It’s the kind of story that sends shivers down any parent’s spine—one that blends local politics, a serious health scare, and a deeply divided community response.
In the quiet suburb of South St. Paul, Minnesota, a city council member is under fire after a three-year-old in her care tested positive for methamphetamine.
Day Care Turned Crisis
Pam Bakken, a sitting city council member, also ran a licensed in-home day care.
In December 2024, a young boy spent the day in her care before becoming unusually hyper and talkative—so much so that his preschool teachers noticed.
Later that day, after vomiting at home, the toddler was rushed to the hospital.
Blood tests confirmed what no one expected: he had meth and other amphetamines in his system.
His mother, Victoria Kane, recalled how her son talked non-stop while sitting in the ER.
He later told her that he ate what he thought were “onion crumbs” off a bathroom rug at Bakken’s house.
Police believe those “crumbs” were actually meth residue.
Investigation and Suspension
Because of Bakken’s role on the city council, Lakeville Police—not South St. Paul officers—handled the investigation to avoid conflicts of interest.
Within 72 hours of the hospital visit, the Minnesota Department of Human Services shut down Bakken’s day care temporarily.
By March 4, her license was officially and indefinitely suspended.
Investigators also revealed she failed to complete a required background check on someone living in her home—a legal necessity for anyone coming into contact with children in Minnesota.
Legal Limbo and No Charges Filed
Despite the meth being confirmed in the child’s system, Dakota County prosecutors announced they would not press criminal charges.
Their reasoning?
They couldn’t definitively prove the drugs came from Bakken’s home, or that she was aware they were even there.
Medical experts added to the complexity, noting that the boy’s symptoms appeared unusually fast for a typical meth ingestion, which blurred the timeline even further.
Facing the Public’s Wrath
While criminal charges are off the table, Bakken’s public image took a severe hit.
During a packed city council meeting in February, residents didn’t hold back.
Several demanded she resign, calling her judgment into question. Some said she had “lost the public’s trust.” Bakken, clearly emotional, was seen wiping away tears during the meeting.
Still, a few residents stood by her, with one even bizarrely suggesting he wished his son could marry Bakken’s daughter—an attempt at support that only added confusion to the tension.
Recall Movement Gains—and Loses—Momentum
Fueled by public anger, a group called the Committee to Recall Bakken began collecting signatures to remove her from office.
They met the required 2,763 verified signatures needed to trigger a special election.
But after the county attorney declined to prosecute, the group surprisingly announced it was halting its efforts, saying the legal decision undermined the DHS investigation.
Calls for Resignation Continue
Despite pausing the recall, the committee made it clear they still believe Bakken should step down.
In a statement, they said, “We don’t believe Pam is a bad person… but she made some very poor decisions.”
They criticized what they called her attempt to “gaslight” the community and breach her oath of office.
As for Bakken? She hasn’t stepped down and remains on the city council, with her term set to expire in January 2029.