On OPEN AGENDA S3 E26, we bring you county executive Julie Giordano's August 28th press conference addressing the Wicomico Nursing Home (WNH) crisis, at which she arduously attempted to defend her administration's actions. Ms. Giordano accepted no responsibility for the crisis, instead blaming “disgruntled” employees, the former director, the county council, and even Ernie Davis for WNH's problems, while also accusing them of spreading false information. Meanwhile, she heaped praise on WNH's current director, Tina Foskey, who was hired by Giordano this past April (without council confirmation). However, it's clear that the crisis only arose after Ms. Foskey took the reins and many questions about her prior work history have since been raised. Why is Ms. Giordano trying to marginalize and invalidate the more than two dozen individuals who made public comments at the 8/4 council meeting, as well as the hundreds of citizens who have inundated the council with calls and emails? In fact, at yesterday's press conference she even objected to citizens speaking on this matter at council meetings since the council has no authority over WNH. Unfortunately it is the only government venue at which grievances with the executive can be aired, as she will not face constituents unless she has complete control over the narrative. I guess she's not a big fan of free political speech. Additionally, she refused to accept questions from OPEN AGENDA on the premise that we are not an “accredited” news outlet, which is entirely irrelevant except where access is restricted for security reasons. But even after Ms. Giordano's 40 minute monologue containing an abundance of inconsistencies, contradictions and unverifiable assertions, not one single question was asked by the local mainstream media. Yet oddly, on her Facebook page that evening, Ms. Giordano thanked the media and public for their questions (that were never asked). It's become clear that the county executive is doing everything possible to hide the facts. Although I will not hold her youth, inexperience and incompetence against her, she would be well served to remember that it wasn't the Watergate break-in that brought down President Richard Nixon--it was the cover-up. Tune in and be informed.
Open Agenda TV S3 E46 County Executive Holds Press Conference Amid Doubts of Nursing Home Operations
Show Transcript
Disclaimer: The following transcript was auto-generated and may contain spelling or contextual errors.
You're watching Open Agenda.
>> Um, here with me is the assistant
director of administration, Steve
Leaken, Julie Gerardano, County
Executive, HR manager, Corey Houston,
and our director of our nursing home,
Tina Fosski. All right. Good morning,
everyone, and thank you for being here
today. We have a lot of information to
share with you, so bear with us as we go
through this. I want to begin uh by
saying that it is actually unfortunate
uh that we have to hold this press
conference here today.
Unfortunately, over the past several
weeks, what should be serious
conversations about the future of a
facility that cares for some of our
community's most vulnerable residents
has instead become politicized. My
political opponent along with particular
activists and certain elected officials
in our community has used the nursing
home as a political issue and in the
process has circulated misinformation,
made claims that are simply not true and
created expectations and promises that
are not supported by facts. That is
unacceptable to me because the people at
the center of this discussion are not
political talking points. They are
residents. They are families, employees,
and caregivers who deserve honesty,
stability, and responsible leadership.
They should not have to question the
future of their home or their workplace
because of rumors and political rhetoric
circulating throughout our community. I
have remained focused on the work that
needs to be done. But there comes a
point where misinformation must be
addressed directly, and that is why we
are here today. My purpose is not to
engage in political back and forth. My
purpose is is to put the facts before
the public, address some of the most
significant misinformation that has been
circulating, and explain what has
actually occurred at the nursing home,
and be very clear about where we go from
here. There are difficult decisions and
difficult conversations involved in
operating a nursing facility, but those
conversations must be based on facts,
not rumors, not political agendas or
promises that cannot realistically be
kept. So today, we intend to set the
record straight and I will address the
claims that have been made, provide the
facts that have too often been left out
of the public conversation and explain
the path forward for the Wakamako
Nursing Home and the residents that we
are entrusted to serve.
Just to give everyone a little bit of a
brief history of the nursing home. So,
the Wakamako Nursing Home um has an
important history rooted in providing
equal access health care in our
community. In 1960, Miss Agatha Pulk
proposed establishing a skilled nursing
facility after her father needed care,
but local nursing homes did not admit
African-American residents. With support
from the Beta Tall chapter of Fi Delta
Kappa and other community leaders, a
nonprofit effort nonprofit, sorry,
effort began to create a nursing home
that would serve residents regardless of
color, race, or creed. The nursing home
project was formally incorporated in
1961. Construction began several years
later, and a 50 bed Wakamico nursing
home was dedicated in 1966.
In 1972, the nonprofit board of trustees
experienced financial difficulties that
threatened the facility with closure.
Wakamako County at that point stepped in
to keep the nursing home open and
assumed ownership. Today, the Wakamako
nursing home is county-owned. It's a 102
bed facility and it provides long-term
care and rehabilitation services. The
key point in its history is that
Wakamako County did not create the
nursing home. It began as a
community-led nonprofit and the county
became its owner in 1972
to prevent the facility from closing. A
lot of people question whether we have
oversight of the nursing home. But I
want you to understand it is not in the
sense that Wakamako County government
handles every aspect of the nursing
home's day-to-day operations. There is
an important distinction between
ownership and daily operational
management. Wakamako County owns the
nursing home. However, the nursing home
administrator and management is
responsible for the actual dayto-day
operations of the facility. A recent
county job description is especially
clear. The administrator quote has
authority, responsibility, and
accountability for the overall
operational or sorry, for the overall
operation and financial success of the
facility. That means that the county
executive's office does not ordinarily
function as the nursing home's on-site
management team. It does not personally
make routine clinical decisions,
scheduling nursing shifts, conduct daily
staff meetings, supervise resident care,
or make countless operational decisions
required to run a licensed skilled
nursing facility. So, I would
characterize the structure as such.
Wakcomo County owns the nursing home,
but the nursing home administrator and
management are responsible for the
facility's day-to-day operations. County
ownership should not be confused with
the county executive personally managing
the daily operations of a licensed
nursing facility. It is also important
to remember that the individuals who
work at the Wakamako Nursing Home are
not county employees. They are employees
of the nursing home. They have made it
clear they do not want to be county
employees, nor do they want the nursing
home converted into a county department.
Before that concept is used as a
political talking point included in a
campaign press release or presented to
the public as a proposed solution, I
would strongly suggest speaking directly
with the people who would actually be
affected by such a significant change.
Their voices and concerns should be part
of the conversation before anyone makes
promises or proposals on their behalf.
All that being said, this administration
met with the nursing home administrator
on a quarterly basis, particularly
during the county's capital improvement
plan and annual budget process. In
addition, members of our administration
typically visited the nursing home two
to three times per year. During those
meetings and visits, we routinely asked
the previous administrator how the
facility was doing, whether there were
any concerns, or whether the county
could provide any additional assistance.
We were consistently told that things
were going well, and that there were no
significant issues requiring the
county's attention. We did work with the
previous administrator to address
specific capital needs, including the
installation of a new generator. We were
also aware that Senator Johnny Mounts
had successfully secured a bond bill to
assist with the replacement of the
nursing home's roof. But beyond those
capital projects, however, we were
repeatedly assured that the facility was
operating appropriately.
At that time, we had no reason to
believe otherwise. We were not receiving
complaints from employees. We were not
hearing concerns from residents or their
families. We were not being notified by
the state of any significant operational
problems. Based on the information that
was being provided to us, there was
nothing that would have indicated the
extent of the issues that would later
come to our attention. And as a matter
of fact, the only significant concern
that was brought to our attention during
the previous administration involved a
lawsuit filed against the nursing home.
I'll bet you some of you didn't even
know there was a lawsuit filed against
the nursing home. It was by a laboratory
company. The dispute stemmed from unpaid
charges for CO 19 testing that, as we
understood it, resulted from an
insurance billing error. Ultimately, the
nursing home reached a settlement with
the laboratory company for more than
$400,000.
Fortunately, the nursing home did have
the funds to cover the settlement
without the county requiring or uh the
county to pay the underlying obligation.
However, the county did provide and pay
for the legal counsel necessary to
represent the nursing home and resolve
the matter. It was not until Tina Fosski
was hired as the new nursing home
administrator and began taking a com
comprehensive look at the facility's
operations, finances, policies, and
internal practices that we started to
understand the full picture. As she
began identifying concerns and bringing
them directly to the county's attention,
it became increasingly clear why many of
these issues, including significant
financial and operational concerns, had
never been brought forward by the
previous administration. The difference
has been transparency.
When Tina identifies a problem, she has
communicated it. When she needs
assistance, she asks for it. when
something needs to be corrected, she
works with us to address it. That level
of communication has allowed the county
to become aware of issues that quite
simply we had not been even told
existed. So, I will start with the good
news. The quality of care for our
residents and the cleanliness of the
facility have remained strong, earning
the Wakamako County Nursing Home a
four-star rating. A rating that the
facility still maintains today. That is
important and it is a credit to the
employees who work there every day and
care for our residents. Where the
concerns have arisen, however, is not
with resident care, but rather with
certain financial controls and personnel
practices that have occurred under the
previous administrator. One example
involves the handling of employee
vacation time. Under the previous
administrator, certain employees were
permitted to cash out accumulated
vacation time whenever they chose rather
than actually taking the vacation. Those
employees were then issued checks for
the value of that vacation time. And
those payments were reportedly made
without taxes being withheld. This was
not a standard county practice, nor was
it a policy contained in the nursing
home's personnel manual. To our
knowledge, it was not a practice
utilized by any other nursing home
administrator. It was a practice that
occurred solely under the previous
administrator. The concern is not simply
that the employees were permitted to
cash out vacation time. The larger issue
is the lack of established policy,
consistency, appropriate financial
controls, and proper payroll procedures
surrounding those payments. Practices
involving employee compensation and
funds must be clearly authorized,
properly documented, consistently
applied, and handled in accordance with
applicable payroll and tax requirements.
Another example involves a nursing
home's debit card and the lack of
appropriate financial safeguards
surrounding its use. Under the previous
administrator, there was one debit card
connected directly to the nursing home's
primary bank account, and that card was
reportedly kept at the front desk where
multiple individuals could access and
use it. This created significant
financial risk. If that debit card
information had been compromised or
stolen during a transaction, an
unauthorized individual could
potentially have gained access to the
funds of the nursing home's primary
operating account. The new
administrator, Tina, has since taken
possession of a debit card and secured
it in a safe location. She is also
moving the facility towards a controlled
purchasing card system, which will
provide greater accountability,
establish appropriate spending controls,
and significantly reduce the potential
of fraud or unauthorized access to the
nursing homes funds. As far as the
employee terminations have occurred,
there has been a great deal of
misinformation and misunderstanding
surrounding this issue as well. The
nursing home employs just over about a
hundred people. And since Tina has
become administrator, three
I'm going to say that again, three
employees have been terminated. Not
seven, not 15, not 20, three people have
been terminated. And each one of those
terminations was made for cause and the
appropriate progressive disciplinary
measures were followed. Because these
are confidential personnel matters, I
cannot and will not publicly discuss the
specific circumstances surrounding any
individual's termination. What I can say
is that this administration and the
state supports the personnel actions
that were taken and the nursing home has
followed applicable processes and
requirements. What I find particularly
noteworthy is where some of those
grievances have been directed. Rather
than pursuing the established
administrative or legal avenues
available to any employee who believes
they were wrongfully terminated, the
personnel disputes have instead been
brought to the political podium of the
county council.
That is an important distinction
distinction because the county council
is not the appropriate forum for
adjudicating individual personnel
disputes of the nursing home. Public
comment at council meeting does not
provide the per full personnel record.
the disciplinary history or the do uh
the documentation behind an employment
decision and confidentiality
requirements prevent the nursing home as
well as administration from publicly
presenting the information in response.
As a result, the public only hears one
side of the personnel matter while the
employer and the county are legally and
professionally constrained from
discussing the facts necessary to
provide the other side. that should not
be mistaken for evidence that the
allegations
being made are uh accurate. If any of
the terminated employees would like to
sign a waiver, allowing me to share the
specifics of their termination, I would
be happy to do so.
Some employees also have expressed
frustrations with new policies that TINA
has put in or has implemented. But I
think it's important for the public to
understand what some of those policies
actually are and why they were put in
place. You hear all these horrible
policies are out there. This was one of
them. Tina has implemented a cell phone
and earbud policy because she does not
believe that employees should be
distracted by their phones or have
earbuds in their ears while they are
responsibly caring for our residents.
The expectation is simple. When you are
caring for our residents, your attention
should be on the residents.
Employees were also asked to park on the
side of the building rather than
directly in front of the facility. The
purpose was not to inconvenience
employees. It was to make uh accessible
parking spaces available for residents,
families, visitors, and others coming to
the nursing home. But perhaps one of the
biggest changes for some employees has
been the end of the inappropriate
practices involving bonuses and vacation
payouts. Tina has made it clear that she
would rather see the nursing home's
resources invested back into the
facility, its residents, and its
workforce in ways that benefit everyone,
not just the employees of her choice.
That means replacing curtains that were
being held up with zip ties. It means
providing raises to kitchen employees
who had reportedly not had a raise in
over a decade.
And it means investing in dietitionian
services to help ensure that residents
meals and nutritional plans
appropriately reflect their individual
medical and dietary needs. Those may not
be popular changes amongst everyone,
particularly with individuals who
benefited from the previous policies.
But the priority of the nursing home
must be clear. resident care,
responsible financial management, and
creating a professional environment for
the people who live and work there.
But there are a lot of good things that
I want to talk about that TINA has
implemented. But for weeks now, much of
what the public has heard about the
nursing home has been negative, right?
The complaints, the accusations, the
misinformation, and in some places,
claims that are just not simply
supported by the facts. And we're going
to address a lot of those in just a few
moments. But what has largely been
missing from this conversation uh is the
positive changes that have taken place
since April 9th when Tina was hired. The
fact is Tina has accomplished a great
deal in a relatively short period of
time. She has identified long-standing
issues, strengthened accountability,
implemented needed policies, improved
financial controls, invested in her
employees, and most importantly, kept
the focus where it belongs, on the
residents and the quality of care that
they receive. So, before we spend any
more time talking about the accusations,
I want the public to hear about the very
real and positive changes that Tina has
already accomplished for the Wakamico
nursing home. The first thing I want to
talk about are hot plates. Seems simple.
When food was delivered to residents
rooms, it was on a warming cart with
saran wrap on top. By the time the
residents got the food and were able to
eat, their food was tepid at best. Tina
has now purchased warming plates, hot
plates, so when they get their breakfast
or their lunch or their dinner, it's
actually hot.
Easy change. Probably should have been
done years ago, but that's one of the
things that she has implemented. We have
also digitized all patient files in two
days time which were kept on paper in
unlocked filing cabinets. Employee
personnel records were kept on
handwritten index cards which included
identifying information such as social
security numbers, home addresses, etc.
which has all been remedied.
Medicare and Medicaid were not properly
build for resident stays resulting in a
significant loss of revenue for the
nursing home. So to address this issue
from occurring in the future, we've
retained a Medicare and Medicaid billing
specialist to review the processes and
ensure that all future claims are
submitted accurately and build
appropriately for reimbursement rates.
She's also brought to our attention the
issue involving the state funding that
was awarded to the nursing home through
the bond bill. Under the previous
administrator, the responsibility to
secure those funds was given to the
maintenance person. the maintenance
person did not follow through with
getting that. So, we have gone a year
and a half with $75,000 sitting at the
state that our staff has actually put
the paperwork forward to ensure that
they get those funds.
So, the future of the nursing home and
those are just a few things that that
she has done, but I wanted to talk about
the good things. I am going to make
myself explicitly clear in front of
every single person here and any person
listening. Makamako County has
absolutely no plans of selling or
privatizing the nursing home. We also
have no plans to what did they say? Oh,
dismantle the nursing home. Any
suggestion otherwise is simply
inaccurate. In fact, the actions of this
administration demonstrate the exact
opposite. Since the new director has
assumed her position, county staff have
dedicated over a hundred staff hours,
assisting her at her request with
reviewing and developing policies,
strengthening financial practices,
addressing personnel matters, and
providing administrative support. That
work has involved multiple county
departments and has been done for one
reason, to help stabilize the nursing
home, to strengthen its operations and
position it for long-term success just
as we did in 1972.
It simply does not make sense to suggest
that I would allow my staff to dedicate
a 100 hours of tax. I mean, they're
taxfunded, taxpayer funded. I would not
allow them to dedicate that level of
staff time and resources and expertise
to improve the nursing home if our
intention were to turn around and sell
it or privatize it. We are putting in
this effort because we want the nursing
home to succeed and remain an important
uh resource for this community. And I
also want to correct the conception that
as county executive that I could just
simply decide to sell the nursing home
on my own. I don't know if you know this
or not. I do not have that authority. A
decision of that magnitude would require
both action or actions by both branches
of government. Additionally, because the
nursing home property is a county-owned
public asset, the appropriate public
process would have to be followed,
including the required steps associated
with declaring the county property
surplus and providing an opportunity for
public input.
There has been a tremendous amount of
misinformation and speculation
surrounding the nursing home. And
repeating a rumor over and over again
does not make it true. The facts are
straightforward. There is no plan to
sell. There is no plan to privatize. And
our focus is on supporting leadership,
strengthening its operations, protecting
its future, and ensuring that it can
continue serving the residents and the
families who depend on it. Excuse me one
moment.
The next thing that I want to address is
the emergency legislation recently
introduced by the county council
concerning the Wakamico nursing home
because there are serious questions
about whether this legislation is
consistent with the Wakamako County
Charter. First, let me be clear.
Oversight is appropriate. Accountability
is appropriate. But we must operate
within the charter. This legislation
does not simply create an advisory
commission, which is the only part of
the bill that this administration agrees
with. As a matter of fact, it's
something that I have been working on
for several months,
but it fundamentally changes the
governmental structure surrounding the
nursing home. The bill states that the
nursing home director will be appointed
by the county executive with council
approval and will serve as the quote
head of the Wakamako County nursing home
and will report directly to the county
director of administration. It also
places responsibility for the overall
management and operation of the nursing
home within that director. That
structure looks remarkably similar to a
county department or executive branch
agency. But there is a problem. Section
503 of the county charter specifically
identifies the departments of county
government and the nursing home is not
one of them. All of our county
departments fall under our tax ID. The
Wakamico nursing home has its own tax
ID.
More importantly, the charter states
that offices and departments may be
created, merged, or abolished only
through legislation, are you ready?
Proposed by the county executive and
passed by the county council. I'm going
to say that again. Offices and
departments may be created, merged, or
abolished only through legislation
proposed by the county executive and
passed by the county council. This
legislation was not proposed by the
county executive. It was introduced by
the council president. So, the question
the council needs to answer is simple.
Is the nursing home now a county
department or executive branch agency
under this legislation or isn't it? And
if it is, then why wasn't the process
required by section 503 of the charter
followed? If it isn't, then why does
this legislation place the nursing home
director under the director of
administration and attempt to give both
branches of government direct authority
over the director? There's also another
significant issue. Section 314 of the
charter is titled non-inference with the
executive branch. It prohibits members
of the council from taking part in the
appointment or removal of county
officers or employees except where
specifically authorized by the charter.
Yet, this legislation gives the county
council the power with five votes to
terminate the nursing home, excuse me,
nursing home director. And perhaps most
importantly, the council introduced this
as emergency legislation.
The charter is very specific about what
cannot be done through an emergency
bill. Section 311G states that emergency
measure cannot include a measure quote
creating or abolishing any office or
changing the salary term or duty of any
officer. Yet, this emergency bill
establishes the position and authority
of the nursing home director, dictates
who appoints the director, determines
who the director reports to, establishes
numerous duties, requires quarterly
appearances before the council, creates
budget responsibilities, imposes
reporting requirements, and establishes
a new mechanism for removing the
director. Those provisions raise a very
serious charter question on the face of
the legislation itself. The charter is
not optional. Neither the county
executive nor the county council gets to
ignore it when it becomes inconvenient.
This is not about whether the nursing
home should have oversight. It
absolutely should. This is about who has
the legal authority to exercise that
oversight.
Yeah. How the authority must be
exercised and whether one branch of
county government can give itself power
that the charter does not provide. If
changes to the nursing home's
governmental structure are necessary,
then we should make those changes
thoughtfully, transparently, and most
importantly, legally, and in accordance
with our charter. If the council passes
this legislation, it will be legally
challenged. End of story. Before I turn
it over to Steve, our assistant director
of administration, I want to address
something that has become increasingly
obvious over the last several weeks.
Throughout this entire controversy,
there have been individuals
working overtime to create and amplify
chaos. They have spoken at council
meetings, written letters, circulated
accusations, and taken to social media
to spread their version of events. They
include community activists, candidates
for public office, and even some current
elected officials. And there is a common
thread that should not be ignored. Many
of the loudest voices involved in this
effort also happen to support my
political opponent. Now, people are in
certainly entitled to like if they want
to support whoever they choose, they're
entitled to criticize me and my
administration that comes with public
office. But will I I will not accept is
turning the residents of the Wakamico
nursing home, some of the most
vulnerable members of our community,
into political pawns in an election year
narrative. If you disagree with me
politically, then criticize me. If you
disagree with my policies, challenge my
policies. If you want to support my
opponent, then support my opponent. But
do not use our nursing home residents,
their families, and fear and uncertainty
surrounding their care as political
ammunition.
To those of you who have knowingly
contributed to that effort, I have a
very simple message for you. Shame on
you. Our residents deserve better. And
at the end of the day, this should not
be about politics. It should be about or
it should not be about personalities,
elections, disgruntled former employees,
or who can generate the most outrage on
social media. It should be about the
residents at the Wakamico nursing home.
They are the reason this facility exists
and their care, dignity, safety, and
stability must remain a priority. The
facts show that we were long-standing
financial, administrative, and
operational issues that needed to be
addressed. The new leadership identified
those problems, brought them forward
instead of hiding them, and began the
difficult work of correcting them. And
at the same time, the quality of
resident care has remained strong, and
meaningful improvements are being made
throughout the facility. And despite
what has repeatedly been said, we are
not selling the nursing home. We are not
privatizing the nursing home. We are
working together to strengthen it.
Nearly again, and I said this, a hundred
hours of county staff time have already
been dedicated to assisting its new
leadership because we want this facility
to succeed and remain an important part
of the community for generations to
come. There will undoubtedly be
disagreements about how we move forward.
That is part of government. But those
discussions must be grounded in facts
guided by the law and the county charter
and focused on what is best for the
people we serve. Not driven by political
agendas or misinformation. So my message
today is simple. Enough with the rumors.
Enough with the fear. Enough with using
our most vulnerable residents as
political ammunition. The Wakamako
Nursing Home has served this community
for 60 years. When it faced closure in
1972, Wakcomo County stepped in to
protect it. And today, our
responsibility is no different. We will
protect the nursing home. We will
support the people working to make it
better. And we will address the problems
when we find them. And above all else,
we will continue fighting to ensure that
the residents who call the Wakamako
Nursing Home their home receive the
quality care, dignity, and stability
they deserve. That is where our
attention belongs, and that is where my
attention will remain. Um we will open
it up uh to some questions. We have
about 10 minutes. Um so any accredited
news agencies uh feel free to ask your
question if you have anything
>> here.
>> You're not an accredited news agency.
>> Constitution accredited news agency.
You're being arbitrary, capriccious, and
exclusionary.
>> You spread false narratives. I am not
entertaining you.
>> Anybody else?
>> Refuse to answer your questions. There
will be legal consequences. Do you
understand?
>> Is there anybody who is an accredited
news agency that has any questions? WMD,
WBO?
No. All right. That concludes this and
uh we thank you so much for your time.
