DARLINGTON — A joint meeting of the Economic Development Committee and the  Executive, Rules and Legislative Committee met on Monday, March 11 to brainstorm on what to do with the current Memorial Hospital of Lafayette County (MHLC) facility once it becomes unoccupied.

Lafayette County Board Chair, Jack Sauer conducted the meeting, which started with possible scenarios by Sauer.

“My idea, which I’m not sure will work, is given the disrepair of the current Manor, is keeping the newest part of the hospital, some of those rooms are in pretty nice shape yet,” Sauer said. “We could take off and dispose of the oldest part of the hospital and add on to the newest part and you would have something more substantial and newer than our current Manor. I’m sure it would cost us more than repairing the old Manor, but the Manor is a 1962 building and has a lot of updating and repair needs.”

Ela Kakda, Regional Economic Development Director and Allison Taylor, Lafayette County Economic Development and Tourism Director presented a power point presentation which explored matching grants, worker programs and other options.

The presentation asked whether to close the facility and raze the buildings, keep them or reuse them.

Strengths that were listed include: The new hospital building portion in good shape; the clinic portion could be used as childcare; Manor has capacity to house people; people want the Manor; need for Manor due to increase in the aging population in the area.

Weaknesses: Portions of the hospital are not in great shape; Manor not in great shape — major costs to repair/renovate; cost for labor to provide Manor services; assisted living facilities in general are closing due to labor and inconsistent usage.

Population demographics: The population of 65 and over is steadily growing in Lafayette County and for the first time deaths outnumber births in the six Southwest Wisconsin Counties.

The conversation went to financing any possible projects related to the hospital and Manor.

Other items brought up included: Childcare options, eldercare; leveraging Fund 80 from the schools; PERM program which would bring skilled workers from other countries to work in the Manor or hospital; disabled housing programs; drug rehab housing and therapy; the recovery Kentucky model program.

Kakda suggested a feasibility study for the hospital and Manor, which could cost $50,000, a WEDC CAP grant could pay $40,000 and the county would need to pay $10,000.

“We’ve done a feasibility study on the hospital in 2019,” MHLC CEO, Kathy Kuepers said.

Kakda said that was great.

“We could use that hospital study and do one for the Manor and merge those and find out what the uses could be,” Kakda said. “The study could research the ideas that have come up here and any other ideas the public could come up with, to figure out what the next step is, that we should take.”

Sauer added, “We should contact Gov. Evers and Senator Baldwin, we may be able to get state or federal funds for something innovative.”

Kakda brought up other funding sources.

“Taylor going over hypotheticals, EMS could be housed there, a jail was discussed,” Kakda said. “There are so many possibilities, I think what we discussed are some of the best, especially when you’re talking eldercare and childcare. Could you turn the entire hospital into a Manor, the Clinic into a childcare facility and the Manor into a housing facility — sure.”

Kuepers broke into the discussion, saying that the hospital is not interested in letting the clinic building go. 

“That is going to be a medical office building for administration,” Kuepers said.

Supervisor Scott Pedley gave credit to the hospital and Manor for being the biggest employer of young people in the county. 

“I’m reeling from hearing that the hospital wants to keep the clinic building for administrative offices. That tells me, we’re not building our new hospital big enough. I’m stunned,” Pedley said.

Kuepers responded, “Since we started this project Scott, we have brought on new service lines and created larger service lines. So, the departments that don’t need to be onsite are being relocated, so that space is available for revenue generating departments.”

Pedley said the hospital is an excellent revenue generator. 

“But, I rather see us immediately get administration up there (the new facility) so that you can monitor every aspect of the operation. That’s just my reaction to it, but I’m only one,” Pedley said.

Sauer changed the subject.

“On the horizon a referendum may need to be held to keep operating the Manor as it is currently run and that referendum will not pass,” Sauer said. “We need to have a plan of some type to alleviate issues. The problem is we’re spending too much on nursing care and we have an old building that we need to pour a lot of money into. How are we going to alleviate those two items? If we don’t have a plan a referendum will go nowhere.”

Future County Supervisor and hospital committee member Jed Gant chimed in.

“If you do a study at the Manor, to catch up with what the hospital has done. So, we know the condition of the Manor and the do’s and don’ts at the Manor. Once you have those two studies, you compare the two and make a decision in the best interest of the county. We have to catch up the Manor with the hospital. We all know there are very good places in the hospital and some very bad places in the hospital,” Gant said.

More discussion followed until Kakda ended the discussion by asking, “Are we all onboard with doing a feasibility study?”

The committees, through nods or saying yes, answered in the affirmative to go ahead with the feasibility study. No motion, second or official vote was taken. It is not clear if this will need full county board approval.