Hospital board ponders, listens, prepares for next, crucial, steps

At a special Sonoma Valley Hospital board meeting last Thursday, boardmembers discussed when to launch another bond measure and whether to secure the Carinalli property. After active public discussion, the board agreed that they need time to study the financial projections, the various strategic options and the extent and nature of the community’s support before making any decision.
Stanley Cohen reminded the group that the timing of any bond measure would depend on finances. “We have to see if the money will hold till next year.” Norman Gilroy argued against going for a bond in November, citing the distraction of the presidential election and the fact that volunteers would be busy – and they’re already burned out. In addition, he said, there will be board seats up for election at that time, too. “I’m concerned we’re focused on politics instead of health care,” he said.
Peggy Bair, co-chair of the recent failed campaign, said she agreed with Norman Gilroy, but, “I’d add one thing. Those of us who worked on this campaign became exceedingly clear that, other than the time period, we never found how to come together as a community. How do we get this community to shift in its attitude toward this hospital? A lot of us are willing to work on it, but it can’t be done by November.” Some emphatic accusations by hospital neighbors, including shouting out of turn and slamming doors, indicated that work still needs to be done.
That it is the scale of the project, not the cost of the bond to the property owner, came through again and again. In an e-mail following the meeting, “neighbor” Gail Rinaldi said, “It’s time to focus on repairing and keeping the existing hospital afloat before a major equipment breakdown forces closure.  They need to let the options go on these properties, cut their losses, and not spend another nickel on land acquisition until they have a financially stable and well-equipped running hospital.”
Carl Rogge, a resident of 32 years, said, ”Why do we support the hospital? We need an emergency room. Why else? It’s our civic duty! I think most of us believe that we don’t expect the fire department or hospital or schools to make money. But we expect to support them.” He described Prop A, in 1992, to build an expensive new high school. “It went down to defeat in June of 92 garnering only 38 percent of the votes. Did that mean the people here were against supporting our schools? Of course not.” He said a more modest proposal was then put before the voters, and it passed with 78 percent. “I think there’s a lesson there for all of us,” he said. “The trouble, dear boardmembers, lies not with the voters, but with the options they have been given so far.” With that, he sat down, and applause rose up around him.
Boardmember Mike Smith seemed to echo the thought. “We have to get down to the basic question: what is the most vital thing to the community. I believe it’s preserving the emergency room, having the ICU and the lab. I don’t think it’s about money. I think it’s about message. It doesn’t make a difference if we believe we have a solution, if you don’t feel we have a decision, it doesn’t make a damn bit of difference.“
Hospital CEO, Carl Gerlach, said, “I need to be able to finish the budget. That will tell you how long you can go.” The decision to opt for time rested with these two unknowns: what will the community at large support and how long can the hospital hold out. They plan to decide at the next board meeting to be scheduled toward the end of May.