State senator asks nursing home officials to reconsider closing

EDITOR’S NOTE: State Sen. Dave Murman has sent the following letter to officials of the nonprofit corporation that recently closed a nursing home in Arapahoe:

Mr. Randy Bury

President & CEO

Evangelical Lutheran Good Samaritan Society Sioux Falls, SD

Mr. Bill Gassen

President & CEO Sanford Health Sioux Falls, SD

Mr. Nate Schema

VP of Operations

Evangelical Lutheran Good Samaritan Society

Sioux Falls, SD

Dear Messrs. Bury, Schema and Gassen,

I represent District 38 which includes the city of Arapahoe, Nebraska and am writing with regard to your recently announced plans to close the Good Samaritan facility in that community.

While I have heard various reasons offered by the Society to justify the closing, I would like to focus on the affect this decision has on the residents, their families, and the Arapahoe community at large and the Society’s apparent decision to preclude selling the facility to the city of Arapahoe or others in order to continue operations.

I’m sure that you can imagine, the Society’s decision has had a devastating impact on the residents, their families, and the greater community. It has been hard for those affected to find other suitable facilities, and families that love and support your clients will have difficulty doing so from long distances. It will also have a huge negative impact on the community at large.

I have been contacted by a number of affected individuals, along with the mayor of Arapahoe and community leaders explaining what this will mean to those involved. The sixty-day notice has multiplied the anxiety and uncertainty for those relying on the services offered as well as their families.

While I realize that absent contractual obligations, the Society (and/or Sanford) has the right to manage its properties as best as it sees fit, what has been hard for me to understand is its seeming intransigence to even consider allowing the city of Arapahoe or another entity the opportunity to continue operating the facility in some fashion.

As a not-for-profit organization, why would the Society be concerned about the city’s good faith effort to continue to offer services? How could you be worried about competition? With everything at stake, why wouldn’t you do everything possible to facilitate this offer?

I understand that the Society’s mission is “to share God’s love in word and deed by providing shelter and supportive services to older persons and others in need, believing that “ Christ’s Love, Everyone Is Someone”. From the Society’s website I learned that your services are driven by ‘’faith, love and compassion” believing the “everyone deserves to be treated with respect, dignity and empathy”.

In the same manner, Sanford Health has stated its commitment “to three pillars: Patients, people and communities.”

How best to fulfill this mission and these stated goals than by allowing the city or another entity the opportunity to try and continue operations? By doing so, you would be fulfilling your stated objectives and providing those who have trusted Good Sam over the years with the compassion, respect and dignity that they deserve.

Please prayerfully reconsider your decision in this matter. Sincerely,

Sen. Dave Murman

District 38