For the sake of consistency, we'll highlight this Standard-Examiner article, appearing in yesterday's "Top of Utah" section, under the headline "Ogden hospital a done deal." In truth, yesterday's print edition story is merely a fleshed out version of the earlier Std-Ex Online Edition story which we spotlighted here on Thursday, padded out with some generally useful background information. We did identify two paragraphs in the most recent story, however, with which we must take issue:
In January 2006, Ernest Health abruptly canceled its plans to build a hospital in Ogden after the RDA board, made up of city council members, questioned Darby Brockette, the company’s president and chief executive officer, about the firm’s finances and investors.We find the inclusion of these paragraphs troubling, because they continue to perpetuate the myth that simple qualifying questions posed by the then newly-elected 2005-06 Council/RDA Board caused Ernest Health to back away from the the negotiating table in the winter of 2006. The Standard-Examiner has previouly characterised the former RDA Board as having been overly agressive and/or rude. We've addressed this issue at Weber County Forum several times in the past, most recently in this June 7, 2007 article. We incorporate below an excerpt from that 2007 WCF article:
Members of the RDA board later apologized, and Mayor Matthew Godfrey’s administration encouraged the company to return to negotiations.
Those of us who actually attended that January 10, 2006 RDA session of course had a completely different take from that of the Std-Ex, about the events which transpired that night. What members of the RDA Board did that evening, as it has done many a night since then, was to ask (quite politely we thought) whether the Ernest Health folks would be willing to 1) disclose the identities of their principles, and 2) provide some basic financial information. The atmosphere was very cordial, according to our recollection; and Mr. Brockette agreed that his company would do so, mentioning that he "expected the Board to do its due diligence," and adding that his company itself was yet to complete its own due diligence.For our readers' further enlightenment, we also provide a link to a Dian Woodhouse letter, appearing in the February 8, 2006 Std-Ex edition. The letter refers to an audio recording of the infamous February 10, 2006 RDA Board meeting -- an audio recording which has since been removed from the Ogden City website. Until recently, our readers could simply listen to the audio, and decide for themselves whether its reasonable to speculate whether an earlier RDA Board actually drove Ernest Health out of town. Unfortunately, the Ogden City Administration, for reasons unknown, has eliminated that useful resource from public purview.
The real problem, of course was the usual problem: Boss Godfrey. The RDA board had asked for certain information necessary to an important decision; and Boss Godfrey had refused to provide it behind the scenes. Thus the Board had to ask its questions in open session. At the time, our gentle readers will recall, Godfrey's lame excuse was that the new RDA Board had failed to put their information request in writing.
What developed subsequently was a month-long anti-council harangue from the Standard-Examiner, and an extended and petulant Municipal Government Academy Award performance from Drama Queen Godfrey, blaming Ernest Health's failure to abandon its ongoing due diligence, and to immediately sign on the dotted line, on RDA Board over-aggressiveness. Blaming the victim has of course always been Godfrey's strong suit.
For those readers who'd like to fully bone up on the subject, you can review the full array of Weber County Forum articles on the on the topic of Earnest Health right here. We believe it to be a danged good historical archive.
The phrasing in yesterday's Std-Ex article suggests that the 2006 RDA Board's behavior had been improper. Thus we're compelled this morning to set the record straight once again.
We don't know why it took Ernest Health 2-1/2 years to finally commit to building its new hospital in Ogden; and as far as we're concerned, neither does the Standard-Examiner.
And what say our gentle readers about all this?
5 comments:
Nice work, Rudi. Some of the weakest reporting in the SE is tucked into the "context" summary that concludes a story, and this was a good example. And it matters, because those brief summaries, repeated enough, become eventually the public "memory" of what occurred, and themselves are used, later, as evidence in arguments about new policies, new disputes.
Part --- but only part --- of the problem is the consolidation of the media [newspapers, TV channels, cable networks], reducing the number of competing voices presenting news, and part of it is the loss among some [but not yet all] news people, of an understanding of how important, how crucial it is for a democracy to work that they do their jobs well, and that the bottom line does not become the sole and determining measure of what constitutes good journalism. Done right, reporting, and editing, is a calling, not just a job.
Yesterday, Bill Moyers gave a speech at a national conference on media reform, on just that topic: the taking over of media by growing conglomerates, by the Rupert Murdochs and other who are slashing reporters and editorial staff in order to fill pages or screens with cheaper content to bump the bottom line. It was a hell of a speech. 40 minutes long, but well worth the time, I thought. It's available on YouTube here.
The question that remains to be answered on the Ernest Health deal this time around is:
How much are Ogden City taxpayers on the hook for this latest deal with Ernest Health?
The proposal the last time we were to be on the hook for $2.1 million.
So where is the fine print that tells the whole story about the latest deal?
I was at the the original City Council meeting that Mr. Brockette attended publicly with the Ogden City Council when he was supposed to divulge all the fine print. We never heard it then. My money is that we won't hear the real story now.
For those of you late to the party you may want to look up the old Health South group who took Medicare for the biggest Medicare fraud in history.
Mr. Brockette learned those ropes while being part of Health South management.
The success of the proposed hospital will depend on whether health care in the U.S. expands, continues as is or is drastically reduced because of current financial problems facing our country.
The U.S. government plan for Medicare and Medicaid as presently operated is paying for the Ernest Health hospitals through government programs.
The big question is for how long those government reimbursements will continue or be reduced.
If the Ogden RDA proposes to issue bonds to help construct the Ernest Health facility then Ogden taxpayers will be responsible for paying for any bonds.
Has anyone looked into that possibility?
Since Mayor Godfrey has managed to sneak in the change in the RDA law so that he is now the executive director of the Ogden RDA I would not bet against his having made some deals with Ernest Health that are yet to be divulged.
DL:
Just two points. First, if federal subsidies are being doled out for the construction of rehab hospitals, I don't see any reason Ogden shouldn't become a beneficiary if it can.
Second: as I recall, the problem the Council had with Ernst the first time round was that the Council could not get information about the company's financials when it asked the Mayor for that information. And so some council members felt due diligence required them to try to get the information in public session that the Mayor was not supplying them directly.
I gather it is more or less standard operating procedure for a company seeking a benefit from a community to provide a great deal of financial information to the community. [Think of the ice tower builder in Vermont was it who supplied the city he wanted benefits from with full evidence of project funding in place, and financials on the viability of the company overall]. It seems in Ogden, such information is either not generally required by the Administration [think Ogden Climbing Parks tower project, or Adam Air], or if it does ask and the information is provided, it is not made available to Council members when they ask. We've seen that very recently when Ms. Jeske and then Ms. Gochnour asked to see a business plan for the proposed ice tower. None as yet been provided so far as I know.
That was the problem with Ernst the first time round. The Council members asked the Mayor to provide financials on the company [he certainly should have had such information as part of has negotiations with Ernest], he didn't, and so the Council members had no choice but to proceed without information they thought it important to have, or to ask for it in open session. Which they did.
Dorothy,
Have you considered running for city council?
Perhaps that would be one way for the council to have more information in its deliberations.
I wonder if Godfrey sent his little quisling Bill Glasmann to convince Ernest to come back to Ogden?
Post a Comment