Friday, March 13, 2009

city - hospital board

After nearly two hours of meetings last night, I am not sure I understand the thing between the city and the hospital board any better.
The city has been restructuring its boards, so maybe it makes sense that the hospital board would be included in that.
Hospital board people argue that they are doing a good job, so there's no need to mess with something that is working.
They did seem to be close to agreement last night.
The changes are not all that drastic really.
Board member said they had no problem with going from nine members to seven.
One disagreement is that the hospital board has some sub-committees that report back to the board. You have the board making decisions about operations of the hospital - no pun intended - and the city feels that is micromanaging. They believe the ceo should be in charge of that.
Hospital board members feel the system they have works just fine and makes them more efficient. Looks like they do get somewhat involved in day to day operations, but they are fine with that.
Another point that may have been cleared up, was the process of selecting board members. The board recommends people, the mayor then nominates and the commission either approves or rejects. Rejection of a board member nomination is very rare.
Commissioners felt they "had to" approve whoever the hospital board sent them. Hospital board members did not feel that way.
One thing I hoped for last night, as to finally find out why this matters.
Why does the city feel reorganization needs to be done, and why does the hospital board care. Im not sure that question was answered.

Commissioners say they want to make some changes because things have changed. With the half-cent sales tax, the new hospital is going to be built with a lot of help from tax dollars. Nearly $1 million a year for 10 years. For that reason they want to take a little closer look at things.

10 comments:

Anonymous said...

I'd be interested "why" the city boards need to be reorganized. Is this for the majority of city boards, or is this just a problem w/ the hospital board?

Traveler Editor said...

they have restructured all of the boards.
The hospital board is the last one.
Ill post more of their reasoning later

Jean Snell said...

JJ

What boards have been reorganized and in what ways?

Jean Snell

Traveler Editor said...

several months ago.
blanket ordinances were passed that applied to all boards. I guess the hospital board did not count at that time. Im not sure.
Anyways, they did term limits. Also you could be booted if you missed so many meetings.
And they passed an ordinance saying any board member could be removed by the commission - with or without cause - with a supermajority vote.

Sometime last year. Maybe in the summer.

Anonymous said...

I think they should dismantle the whole thing and turn it over to the county, as is really a "regional" hospital in disguise. Also, the whole county should be footing the bill. Sorry! I know I can't let dead dogs lie, it's just I do not agree with the city controlling or paying for a hospital which is not really a CITY hospital. Don't give me that "it's only a hop, skip and a jump away" speech, either. I'm not buying that or the fact that AC will soon expand all that way, either.

Anonymous said...

some people just don't get it. Bet Winfield would love to pay for our hospital. Why can't we be proud of the fact that we have a good hospital that is working realy well and wants to just get better. For that matter why can't we just be proud of something in this town and not see so many negatives.

Anonymous said...

interesting that Jean is only NOW paying attention to what is going on. he tuned in for the big box debate and tuned out until now?

Anonymous said...

Restructuring the boards was never truly addressed by the commission but slipped in like we wouldn't notice. It was hard to tell which boards were and which ones were not reorganized at the whims of this commission. I like many thought it was to add the public works board and to dismantle others to meet the personal agenda of a few commissioners. I don't think many of us realized it meant all of the boards. Politics at its best.

Anonymous said...

Your statement is politics at its best. You make things up to suit your agenda. You can't recreate history to your own liking. James. Please set the record straight on this. Was it "under the radar" or was this person just not paying attention?

Traveler Editor said...

back when they did the restructuring, I understood it to be for all boards.
I was surprised later to find that it didnt apply to the hospital board.