not positioned to serve as a long-term landlord without a clear revenue stream or tenant commitments.
The board did not make a final decision to acquire or divest the property during the meeting. Commissioners said they will continue to explore options, request clearer cost estimates and consider formal maintenance agreements that spell out responsibilities for broken windows, heat, power and grounds care as part of next steps.
