PDH Save Our Hospital - Brand new update of Foundation proposal

Any news? Anyone?
Treasure

Go to pdhcf.org for the latest proposal...Sandy

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by treasure:

Any news? Anyone?
Treasure

---

Thank you. I have seen this version of the proposal by the PDH Foundation and doctors before, and it looks very good to me. Now I have another question: What needs to happen in order for this proposal to be implemented?

As I recall, that can't happen unless the PDH Board of Directors votes in favor of the Foundation's proposal. And last I heard, the PDH Board had numerous objections to it. Does anyone know if that has changed?

treasure

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Sandy2y:

Go to pdhcf.org for the latest proposal...Sandy

---

You can call 823-8312 with your questions. They're very good about answering...Sandy

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by treasure:

Thank you. I have seen this version of the proposal by the PDH Foundation and doctors before, and it looks very good to me. Now I have another question: What needs to happen in order for this proposal to be implemented?

As I recall, that can't happen unless the PDH Board of Directors votes in favor of the Foundation's proposal. And last I heard, the PDH Board had numerous objections to it. Does anyone know if that has changed?...

---

I don't know what has changed. I did attend a few of the gatherings involving PDH Board of Directors, including the last one at Palm Drive Hospital in the conference room near the entrance. I have never gotten the impression that the current BOD has much passion for reopening the hospital. This could be for several reasons, the main one being that their lack of oversight of the previous CEO and CFO contributed to, if not caused, the sudden realization that there was no money and therefore immediate closure. I do not think we should be leaving the ultimate decisions as to reopening the hospital to this BOD...they've already shown us their lack of leadership, involvement, and, I think, irresponsibility regarding the hospital administration who was 'running' things when the truth suddenly became known.

At the last meeting, and I didn't take notes, there was a large presentation by the ambulance company who serves Sonoma and Mendocino counties. After the presentation, the BOD thanked them for their presentation without asking any critical, in-depth questions. This is what I mean about this BOD, they're sleepy and not all that passionate about the hospital. We were getting the impression that the ambulance system is so good, why we may not even need a hospital? Then, God Bless 'em, Dan Smith offered statistics that had been overlooked in the presentation, and, by golly, only 15% of people who go to the hospital go by ambulance. The other 85% either drive themselves, are driven by family or friends, or are covered by their insurance. We were also able to understand that the ambulances have been stacking up at major Santa Rosa hospitals, so that the emergency care of the patients was delayed and the availability of ambulances for other emergencies was reduced because of the wait time, stacking, at the other hospitals. Again, thanks to Dan Smith, we were able to find out what Palm Drive Hospital's participation as a 'receiving' hospital had been for the ambulances...in a word, significant.

It was at about this time that the public participation at the meeting was to come to an end, in fact things had gone over a bit. But, to go back to the beginning, once the agenda was read and understood, and Nancy Dobbs made a motion to accept the minutes of the last meeting (wow, jeez) and there was a brief time when the public could comment or question something related to PDH that was not on the agenda. A woman in the front row noted that the BOD had hired, or was hiring, a new CFO and her question was "was the BOD doing anything to put in place a structure that would keep phony financial statements and untruths from happening again?" Marsha Sue Lustig, president of the BOD, noted her comment and said that would come under the topic of CFO. My thought at that moment was that the lack of oversight was not the same as the hiring of a new CFO. That, I believe, is the problem with this BOD. They're just not connected, not engaged, in the real issues affecting PDH, but instead labor away on more superficial aspects.

I do not believe we will be able to successfully, or even in a timely manner, be able to reopen PDH with this lackluster BOD in place.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by treasure:

Thank you. I have seen this version of the proposal by the PDH Foundation and doctors before, and it looks very good to me. Now I have another question: What needs to happen in order for this proposal to be implemented?

As I recall, that can't happen unless the PDH Board of Directors votes in favor of the Foundation's proposal. And last I heard, the PDH Board had numerous objections to it. Does anyone know if that has changed?

treasure

---

At 11:05 AM today (August 25), the PDH Foundation and Doctors submitted a revised version of their proposal to the District Board. This version is 21 pages, the previous was 11. I am sure that it will appear on the Foundation website any minute now.

There are numerous noteworthy changes in this version.

• pages 3-5, Proposal Outline
• page 7, mention of the very recent North Bay earthquake and its relevance to us all
• pages 15-16, Steps to Reopening
• Four critical appendices A, B, C, and D

This reminds me of a dream someone had long ago of comedian Bob Hope bouncing along on a pogo stick. Translation? "Hope Springs Eternal."

treasure

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by treasure:

At 11:05 AM today (August 25), the PDH Foundation and Doctors submitted a revised version of their proposal to the District Board. This version is 21 pages, the previous was 11. I am sure that it will appear on the Foundation website any minute now....

---

The new proposal is here.

It seems to me that sufficient time has elapsed to allow for a definitive conclusion regarding the future status of our hospital, re-open or shut down permanently. The Board continues to posture as if considering a proposal to re-open while refusing the only proposal that has been presented. The PDH Foundation has presented a revised proposal which continues to include a feature that was noted as a conflict-of-interest, the use of the HarmoniMD, and considered objectionable in the original proposal. Accusatory speculation has been tossed about from both sides and there's no question that the primary players in this game have opposing self-serving interests motivating their actions. The result, a stale-mate – the losers, West County residents.

It's time to repeal the Palm Drive Parcel Tax. Both sides of the table will of course oppose this idea and they will both have valid self-serving justifications as to why we should wait to take such action. However it is this taxpayer's opinion that we have waited long enough. Repealing the tax is a process that will take time to effect. Ultimately it will involve a ballot measure, this is no small scale action and will certainly not finalize in any short order. I suggest we waste no more time and take the only definitive action that appears to be available to us regarding this unfortunate situation. If the hospital players can't come to an agreement to save our hospital perhaps they will step up to the plate with a hospital plan in an effort to save the tax.........

The Palm Drive Parcel Tax will stay in place until all debts are paid off. The hospital closure does not absolve the PDHD of its financial obligations which are, for the most part, paid by the parcel tax.

A ballot measure would be meaningless as we cant use the outcome to escape our obligations.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Rustie:

...It's time to repeal the Palm Drive Parcel Tax. Both sides of the table will of course oppose this idea and they will both have valid self-serving justifications as to why we should wait to take such action. However it is this taxpayer's opinion that we have waited long enough. Repealing the tax is a process...

---

Whoa. Hold your horses. This is a big, important issue for the whole area that uses Palm Drive Hospital, and not one to be given up on so quickly. After my post, I received a response, which I will quote, in part, and it was encouraging to me to think that in November two of our current Board members could be replaced in the election. I haven't checked it out yet, but encourage you to do so. This replacement would be critical to our success in having a hospital here once again. Here's the quote I received, which I will leave nameless:

"I agree with your criticism of the district board, (BOD). They want the hospital to stay shuttered, but with all the wonderful movers and shakers in the area like Dan, Gail Smith, Dr. Rich Powers, I’m sure the hospital will reopen, and this time stay open. Dennis Colhurst and Dr. Powers will be running for District Board in the November election, and they want the hospital reopened permanently, so Nancy Dobbs and Sandra Bodley will be outvoted......The new proposal for calling it Sonoma West Medical Center can be read at pdhcf.org"

Let's all hang in there and do what needs to be done to have our hospital once again! dg.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Rustie:

It seems to me that sufficient time has elapsed to allow for a definitive conclusion regarding the future status of our hospital, re-open or shut down permanently. The Board continues to posture as if considering a proposal to re-open while refusing the only proposal that has been presented...

---

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Sebtown1968:

The Palm Drive Parcel Tax will stay in place until all debts are paid off. The hospital closure does not absolve the PDHD of its financial obligations which are, for the most part, paid by the parcel tax.

A ballot measure would be meaningless as we cant use the outcome to escape our obligations.

---

Don't you mean the financial obligation borne by Wells Fargo Bank? This parcel tax was foisted on the taxpayer and if the tax goes away Wells Fargo holds the obligation. Sorry, but I pay $1482/mo to Kaiser. I got no dog in this hunt except I get to pay taxes for something I will never ever get any personal benefit from. I still fail to see how on earth this hospital can't make ends meet given the huge subsidy from the public, many, if not most, of whom just drive by the hospital. If it goes away I am against paying Wells. Period.

Regardless, we still owe the money until it is paid off. You can love it or hate it, but it really doesn't matter. We will be paying the parcel tax for years (decades) after PDH is long gone.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by jbox:

Don't you mean the financial obligation borne by Wells Fargo Bank? This parcel tax was foisted on the taxpayer and if the tax goes away Wells Fargo holds the obligation...

---

i don't think this is accurate. perhaps the board can't kill the district and tax, voters can. wells would probably get the land, building, and equipment as collateral for the defaulted bond. it would take some organizers to get a referendum on the ballot, and it would probably pass.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Sebtown1968:

Regardless, we still owe the money until it is paid off. You can love it or hate it, but it really doesn't matter. We will be paying the parcel tax for years (decades) after PDH is long gone.

---

What I say is true. I was on the PDHD board from 2012-2013

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Sebtown1968:

Regardless, we still owe the money until it is paid off. You can love it or hate it, but it really doesn't matter. We will be paying the parcel tax for years (decades) after PDH is long gone.

---

I object to the notion that the district board wants the hospital closed and that their actions were self serving. Continued attacks only make things worse and perpetuates the rift. The foundation proposal calls for a 13 member board to run the hospital, with the members approved by the foundation and the district. We need to move on, stop the attacks, look for the best solution, otherwise the new board could easily break into to factions and maneuver for those 7 controlling votes.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Dustyg:

Whoa. Hold your horses. This is a big, important issue for the whole area that uses Palm Drive Hospital, and not one to be given up on so quickly. After my post, I received a response, which I will quote, in part, and it was encouraging to me to think that in November two of our current Board members could be replaced in the election. I haven't checked it out yet, but encourage you to do so. This replacement would be critical to our success in having a hospital here once again. Here's the quote I received, which I will leave nameless:

"I agree with your criticism of the district board, (BOD). They want the hospital to stay shuttered, but with all the wonderful movers and shakers in the area like Dan, Gail Smith, Dr. Rich Powers, I’m sure the hospital will reopen, and this time stay open. Dennis Colhurst and Dr. Powers will be running for District Board in the November election, and they want the hospital reopened permanently, so Nancy Dobbs and Sandra Bodley will be outvoted......The new proposal for calling it Sonoma West Medical Center can be read at pdhcf.org"

Let's all hang in there and do what needs to be done to have our hospital once again! dg.

---

I believe you might be confusing the Parcel Tax with the General Obligation Bond. The GO Bond was approved in April of 2000 in the amount of $5.9 million and it matures in 2030. You are correct, the GO bond is our debt and we are obligated to pay that tax, until the bond matures, with or without a hospital. We are not obligated to any rate of return to the investors nor is it our obligation to ensure that the investors or Wells Fargo, the trustee, win or lose on the deal. There are situations where bankruptcy can lead to default of a GO Bond. I have no idea if that would apply to the PDHCD bond.

The GO Bond however is not the same as the parcel tax. My understanding is that the parcel tax was first approved in 2001 in the amount of $60 per parcel per year for five years. These funds were to pay for uncompensated care and to subsidize other operations such as the ER. In 2004 Measure W went on the ballot and was approved. Measure W was presented on the ballot as a means to 'ensure survival of Palm Drive Hospital and access to local ER and acute care, medical and physician services, and to provide for ongoing expenses, repairs and improvements'. The yes/no ballot question was: Shall PDHCD repeal its existing tax (the above mentioned $60/parcel) and levy a special tax of up to $155. While Measure W carefully obliterated the sunset provision that was included in its 2001 predecessor it did not, similar to its predecessor, indicate that revenues generated from this tax would be used to pay off GO Bond debt or obligate us indefinitely to any other subsequent loans.

Apparently there is a lien on parcel tax revenues securing 2005 & 2010 bond debt as well as the recent $450K loan that was approved by the bankruptcy court judge this year. That having been noted, I have been unable to locate any language in Measure W that indicates we voted on an open end tax to cover all unknown future debt with or without the hospital's existence.

I believe that you are incorrect in your assertion that a ballot measure is meaningless and that we are stuck with this tax, hospital or not. If you have any facts to substantiate your opinion I would be delighted to hear them and learn. Telling us that what you say is true because you were on the board for a year does not equate to anything more than “cuz I said so...”

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Sebtown1968:

The Palm Drive Parcel Tax will stay in place until all debts are paid off. The hospital closure does not absolve the PDHD of its financial obligations which are, for the most part, paid by the parcel tax.

A ballot measure would be meaningless as we cant use the outcome to escape our obligations.

---

Exactly – so why are we not actually doing anything? If the integrity &/or motivations of board members are in question then why did we not recall those folks. There was a lot of talk about it but no “doing”. So here we sit and now we are suppose to hang our hopes on the outcome of the November election. OK, it's almost November, we can wait a little longer. Let's fast forward and say that Dennis Colhurst and Dr. Richard Powers are now on the Palm Drive District Board and they outvote those board members that are suspected of trying to keep the hospital closed. What is the hospital plan that the board will be voting on to implement? Is it the Palm Drive Health Care Foundation's plan? If so, is no one concerned about the obvious conflict-of-interest in as much as both Dennis Colhurst and Dr. Powers also sit on the board of the PDHCF? Are we so busy giving a wink and a nod to our “wonderful movers and shakers” that we fail to notice when the movement is shaking out via unethical business practices?

Currently the future of our hospital appears to be an open-ended chess game and the stakes for the players at the table seem to have little to do with the best interests of our community. How long are you willing to play the pawn and wait...........?

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Dustyg:

Whoa. Hold your horses. This is a big, important issue for the whole area that uses Palm Drive Hospital, and not one to be given up on so quickly. After my post, I received a response, which I will quote, in part, and it was encouraging to me to think that in November two of our current Board members could be replaced in the election. I haven't checked it out yet, but encourage you to do so. This replacement would be critical to our success in having a hospital here once again. Here's the quote I received, which I will leave nameless:

"I agree with your criticism of the district board, (BOD). They want the hospital to stay shuttered, but with all the wonderful movers and shakers in the area like Dan, Gail Smith, Dr. Rich Powers, I’m sure the hospital will reopen, and this time stay open. Dennis Colhurst and Dr. Powers will be running for District Board in the November election, and they want the hospital reopened permanently, so Nancy Dobbs and Sandra Bodley will be outvoted......The new proposal for calling it Sonoma West Medical Center can be read at pdhcf.org"

Let's all hang in there and do what needs to be done to have our hospital once again! dg.

---

Whoa, again! Do you want a hospital in Sebastopol again, or not? I get the feeling you like to fight....why not get busy working to get our hospital back....

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Rustie:

Exactly – so why are we not actually doing anything? .....

---

Yes, I would like to see a community hospital in Sebastopol. Currently what I see is a stale-mate between some local major players and Wells Fargo. Neither side seem to be willing to give up any part of their self-serving interests in an effort to move negotiations forward toward realizing the re-opening of our hospital. As I suggested in my original post, if you bothered to take the time to consider it, repealing the parcel tax may well push this process to a more expedient resolution.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Dustyg:

Whoa, again! Do you want a hospital in Sebastopol again, or not? I get the feeling you like to fight....why not get busy working to get our hospital back....

---

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Dustyg:

Whoa, again! Do you want a hospital in Sebastopol again, or not? I get the feeling you like to fight....why not get busy working to get our hospital back....

---

Not sure how you discern that I like to fight based on my posts but I find it interesting that rather than respond to any of my points you chose instead to try to slap me down with subtle sarcasm.

For your convenience I will restate the three questions I posited in my previous post to you in the hopes that you, and others, will choose to address these important issues. Setting the stage, I took your lead that we may possibly see Dennis Colhurst and Dr Powers on the Palm Drive District board after the November election. This, according to the information that you presented, will likely lead to a permanent resolution to our current hospital crisis as these folks will outvote those suspected of trying to keep the hospital closed.

Again, my questions:
Question 1: When this occurs what hospital plan will the board be voting on?
Question 2: Will it be the Palm Drive Health Care Foundation's plan?
And Question 3: If so, is no one concerned about the obvious conflict-of-interest in as much as both Dennis Colhurst and Dr Powers also sit on the board of the PDHCF?

Seems to me that to be waiting on this scenario to play itself out is to wait for nothing. I can not believe that our entire community will turn a blind eye to this unethical process and allow a yes vote on the Foundation's plan, under those circumstances, to stand.

No subtle sarcasm intended. I am not going to participate any further with you on this matter.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Rustie:

Not sure how you discern that I like to fight based on my posts but I find it interesting that rather than respond to any of my points you chose instead to try to slap me down with subtle sarcasm. ...

---

Don't you think these dedicated folks are smart enough to know they may have to depart the foundation board to join the new one. Others have distanced themselves or declared a conflict and not voted when appropriate.

I'm getting a little tired of "conflict of interest" flag waving.

Being on foundation board (as volunteers!) and spending the kind of effort to get something to work is the right thing for now.

What I have seen presented indicates that declaring a conflict and not voting would set up a 2 - 1 against the Foundation's proposal - not exactly the plan as I understand it. Having two seats departing the Foundation board to enable a clean run for the District board, in my opinion is still stacking the deck. I would prefer to have some qualified folks with a significant distance from the proposal they will be reviewing and voting on - but that's just me.......

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Tom95472:

Don't you think these dedicated folks are smart enough to know they may have to depart the foundation board to join the new one...

---

For the sake of any of us bystanders who might think she is in fact making a valid point, would you please answer her question? If you are relying on electing two new members to the board who are sympathetic to the doctors' plan, but those new members, being part of the plan themselves, cannot vote on it, are you not in danger of setting up a catch 22? You may end up making it impossible to adopt your favored plan because you do not have a majority who are able to pass it. How do you propose to resolve this?

Patrick Brinton

Thanks Patrick, nice to know there are some paying attention to the substance. None-the-less, no takers yet. Interesting, so many have so much to say until presented with a few direct questions........ The silence is deafening

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by pbrinton:

For the sake of any of us bystanders who might think she is in fact making a valid point, would you please answer her question? If you are relying on electing two new members to the board who are sympathetic to the doctors' plan, but those new members, being part of the plan themselves, cannot vote on it, are you not in danger of setting up a catch 22? You may end up making it impossible to adopt your favored plan because you do not have a majority who are able to pass it. How do you propose to resolve this?

Patrick Brinton

---