Champaign County finally received the word on the fine they are receiving for various missed deadlines and rules violations on the construction of the new Champaign County Nursing Home. You can read the press release from Pius Weibel here.
First, while Weibel, Inman, and Beckett will all talk about what a travesty this is, behind the scenes they are breathing a deep sigh of relief. This fine could have been significantly higher, and but for this being a public facility, it is likely that it would have been.
Second, Weibel's press release is another insult to the citizens of this county. "Champaign County has acted at all times in good faith with Illinois Health Facilities Planning Board and its staff..." This is just absurd. As I wrote in November of last year, our attorney wrote the Health Facilities Planning Board on November 6, 2006, saying this:
"The result is that the existing HVAC units may have to be replaced or reworked substantially to provide a proper HVAC system for the facility."
So, as we nearly had finished the HVAC project, Champaign County officials were lying to the HFPB and telling them that the decision about what to do with the HVAC system was still up in the air. This is what Pius Weibel calls good faith.
Of course, good faith with the public hasn't been had either. The issue of fines conveniently broke after the November election, even though Steve Beckett knew that fines were probable in August.
Mark, is there any update on the total in legal fees over the lawsuit? thankyou
Perhaps the county board could take it out of Mr. Inman's salary. Any indignation on the part of Weibel, Beckett, or Inman will be absurd. And the N-G said that Weibel was "irritated". No, buddy, I'm a taxpayer and I'M irritated.
And Weibel isn't a taxpayer?
As I have mentioned before...SELL THE NURSING HOME AS MANY COUNTIES HAVE DONE!!!
Does the county auditor have any responsibility here?
"Does the county auditor have any responsibility here?"
How can he have any responsibility when by his own admission the staff CPA does all of the work in the office?
"And Weibel isn't a taxpayer?"
Sure he is.
And he surely should have seen this coming - the warning signs were clear and public months ago.
And he surely was in a position to do something about it - at least as of last December, when he became County Board Chair.
But the primary responsibilty for this debacle is Inman's. Weibel and Beckett bear responsibilty for ignoring the clear signs that he wasn't complying with HFPB instructions.
And I'm not an anti-Inman zealot. But this $50,000 is the last straw. Mark's detractors have claimed he's just the boy who cried wolf, and that he was on a personal vendetta. But he clearly stated this wolf was coming, and he was absolutely correct (unfortunately).
And how are you Republicans responding to this ineptitude on the County Board? That's right, by not challenging a single dem county board seat ensuring the status quo.
And what's your name, and in which District are you interested in running?
Its a little late to get a Libertarian on the ballot for district 9, even skipping past the ballot access problem for 3rd parties.
"Its a little late to get a Libertarian on the ballot for district 9, even skipping past the ballot access problem for 3rd parties."
I don't think the deadline for third parties to file has passed. Neither has the deadline for Republicans or Greens or Democrats to slate candidates to fill ballot vacancies.
The scope of the original project was amended and the HFPB sent an approval letter dated 10 November 2005 approving a permit alteration in an amount of $1,785,933. This increased the project to $23,224,933. Fines can be levied if the "alteration increases the scope of the original project without HFPB approval. This clearly did not happen after 10 November 2005.
The HFPB can issue a "suggested fine" if the project "exceeds the allowable permit amount". The final realized cost of the project exceeded the $23,224,933 by $581,615.32. (2.5%). The County may have filed a document which was entitled "Final Realized Cost" using forms and procedures of HFPB, but the issue here is whether of not this overrun is recoverable from the contractors who caused the overrun due to their negligence. Another way of saying this is that the fine is improper if the county recovers the $581,615.32.
I think the situation is no different than if there was a fire just after the repairs were made which was caused by the contractor. Let us say the fire caused $581,615.32. The County goes ahead and repairs the fire damage and later the contractor's insurance company pays $581,615.32- Do you get fined because you don't tell the HFPB board? I think that is somewhat ambiquous, don't you.
When a rule is ambiguous or needs interpretation, it is generally construed against the drafter (HFPB)- Remember this is not a fine, this is a suggested fine. So after having said that, I would point out the rule of law ---when you have to construe what is ambiquous. When you do that, you have to go to the whole phase, which contains the words "alteration increases the scope of the original project without HFPB approval" or "exceeds the allowable permit amount". When these two phrases are taken together it appears that the intent of the regulation was just like most standard construction contracts that reguire amendments when there is something different (increase the scope) in the contract. I predict the County wins on this.
I would also point out that this HFPB ruling appears to be a "gotcha" ruling as seems to be the norm nowadays. The minimum for this technical violation is $25,000. By asking for double that the HFPB demonstrates their partisonship given the surrounding circumstances of the nursing home.
This is issue 1.
Issue 2
Whether govenment should run a business. As a public policy matter, I think it should not. Government generally makes a hash of whenever it tries. We can argue in theory for the municipal garbage service or government run Children's Health Care, but both are bad in practice.
The County Nursing Home used to employ a temporary service, Interim, that employed temporary nurses. It supplied some LPNS and RNS as well as those nurses with just a basic license. Although the temporary nurses service cost more per hour, the ability to direct the cost to the times they were needed resulted in a lower overall fixed cost for labor. Much of the change to full time nurses was justified by the need to pay employees a "living wage".
But this is water over the dam. It is a done deal. We are not going to change that anymore than we are going to eliminate Medicare. When the 2002 Olympics were screwed up and losing money, they brought in a turn around specialist called Mitt Romney. He turned it around by running it in a different way. (By the way-vote for Mitt too)
Issue 3 -How do we do that since Mitt is busy? A consultant seems appropriate. Dr. Shellcross made some recommendations to the Mental Health Board about activities, and I am sure we can find a consultant to suggest the possibilities.I am sure we can find a cross section of business and university people to review the consultants suggestions and make reports. But you will need a cross section of very diverse people with very diverse opinions to come up with the best suggestion after much discussion.
When Governor Edgar appointed me as one of 4 at large representatives to the 14 person Interagency Authority on Residential Facilities for Children I discovered that the 10 designees of those child serving agencies were more concerned about protecting their own budgets that working together to improve the "system". My 110 page minority report issued after 5 years (1993-1997) will forever sit at the bottom of some faceless nameless bureaucrats desk. My point is that you need independent advice. But one thing is certain-you need to take politics out of the equation. Interjection of politics into this discussion serves no useful purpose.
And how are you Republicans responding to this ineptitude on the County Board? That's right, by not challenging a single dem county board seat ensuring the status quo.
You shouldn't be asking if Republicans are fed up enough to run for a Dem CB seat - the answer of course is yes, as I stated as did John Farney in 2006. The real question is, "Are voters disgusted enough yet to vote for some accountability and change on the CB?"
No, the real question is: "Do the voters think there are any Republicans out there who can do better?" Clearly they do not.
Actually, John, you're incorrect on a few accounts. The rules regarding overruns, etc. do not take into account whether the overruns are a result of contractor error. The fact is that all expenditures on the project have to be reported and changes in the cost have to be reported prior to undertaking those new expenditures. That is the clear intent of the rules and we didn't do it. You can argue all day whether it makes sense or is fair, but that is the rule. Our county adminstrator and attorneys should have known this.
The idea that rules that are ambiguous (this one isn't ambiguous in any way) are interpreted against the drafter is unique. My understanding (and I'll try to find a few cites in the next couple days) is that administrative agencies are given great latitude in interpreting their own rules. Of course, in this instance, we would not have had any problems if we actually had talked to the HFPB about the rules and gotten an interpretation from them. Instead we relied on expert attorneys.
When you accuse the HFPB of partisanship, you throw yourself squarely in the Inman/Beckett woe is me, they're out to get me camp. Just out of curiousity, why did they single little Champaign County out for this partisan attack? Why didn't they go after the hundreds of other projects that are on their table?
There is one other point that you are missing. The HVAC work was an increase to the value of the project. I"m going to write again about this, but the HVAC work improved the system, but did not increase the airflow in the building.
Once again, we caught a break because they didn't go back and research any of the other violations we had back in 2005 when as you said, we got approval for an increase in November 2005, after we had already proceeded with the mold remediation. HFPB is also cutting us enormous slack since, as I pointed out, our attorneys lied to them in November 2006.
Nice spin, by the way, Mark. The county received word on the fine they could be assessed. No fine has been assessed. Only suggested, At this point, there's no fine; only a suggested amount should the county not state its case clearly enough. (And the suggested fine, governmentally speaking, is pretty small).
Taking both John's post and Mark's post together, the readers can get an idea of how important it is to have a person or persons assigned to administrate a project such as this. With that administration being the person's (or persons') only responsibility. To miss any kind of filing date or presentation of permit factual information is not only inexcusable, it is indefensible.
Even if they did not know whether to file or not to file ...................... FILE it and the regulatory agency will tell you if you did not need to. Does anyone believe for an instant, that if Mr. Weibel was personally going to have to pay a $50,000 fine if these papers did not get filed, that they would not have been filed? Of course not, but it was not his money.
What is really sad is you have to go to Pundit, to find out this kind of information. For crying out loud, we should see our elected representatives being presented with this information in the open meetings. For the life of me, and obviously John and Mark also, I cannot understand any government official being clandestine with any information when it concerns millions of dollars.
When someone like Mark, who is elected to office, tried his Damnedest to let the public know something is on the wrong track, and the responses to that information are political in nature, rather than seeing his statements have merit. Then by God everyone who slobbered those political responses should get the pleasure of paying that fine. Maybe, that would change things and quickly.
And to anonymous:
"No, the real question is: "Do the voters think there are any Republicans out there who can do better?" Clearly they do not."
The moment you referenced a political party, you identified the problem in two ways.
The real question is: "Do the voters think there are any people out there who are more qualified to do it better"
Clearly those doing it now, ain't getting it done and unless we want it to happen again, change is imperative.
The instant a person suggests a Democrat can do it better than a Republican, or vice versa, without considering qualifications, is the instant we get into these messes. Think not, head over to Springfield and check out the darkened Governor's office.
I spent much time with Mark and John and the difference between them and the candidates who were elected because of District shapes was very simple. They wanted to do it to make a difference ....................... and for no other reason.
To that end, I am, and shall always remain;
Rex Bradfield
well, since the fine is "pretty small" we'll send the bill your way. but you're right, compared to the 4 million dollars worth of cost overruns on ths project, the $50,000 is pretty small. Of course, a good question is why so many other organizations have been able to avoid these fines. we've spent hundreds of thousands on attorneys and Mr..Inman, presumably for their "expertise" and we end up getting fined.
Mark,,,,,,,is there any total available for the amount of legal fees incurred over the nursing home? Thanks
When the County Board puts another referendum on the ballot, asking for more money... I can tell you right now what my vote will be.
NO NO NO NO NO NO! I don't care what it is for, and who it is for. My vote will be NO! I voted for this one, and it will be my last.
Both parties should be plenty embarassed by this. BOTH OF THEM! I hold every person on that County Board responsible for this. Every single one.
You hear me Steve Moser? You hear me Steve O'Connor? You hear me Greg Knott? I will NOT vote yes on any more County referendums. As far as I'm concerned, don't even waste your time in asking.
My trust in this bunch of incompetents that we call a "County Board" is GONE.
Late story in the News-Gazette stated county may be able to work off some of the $50,000 fine by doing public service work,,,,,,,how many of them at the county will stand up and do it??
Mark, congratulations. You should feel vindicated. You received a lot of flack over your tenatiousness concerning the problems with this nursing home project. You are truly a steward for the people.
Mark S., I admit that I have not had much interest in some unfortunate construction mistakes at the nursing home. For the sake of argument I will admit that mistakes were made by someone and that oversight could have caught it. For the sake of argument I will also admit that a County Board lead by Democrats could have prevented it. Assuming all this is true-should the wife blame the husband because he happen to be driving when their car was sideswiped by a drunk? Probably not.
My main point is that we take the case as we find it. It does us no good to cry over spilled milk. What everyone wants is the best and most efficient nursing home we can get. If there is a management problem, as you suggest there is, then we need to look at the way to fix it. But you complain about the same Steve Beckett that bravely bucked his own party to side with the Republicans when better management was needed is not the way to win friends and influence change.
The year before I was elected to the Urbana City Council, Duane Eckerty was the City Clerk. The City Clerk had the responsibility of depositing some of the checks of the City. Quite frankly, the financial situation in Urbana was a real mess. When I ran for the 7th ward seat, I campaigned on bringing a Comptroller as a permanent full time person. Ron Elderidge was the person picked for that post. I was one of 4 Republican's on a 14 member council when I was elected- It was more important to get a Comptroller in -that to beat up on poor Duane Eckerty. It wasn't Duane's fault, it was the fault of the stupid method we had or organizing ourselves back then.
I know for a fact that your office is one of the best run offices in the State. You work at it and have gotten many awards. I am sure that some of the innovations came from suggestions from a wide variety of sources. When I was on the City Council there used to be a libertarian by the name of Bill D. who would come to most of our meetings. Most of the council rejected him out of hand, but---if you listened to him carefully, about 25% of what he said were good original ideas that needed to be thoughtfully considered.
I have gone back and reviewed all the comments and the posts on this subject. I am ashamed to say that not one of them suggests a way to fix the problem. It is not about replacing Duane Eckerty with Ruth Brookins, it is about reorganizing the way we conduct business. Do you think that appointing co-county commissioners was a good idea? Do you think that having the elected County Board Chairman as the chief operating officer was a good idea? Do you think that a County Board of 27 people was a good idea? These are the type of systemic problems I am talking about.
I was asked this by my farmer brother in law several years ago-it is quite appropriate today. What is the difference between a farmer and a 747? Answer. A 747 stops whinning when it gets to Florida. Maybe we need to do the same.
It does us no good to cry over spilled milk.
That is absurd. People should be eliminating the source of the spilled milk, which in this instance is Inman. But John, your opinion is shared by most of the board, and much of government at every level. There's no accountability. Rod Blagojevich will be spouting the same lines in three years.
But you complain about the same Steve Beckett that bravely bucked his own party to side with the Republicans when better management was needed is not the way to win friends and influence change.
Is this the same Steve Beckett would bravely withheld documents from his fellow board members? That accused me of lying when I said we had violated the HFPB rules? The one that withheld a negative mold report from the board? The one who went to a Health Facilities meeting in August to discuss fines but never informed anyone else on the board?
Steve Beckett is courageous when it suits his purposes.
As to suggesting solutions, I have. The first is to get rid of the incompetent manager. I quietly worked to have Inman removed in 03 and 04 to no avail. then I got noisy in '06. Have any more suggestions? Your other ideas? The board should be smaller and we shouldn't have co administrators.
I guess now John I have a question for you. Do you think that an administrator who hid information about mold from the board he serves, who accepted with a verbal agreement moldy wood for a public health facility, who lied to the Health Facilities Planning Board, who was instructed by our environmental specialist to have wood tested before proceeding on work but then never informed a single contractor of the need for the test and never had the tests conducted....should that person keep his job? Your answer will speak volumes.
Mark is absolutely correct in putting the blame on Inman and his enabler Beckett. Anyone who truly understands the County Board understands that it's the closest thing to a non-partisan Board we have in local government, and that's precisely the problem here. (I'm including the Champaign City Council as more partisan, by the way.)
Far from producing some conflict-free, Utopian government, the Beckett-Moser alliance has created a monster with no accountability to either party or to the public in general. "Partisanship" is an easy boogeyman for people to blame for various woes, but it does force one group or the other to accept responsibility when things go wrong. Dems who blame Republicans for this mess are just as mistaken as Republicans who blame Dems, and just as mistaken as those who throw their hands up in despair and blame all 27.
If you pay attention, there are Board members (of both parties) who have stood up to Inman, objected to Nursing Home mishaps, refused to support Beckett, etc. Unfortunately, they are outvoted by another group (of both parties) that are willing to go along with the status quo in exchange for personal power. This group pretends that anything bi-partisan is inherently good, and too many in the public and the media are willing to believe them, without question.
In recent years, the County budget has passed with unanimous support. Does that mean your tax bill has gone down? Or does it mean neither party can clearly take the blame when your tax bill goes up?
What everyone wants is the best and most efficient nursing home we can get.
Not me. I want a nursing home that is not owned by the county, then it can be efficient or not, and it will not be my concern.
RedState:
But if a friend, family or yourself ever needs a nursing care facility, it has to be there.
With the State choosing to finance its other budget woes on the back of the Health Care industry, it is unlikely that Illinois will have any more private nursing homes commit to the State of Illinois.
No private business can stand a delay of 8-9 months for accounts receivable, with no late fee interest being paid when the payments are received. For obvious reasons, Banks and lending institutions do not view any operating loan based on accounts which contain significant State of Illinois payments due. Lending institutions do no want to own nursing homes as security to protect loans.
Because we cannot do without nursing homes, at least government ownership allows the flexibility of local governments raising taxes to offset the tardy State Payments. Do I agree with that? Certainly not, but again we cannot get along without nursing homes and we certainly cannot trust the State.
If Mike and Naomi, would just STOP helping the Democrats in Springfield and vote for the needs of the people in their areas, rather than paying back the campaign contributions by voting with them, it might change. Votes are crucial in Springfield and any Democrat that votes for the People, rather than the Democratic party, is doing the right thing.
Mark,
If someone had the time to identify, all those who posted against your previous posts, for obvious political reasons, or just to be cute, it would be interesting to post their names on this post, just to refresh our memory and reduce the effective content of any future posts they might make.
To that end, I am, and shall always remain;
Rex Bradfield
John,
From what I can glean out of the historical records of the nursing home fiasco, there is plenty of blame to go around, but a significant portion of that blame and the most costly, looks like it is laying on the back of the County.
Here are some considerations:
1. An argument could be made about a low Cost Estimate from the Design Professionals, but that would have to be really low to be irresponsible. Raw materials that are outside their control can experience dramatic increases in cost, if for not other reason delivery costs.
2. The problems with the HVAC is certainly a design flaw, but also, the County stands to accept some of the blame, because when a professional suggests an Obviously inadequate design, usually the Installation Contractor will start to howl. In this case, they did howl, but the County ignored the howling, until it was too late. Design flaws are one thing, but circumventing the protection of experienced contractors and all most requiring it be installed because of deadlines, is irresponsible.
3. The mold is all on the back of the County, because the inspectors recognized the mold and would not allow the material to be installed. But as is the right of the Contractor, they went to the County and said if they had to wait for more materials, the schedule would be pushed way back. The County gave them permission to use the material with the unwritten agreement they would clean it up. The unwritten part is the specifications for the cleaning. Had those been in place, the cost might have been back on the Contractor, but they did not exist. Quite frankly, the writing of those specifications would have discouraged the contractor from installing it and eliminated the damages.
4. The general administration of the entire project by the County was an Abbott and Costello movie and no one was on first. That is inexcusable, because as it got worse, the hiding of what was happening, was the norm to protect the political party. Will they learn from this water being over the dam, as you suggest. Probably not.
I look forward to your comments.
To that end, I am, and shall always remain;
Rex Bradfield
Rex, if we are going to have a county-supported nursing home to help the poor, then lets restrict it to medicare/medicaid patients only. I believe when the tax issue came to a vote, some local liberal (Naomi or Prussing I think, but not sure) made essentially that argument. Why are the county taxpayers subsidizing the nursing home care for the wealthy?
Redstate,
I am not entirely for the county running nursing facilities either, but when the State does not pay private companies, they can't exist. I was simply saying, they are necessary now.
And with that restriction, the County would be doomed to pay, because they would not have any of the reliable insurance payments from other sources.
Nursing homes are not the problem, the State payment history is the BIG problem.
To that end, I am, and shall always remain;
Rex Bradfield
Bruce, I haven't forgotten your request. Just not able to get to it quite yet. Hopefully someone at the County will do the work here soon, but if not I will put those numbers togethert.
Mark-I apologize that I do not know who Mr. Inman is. Is he the architect that is supervising the construction project? I presume that the contractor or the architect's insurance carrier is involved in the remediation. If so, how is Mr. Inman involved in this? Was Mr. Inman responsible for compliance with the contract? Who does Inman report to? Does the County have a committee that reviews the construction in progress.
Negligence can consist of sins of ommision and commision. Let's use missing a statute of limitations. Did some blow it off because they just didn't care, or did they miss the statute because they had a poor procedures and methods to make sure the pleading was filed on time.
If Mr. Inman is the one who is at fault, I would want to know whether there was a procedure in place to catch the problem? I would want to know whether the procedure caused the problem or was it Mr. Inman. In assessing the blame we often assess damages based upon comparative negligence. If we are at fault, we need to fix the organizational problems. I just hate it when people say: This is how we have always done it. And then there is that old expression: " When you've got someone by the balls be careful not to squeeze too tightly, for the next time they may have you by the balls."
Denny Inman is the County Administrator in charge of this project. He is also the professed expert on the Health Facilities Planning Board rules. The litany of problems for Mr. Inman would run too long to recite in full. But I just highlighted two. After Mr. Maupin (nursing home administrator) notified Mr. Inman of the mold on the construction site, Mr. Inman told Mr. Beckett, but did not inform the rest of the Board. Then, when the environmental engineers that he hired told him that construction on the project should stop until the moisture content of the wood was below a certain percentage, Mr. Inman never informed the contractors of this and not a single test of the moisture content of the wood was conducted. A month later, Mr. Inman, without informing the County Board, agreed to allow the contractors to put up newly arrived building materials with mold in the nursing home , instead of rejecting the moldy wood. There was no written agreement between the County and the contractor regarding what was to be done about the moldy wood and who was to pay for its remediation.
Mr. Inman reports to the full County Board, but in reality, he reports only to Steve Beckett. Yes, the County Board has a committee to oversee the project. It's the County Facilities Committee and it is chaired by Steve Beckett. They couldn't exercise oversight, because Beckett and Inman were lying to them throughout the time they were to have exercised the oversight.
And yes, we need to fix the organizational problems.
I hold every person on that County Board responsible for this. Every single one.
Wait a minute, I thought we were bashing the county board on this issue (because, you know, they always act in unison on every issue). I've only talked to a couple of the board members about this, but I know they were as frustrated about being kept in the dark on this as Shelden describes.
"I've only talked to a couple of the board members about this, but I know they were as frustrated about being kept in the dark on this as Shelden describes. "
And yet Mr. Inman's contract was renewed again, and Mr. Beckett still Chairs the Facilities Committee.
And Gordy, hit the nail right on the head.
You screw up, you leave. Except in Champaign County.
Mark was right on point with the mold problem. Just identifying the clean up methods and standards of any kind or written agreement would have clearly indicated the contractor and County that a real problem existed and schedule was the least of the evils associated with the problem.
To that end, I am, and shall always remain;
Rex Bradfield
Well, at least the County isn't making positions for staff that have been fired from other governmental entities, at least I don't think so.
i understand thanks