County board opts for mission, tradition

Four years or more will pass before the new county-owned Winchester House opens to offer skilled nursing care.

Much more time than that may elapse before Lake County residents can fully judge whether county board members made the right move in deciding this week to build a new and modern facility instead of rehabbing the existing Winchester House.

No one can complain that this was the decision of a divided board. The vote in favor of a new facility was 22-1, and Brent Paxton, the lone dissenter, talked about his vote more in terms of holding the line on property taxes than any firm belief that the new facility isn't needed or can't succeed.

Nor can anyone fairly say that county board members rushed into a vote without adequate study. They spent well over a year analyzing the situation and exploring all possible options. They sought the advice of a consultant, who delivered a comprehensive report.

The only truly obvious fact was that the county could not continue the status quo. Winchester House's resident population has declined from about 350 to about 250 in the past five years or so. The facility has been losing money -- an average of $4 million per year during the past four years. County subsidies were growing, forcing the board to lay off more than 50 workers. Overall, the Libertyville facility has seen its better days.

But many county board members were understandably reluctant to give up on the mission of county-provided care, a tradition that dates back more than a hundred years.

But changing times had brought financial trouble, in part, because Winchester House had failed to find any new niche and had trouble competing with the many private and specialized-care facilities.

The new, $31 million Winchester House will be smaller -- a 175-bed skilled nursing facility whose size will be more in keeping with the likely resident population. A smaller, new building also will be more efficient and less expensive to operate -- necessities in any decision to keep Winchester House going.

The county also has adopted at least two key recommendations made by its consultant. One, the new facility will include what the board calls a memory-care unit -- larger than the existing facility. That's important, given the number of baby boomers who will develop Alzheimer's disease as they age. Key, too, is the board decision to set up a seven-member advisory board of health care professionals whose task, in part, will be to ensure that the new facility keeps pace with a rapidly changing environment in senior care.

Will the new facility have a sufficiently well identified and clearly needed niche? Will it attract enough private-pay residents to help absorb the cost of catering largely to Medicaid patients? Time will tell. For now, one has to respect the thoughtful approach the board took in making this decision and its reluctance to turn away from a long history of county-provided care.