As we watched the actions from the beginning of the “merger” of the county’s only two hospitals into a single district, the lack of transparency has been an overriding concern. There is much evidence of this, but let’s focus on the current lack of transparency — from first the new healthcare district and secondly, University of California San Diego.
As mandated by Assembly member Garcia’s AB 918, the Imperial Valley Healthcare District Board of Directors are to disclose the terms of the acquisition of El Centro Regional Medical Center AND present a financial plan to finance the acquisition and ongoing operations of hospitals in the district. (See AB 918 32499.6 (c)(6)).
At the Nov. 5 special meeting the “first offer” terms for the acquisition were finally unveiled. It was not, as AB 918 instructs, the “final terms.” That could be months away.
Also missing is the financial plan to address financing ongoing operations with due consideration of ALL liabilities including a massive bond debt. This incomplete maneuver raises so many questions.
- How will IVHD monitor, assess and audit these liabilities while simultaneously trying to boost revenues?
- Does IVHD propose to keep ECRMC finances separate from IVHD finances to ensure that the city of El Centro actually pays for the operation deficits of the hospital?
- How are these finances to be tracked to ensure that money from Heffernan and that which might be received from PMHD isn’t offsetting what the city of El Centro should be responsible for?
- What is UCSD’s role to address the financial plan?
- Where is the Joint Powers Agreement between UCSD and IVHD that was openly discussed in October but has yet to be put on an agenda?
These questions need to be addressed. Additionally, do El Centro’s taxpayers understand that potentially millions of their tax dollars will be needed to meet the terms of the acquisition and any shortfalls in hospital revenues?
The AB 918 law was sold based on a false assertion that the whole of Imperial Valley supported the creation of IVHD — and that it was needed to address the “urgent” dire state of ECRMC. To address the urgency, AB 918 eliminated the right for citizens to vote on the issue. And given how IVHD has been conducting meetings, its likely transparency isn’t high on the priority list.
Keep your eyes open folks. We, the taxpayers, are the ones on the hook and the lack of transparency should be a concern for all of us. AB 918 Section 32499.6(c)(6)(A-E) mandates four public meetings to be conducted to keep the public informed about the acquisition, funding source, a finance plan for the acquisition and interim operations. No public meetings have been held with the intent of informing and engaging the public. It is long past time to have an open meeting to address the concerns. It is time to demand the prescribed meetings with the public.