Tuesday, September 12, 2006

Private or Public? Let's Talk

We heard a presentation from Cirrus Corporation, Dr. Grausz and Michael Ross on Monday, September 11, 2006 that was quite enticing. A free hospital, a spa, a medical office building, all built and operated by Cirrus.

But there are trade-offs. We have to give something to get something. That's, basically, an Urban Growth Boundary extention. This is a quick synopsis, there are many many issues to be discussed and thought about.

In a few days you'll be able to view the powerpoint presentation given by the Cirrus Team and the notes of the meeting, taken by yours truly, including questions and answers.

But in the meantime.... as Joan Rivers said "LET"S TALK"! How did the presentation strike you, how does the concept feel. PRIVATE OR PUBLIC, it's a good question.

9 Comments:

At 8:15 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

If it comes down to changing a small section of the UGB that will have zero negative impact on the UGB intent, and we can come up with a hospital that costs the taxpayer little or nothing in long term debt....bring it on! Time will tell if it is real or BS but to send them packing without looking at the proposal is fiscal stupidity at its worst.

If anyone one wants to sign up for a $100,000,000 tax bond that we have to pay for over the next 30 years, send them packing.

 
At 11:00 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

In one of the slides I thought Cirrus said the community and the hospital would be asked to underwrite some of the emergency room costs because it loses money, by continuing the current parcel tax as part of the deal for Cirrus building the hospital without cost to taxpayers. I could live with that. Paying the parcel tax is a lot less than the cost of a construction bond for most people. The board is already going to extend the parcel tax anyway because Kowal needs it to stay in the black while waiting for a new hospital to open in 6 years. Cirrus probably wouldn't be hiring Kowal either and that is worth changing the urban growth line for.

 
At 2:21 PM, Blogger tduccini said...

This is an excerpt of the IndexTribune article. They want you to buy a subscription to access the online content.



Cirrus Health officials want to set the record straight: They never promised Sonoma a free hospital.

The Texas-based health-care company has been in talks with developer Henry Grause and architect Michael Ross about building a privately owned hospital in conjunction with a medical spa and medical office building. Last week Cirrus President John Thomas released a statement saying the company is still examining the feasibility of the project, but no final decisions about the hospital have been made.

 
At 5:16 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

It seems like expanding the UGB
is a great trade for our community.
New state of the art facility and
no new taxes!

 
At 9:55 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

WHAT'S TO TALK ABOUT? THE COALITION SHOULD JUST TELL SONOMA VOTERS TO CHANGE THE BOUNDARY SO EVERYONE CAN GET A FREE HOSPITAL. EVEN WITH A FAT-SPA ATTACHED, IT WOULD BE BETTER THAN PAYING $100 MILLION FOR A PUBLIC HOSPITAL WITH KOWAL ATTACHED.

 
At 2:48 PM, Blogger tduccini said...

cirrus proposal

 
At 11:08 PM, Blogger tduccini said...

Dear Readers,

At this time due to system constraints we cannot edit or modify comments other than to delete a whole post.

Even if the majority of a comment is informative, factual and appropriate if it has something not verifiable, inaccurate, or even offensive the whole post must be deleted.

If you have a link or resource for information about the pertinent issues and/or participants and wish people to consider the information and discuss you may post the link or resource, and discuss it.

To be courteous and respectful to your fellow citizens please refrain from personal attacks while discussing contrary information.

Information that may not be immediately verifiable will have to be removed by blog moderators.

 
At 9:25 AM, Blogger tduccini said...

Posted on behalf of Steve Pease

Dear Reader,



This Web/Blog site is devoted to news, information and opinions about the issues surrounding prospective replacement of Sonoma Valley ’s Hospital. While we value everyone’s opinions we will not accept, nor post items of a personal or potentially defamatory nature. We welcome factual presentations and opinions, but not adverse judgments expressed about individuals. Thank you for your understanding.


Steve Pease

 
At 9:59 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

The Monday meeting, Oct 2, gave us a well considered dream-scape of a functional healthcare process that was designed for the benefit of the user/patient. In the real world the provider(s) tries as much as possible to hold the cards and create profit, and when possible, dominance for themselves. To ignore this and talk pretty is to be functionally irrelevant. British National Healthcare, in conception, might have once said things as does Mr. Gilroy..and then actually tried to deliver. In Sonoma I fear things will be said and modest window dressing actions will occur and the old mafia doctor-dominated enviroment will sustain. Trying to sell a new hospital to reluctant voters is proving to be difficult.It seem if citizens can see something real in benefit for themselves and family there may be a sale. If however we are sung to with songs of extreme beauty and glorious plans the public likely will smell the emptiness of reality and the whole show will collide into further bankruptcy. Mr. Gilroy and others will need to show much more relevance in the finance area to really capture the publics attention..thankyou

 

Post a Comment

<< Home