RSS Feed
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Full house hears hospital's rebuilding plans
The proposed "regeneration" plan calls for an $18 million four-phase rebuilding of the hospital on its current site which would result in what the Authority says would be essentially a new and better-equipped facility that would last another 40-50 years. The need exists, according to the Authority, because the 46-yearold structure is wearing out and some of its systems, plumbing in particular, could fail "catastrophically" at any time. "Rural hospitals in America are plumb wore out because they have been operating 24/7 for nearly 50 years and that's what's happening to Wills Memorial," said Val Satko, chief architect for GMK, the engineering firm that is developing the regeneration plan. He explained that while a previous consultant had recommended a totally new hospital in a different location, GMK recognizes that "there is some good stuff here" and he indicated that the intensive care facility and the imaging and radiology department are up to date and should be retained with little or no change. Surgery on the other hand, he said, has to be replaced because it is so out of date and inadequate. Marvin Goldman, Wills Memorial CEO, explained that even though the surgery department is functional and working, the facility is so inadequate that some procedures are even being done in what was previously a storage room. In presenting the case for regeneration rather than all new construction, Satko said the advantages were that 22% of the current facility is fully functional, many of the existing systems are retainable, and the planned phased construction would be much less expensive. Disadvantages he listed included some disruption of operations during construction, unforeseen conditions that might arise on demolition, and a longer overall project duration. The entire project would take five years but, according to Satko, "would begin generating new revenue at the end of year two." The end result, he said, would be the equivalent of a brand new hospital. "We're going to do this in such a way that we won't have to come back in a few years and say we have to do it again," Satko said. The four phases of the project are outlined as follows: Phase I: Change to a single main entrance off Hospital Drive. Double the size of the clinics (generating new revenue). Rework the Emergency Department. Phase II: Construct a new patient care wing with 19 new beds. Phase III: Construction of a new surgery and lab facility (also generating new revenue). Phase IV: Refurbishment and construction of administrative and support services areas. A number of citizens in the audience expressed concerns and questions about the hospital in general, its condition, and the specifics of the planned construction. Satko and Goldman both pointed out that drawings and plans are still in the preliminary stages and specific blueprints are not yet developed. Others, speaking in support of the hospital credited it with saving their lives. "The Hospital Authority has been doing a great job and it is their job to run the hospital," County Commission Chairman Sam Moore said, explaining that "it is not the county commissioners' job to run the hospital. It is our job to look after your tax money and see that the people of Wilkes County get the things they need. "It's a tough decision" [whether to back the Authority's plan], he said. "In the 90s, the hospital was near closing a few times but now it has shown a profit for two years. The commissioners are not going to decide what needs to be done at the hospital - that's for the Authority to do. We have to decide if this financial risk is worth taking." Commissioner Donna Hardy said that a number of people had come to her with the impression that the County Commissioners were against building or remodeling the hospital. "We're not [against it], or I'm not, she said, emphasizing that she was not speaking for the entire board. "We want a community hospital," she continued. "My concern is when, and when can the taxpayers afford to do this," Hardy said. "We've got a lot of things we're looking at as county commissioners. I get the impression that people think we're not going to help the hospital but we are doing this on a regular basis. We just have a lot of things that we have to weigh. "We have the lowest income levels in this area," Hardy continued, "lower than the state average, so we don't have taxpayers that can afford increases. We have other things going on other than just a hospital. As a county commissioner, we have to balance all that." Goldman pointed out that when the hospital was at its lowest point some years ago it had "something like five days of cash reserves and nothing in the bank." Recommendations made in a Stroudwater study which was paid for by MCG "were reacted to" in a number of areas. "Today," Goldman reported, "we've got about 87 days of operating cash on hand, we're paying our bills, we have recorded two successive years of positive experience, and we're doing some things to generate the kind of business the Stroudwater folks suggested. "These are tough times for small rural hospitals everywhere," Goldman continued. "We are working very hard every day to assure this hospital's future." He also pointed out that a second Stroudwater report recommended the building of an entirely new hospital. Hardy said the cost of that was estimated at $26 million. Concerning the Authority's request that the county back its proposed bond issue, Moore pointed out that there are also other ways to secure the financing without risking the use of tax money. He cited a method used by a hospital in Abbeville, S.C., using revenue bonds. "It's a tough decision for us to make," Moore said, "because, in the past, we have really supported our hospital a lot. It's nice to think about having things but we cannot let the debt ruin our hospital - that happened to the Greensboro hospital." Moore pointed out that the Authority can borrow money on its own without risking the taxpayers' money. "But they have brought it to us and we have got to consider if that risk is worth taking."
As reported earlier, the option of a FHA 242 loan is available to the hospital but the Authority says it would cost at least $2.2 million more and would delay the project 12-18 months.
|
for larger version       |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
)
