Here is what’s known to the public about the pending privatization of the Sunnyview Nursing and Rehabilitation Center:

• The decision to sell Sunnyview won’t be made this week. The decision was made Oct. 15 when union employees voted 134-5 to reject the Butler County Commissioners’ request for concessions to offset operating deficits at the county-owned home. Commissioners Bill McCarrier and Dale Pinkerton voted the following week to begin the search for a buyer, agreeing in principle at that time that the home, as well as the county, would be better off with a private owner.

• The county did not solicit bids for the sale. Rather, it circulated a request for proposals through its Chicago-based consultant, Marcus & Millchap. The RFP format gives potential buyers the leeway to assemble a variety of factors in its offer, provided they meet key minimum requirements — including, in this case, a minimum offer of $13.5 million.

• Eight companies submitted proposals. Marcus & Millchap, with the commissioners’ input, has narrowed the field to two. The commissioners traveled to the New York City area to tour five nursing homes owned by the two finalists and to familiarize themselves with the companies.

• The commissioners will not authorize a final sale this week, but they will authorize McCarrier, as chairman of the commissioners, to enter final negotiations with the company that submitted the most attractive proposal. The authorization vote appears on Wednesday’s agenda.

• Returning from their New York visit, McCarrier and Pinkerton both said they have in mind one proposal that stands out, but in keeping with Pennsylvania Sunshine Act requirements, they haven’t discussed whether they favor the same finalist. We’ll find out Wednesday.

• Jim Eckstein, the minority Democrat commissioner, has called for a voter referendum on whether to sell. That won’t happen. Solicitor Mike English has said a referendum on such an issue could not be done in Pennsylvania.

Here’s what we still don’t know:

• The names of the eight competing companies and details of their proposals have not been disclosed. County officials maintain divulging that information could jeopardize negotiations. County solicitor Mike English previously said the proposals will become public information after a sales contract is awarded.

The continued secrecy at this juncture is frustrating particularly to the employees and patients. According to the state Sunshine Act, the commissioners may withhold the names of the companies, but they don’t have to withhold them, and they do have an obligation to keep the public informed about the sale of a historical property. It would be newsworthy to know the companies’ geographic locations, their current holdings, and whether any of them have local ties.

In the interest of government transparency, release of the names of those who submitted proposals at this juncture is not an unreasonable request and that does not jeopardize negotiations. It would beneficial knowing with whom we’re about to do business.