Present the facts concerning the new hospital

Two recent supporters of the plans of EARH District No. 2 commissioners appear unable to address the concerns of those who are not so enamored with the current plans of the hospital commissioners. In fact, they seem to need to invent and misstate the opinions of those they oppose. Perhaps we could seek clarity if not agreement.

Once upon a time, the commissioners decided to build a new hospital. They stashed money in some fund, while asking the voters of District No. 2 to vote for operating and maintenance monies. The commissioners did not inform the voters of their plans. At some point the building was no longer maintained properly. Three (current and former) maintenance employees have testified to this.

The stash of cash, which apparently amounted to some $8 million, became known and the hospital commissioners admitted the stashing of cash and the plans to build a new hospital.

The hospital commissioners offered the employed doctors a nasty contract that no decent person would have suggested. The doctors quit the hospital and the community was angry.

A reform slate of candidates arose. The citizenry reasonable enough believed the reform slate of candidates would save our existing hospital. The reform candidates were elected. However, the reform candidates became supporters of a new hospital seemingly turning their backs on the voters who elected them.

The community voters gave up attending hospital board meetings not because they lost interest in the hospital issue or no longer cared, but because they saw the hospital commissioners were going to do what the commissioners wished without regard to community opinion. The hospital commissioners have it appears refused to accept the decision of the voters.

The district voters turned down a bond issue to build a new hospital. A new campaign for a new hospital in its many facets can charitably be described as treating the voters as ignorant rubes. The so-called “Friends of EARH” as reported in The Journal, appear to accept the idea of voters as ignorant in need of education.

Strawman arguments and ad hominem attacks do not alter any of the facts. Perhaps those supporting the building of a new hospital in New Ritzville, or whatever the current plan might suggest, could make their case without misstating the views of those they disagree with. Make your case, but do not rewrite the arguments of others. And please, do not continue to pretend we are where we are because the hospital building happens to be 60 years old, or replacing the hospital at the cost of many millions make sense when reducing efficiency. And those who insist a rosy financial future for a new multi-million dollar hospital should post a bond.

Barry Boyer, Ritzville