Matt Ready

Angela Gyurko:  Well thank you. Jill.

Commissioner Jill Buhler: You’re Welcome.

Public Commenter Angela:  Thank you. I’ve been chatting with my counterparts in Clallam about the OMC Jefferson health care discussions, and it’s interesting to hear their perspectives. Their concern centers around making sure that the fiscally unsound OMC is not bought by a Catholic hospital chain, and thus losing access to health care that is important to the community. My Clallam counterparts noted Jefferson Health Care’s good fiscal record, good relations with the community, and great reputation for patient care.

As I listen to them talk, I realized that this proposed linking might be great for Clallam. But really, from a public perspective, I’d like to know what’s in it for Jefferson. Mike Glenn has kept the hospital fiscally sound through some very difficult times. We are facing more difficult times. Coming up with his attention be divided, trying to get OMC up to speed both fiscally and with patient care.

I’ve my elderly mother in law, has been treated at OMC and it has not been up to the standard at Jefferson, and I can see it taking a lot of time and energy. Would Jefferson’s quality and finances suffer? Likewise, the proposed board would have five members from Jefferson and seven from Clallam. What would keep in the future Jefferson from being an afterthought?

I’m talking about five, ten, 15 years down the road. Given that Jefferson would be taking on the hard work of resolving omics issues, why shouldn’t Jefferson have the seven seats in Clallam have the five seats? I’m really concerned about this org chart. I know it’s probably based on community size, but in terms of who’s going to be doing the intellectual, heavy lifting and who’s going to be doing the work to get things going.

I would think a much more fair distribution, of seats would be in order before folks in this community would consider this, a reasonable option.’

Thanks.