Hospital committee ponders own future

With a series of historic issues now behind them, members of the strategic planning committee found themselves wondering Wednesday if the panel has outlived its usefulness.
In the end, the committee wants a second opinion.
Committee member Dick Kirk, who is an elected member of the Sonoma Valley Health Care District Board, said that after the committee’s work on the proposed hospital relocation and the several ballot measures, the Sonoma Valley Health Care District Strategic Planning Committee needs to redefine its purpose. “We were on a cliff. Now we’re on a trail.”
“Should we have this committee at all?” asked committee chair Alden Brosseau when he started the meeting. “If the board wants help, it can seek resources to get that help. To have a standing committee makes no sense to me. The committee for now is not focused on planning. It has been a forum for discussion, and now serves as a ‘dress rehearsal’ for Board meetings.”
What for years had been strategic planning is now, with $12 million in bond money in play, becoming a reality. Hospital CEO Carl Gerlach told the panel that regulations mandate the hospital having a “master plan” in place by the end of June. “This is bold language. We have lot of work to do, fairly quickly,” much of which is underway, he said.
Gerlach gave a report of ongoing plans for facilities, women’s health initiatives, the recruitment of physicians, fund raising, marketing and more. “A lot of good work has been done already,” he said, citing the example of a $25,000 information technology inventory and assessment program, and the imminent naming of a project manager. “In most cases, 3 or 4 or 5 people are working on each issue. There is lot of action.”
“This committee did play an important role in where we are now, “ he said, but allowed that it was “time to re-boot.”
Committee member Gina Cuclis suggested that the committee is important as a forum for ideas and public awareness. “While all this other work is going on, how do we keep the customers from leaving? That would be a good role for this panel.”
A subcommittee was formed to develop recommendations for the future of the committee, which will be the prime agenda item at the committee’s next meeting, in April. Kirk’s motion to “further explore the role of this committee” was approved by unanimous voice vote, ending the hour-and-a-half discussion.