SULLIVAN COUNTY, NY — Advocates for residents of Sullivan County’s Adult Care Center, also known as the Care Center at Sunset Lake, have accused the county of rushing residents to transfer out of the facility, even as a preliminary injunction requires a pause on the facility’s closure plan. 

The facility, which had 93 residents when its closure was announced, now has “approximately a dozen” remaining, according to Lou Setren, the president of the ACC’s family council. Setren also said residents have felt rushed and pressured to make a decision regarding their transfer, even as the facility’s closure is temporarily halted.

Bonnie Lewis, a sister of former ACC resident Janet Mentnech and a petitioner in a lawsuit against the county to stop the closure, said she and other caregivers felt that rush. “We all were getting a sense they were twisting the arms of many of the residents to hurry,” she said.

“I think all of the nursing home residents and caregivers were getting the sense that, if you want the nursing home of your choice, hurry up, don’t wait,” Lewis said. “You might not get a bed where you want to go, and you’ll end up farther away from your home, your last known bedroom where you thought you’d spend the rest of your life, so it’s been quite upsetting.”

Sullivan County Communications Director Dan Hust said that communicating reality with residents and their caregivers allowed them to make proper determinations, and denied that the county’s communications were intended to rush residents for the sake of rushing them out.

“Residents and their families are informed that nursing-home bed availability can change throughout the discharge-planning process,” Hust said. “A facility that has an available bed today may not necessarily have that same availability at a later date. Communicating this reality is intended to allow residents and families to make informed decisions and is not a pressure tactic.” 

Legislators and advocates speak out

Regardless of the county’s intentions, the process has drawn criticism from advocates, including county legislators. During a special meeting of the Sullivan County Legislature on Thursday, September 24, legislator Catherine Scott called the closure “diabolical.”

In an interview with the River Reporter, Scott said that residents have shared that they’ve felt pressure to transfer out of the facility.

“I have big concerns about how this closure has transpired,” Scott said. “What I’m hearing from some family members and what I’m hearing from some residents is that they feel pressured. They feel like if they don’t make a decision, their options are going to be limited, which may or may not be true.” Scott also said that the timeline of the closure is highly suspect. Scott said that she asked if there was a deadline for closing the facility and was told no, and said that it is her understanding that the facility will remain open as long as patients are still there.

“But I’m hearing from people their firsthand experiences, which is that they feel

pressured, they feel rushed,” Scott said. “The timeline speaks for itself.”

Setren said that the county’s decision to close the facility has done severe damage to the residents of the facility, who could now be suffering from “transfer trauma” due to the transfer to a new facility, and to new wings and rooms inside the facility as the county closes off wings.

“Their improper decision to close the facility has caused irreparable harm not only to residents of the facility, but to family members of those residents who will now be forced to make, in some cases, hours-long round trips to visit their loved ones. That’s inappropriate, quite frankly,” he said.

Setren said that the county offers many non-mandated services other than the ACC that also do not make money for the county but that serve a greater need. 

“It is the business, so to speak, of government to provide services to its residents,” Setren said. “We believe that this is a vital and essential service that government needs to provide to its most vulnerable residents.”

Setren encouraged people to reach out to their legislators, as well as the clerk of the legislature (AnnMarie.Martin@sullivanny.gov), who will share their concerns with the legislature. Contact information for the county legislators can be found here. 

Scott also encouraged people to reach out and hold their elected officials accountable. “I’m begging people, if you have a feeling on this, speak up and be heard,” Scott said. “We need that feedback. Do not let elected officials go into a vacuum to make a decision because you’re not going to be happy with the decision they make.”

Access at the ACC

During the September 24 meeting, Scott also said that, as she was leaving the Adult Care Center (ACC), she was informed that she was not supposed to be granted free access to the facility and was supposed to be held at the desk when she entered until the administrator of the facility could be informed. Scott said that this is the first time she has heard such a thing, and that legislators have an oversight responsibility that she was exercising.

Scott had previously visited the facility several times, including while her mother was a resident of the facility. Scott told the River Reporter that she went to check on the closure process, as well as check on some of the residents.

“Why are they stopping people from going? Why are they stopping legislators? I was really disturbed by that,” Scott said during the September 24 meeting.

“Legislators are not held at the desk until the administrator gives permission,” Scott said. “That’s not how this works.”

Sidebar: ACC Lawsuit Updates

At a hearing on Monday, September 21, State Supreme Court Justice Kevin R. Bryant continued an injunction ordering the county to temporarily halt the closure process. He released his full written decision on Thursday, September 24, in which he says that the county was in knowing violation of New York’s open meetings law (OML).

“It appears to this Court that the entire closure process was designed to maintain secrecy and withhold critical information from the public regarding actions of the legislature,” Bryant writes. “These actions were undeniably related to a public facility and the expenditure of public funds, and they appear to have been deliberately undertaken to bypass the provisions and intentions of the OML.”

Bryant also responded to the county’s argument that if the injunction were to be continued, the county’s financial problems that led to the closure of the facility would be exacerbated. Bryant found this to be a “foreseeable consequence” of the county’s own actions.

“Under the circumstances, it is the preliminary finding of this Court that this potential harm is strictly of Respondents’ own making and the direct result of the County’s deliberate attempt to conduct the business of the public in secret in violation of the OML,” Bryant wrote.

The county has also argued that the New York State Department of Health (DOH) has regulations and gave guidance to the county that overruled the OML. Bryant found that argument flawed.

“While this Court appreciates Respondents’ argument that they were acting in accordance with DOH regulations in order to avoid panicking residents, there is no legal basis for DOH instructions or regulations superseding the provisions of the OML,” he wrote.