My company recently received a check from Pinnacol for $10,658. This was a return premium for the last fiscal year. As I stated in my post of 4/11/09, when Pinnacol has funds in excess of projected claims it is returned to employers. If Al White had his way my return premium would belong to the state. That would have been a huge theft.
You have brought up two seemingly exhausted threads that mean little. Is the new hospital on time? Is the price per square foot for a satellite building congruous with new hospital construction? It doesn't matter, none of us can control either factor. Why don't you answer the ethics problems with dumping a contract with two local business persons? Perhaps you can also explain the $ 2,174.000 booked in March in new loan obligations. Why is TMH borrowing more money? You seem to want to attract attention to matters that are not controllable. I'll bet I can identify the donor name on your paycheck!!
Let's try to put some perspective to this statement. Not long ago TMH was apparently negotiating to purchase or lease the Told facility to make space for an incoming physician. Then, we were told that space would be made available in the leased MRI building for the new doctor. Just a few days ago (5/2/09) TMH released information that it was studying the feasibility of a 37,000 Sq. foot annex to the new hospital to house local physicians. TMH's resident Service Excellence Officer, Johnston said “building the medical offices was not a question of if, but how”. Then, in this (5/8/09) article, TMH stated, “but, with a price tag of more than $7 million, it was not known how the hospital would fund such a building.” Now, apparently, the plan is to ditch their obligations on the MRI building and use the old TMH building for physician offices.
As I said in an earlier post, TMH can legally dump the 20 year lease/purchase contract on the building. All counties use the lease/ purchase arrangement, but they are always honored.
It is hard to believe that those TMH Board members that voted 6-1 to adopt the lease would agree to “opt out” of the obligation.
Sue Lyster (Chair), Don Meyers, Melton Sullivan, Brenda Mckey, Missy Bonaker, Ron Danner, Gene Bryant.
Moffat County commissioners Tom Gray and Saad Tyyara, chaired by Darryl Steele also voted unanimously for the lease.
In a few short weeks, there have been four sites proposed for physician offices. Perhaps the “Craig Memorial Press” will clarify this comedy. What are we missing??
“Rohrich said the hospital would be able to legally opt out of its leases in the MRI Building, 651 Yampa Ave., and in the mall.”
That's true they can opt out. County entities are forbidden by statute to enter into multi- year contracts. So, the PSC the new hospital and all large equipment purchases were set up as year to year leases, recommitted each year.
The MRI machine and the MRI building were “leased” by TMH in February 2005. The MRI machine was leased for $1,196,730 and will be paid out in early 2010, at which time TMH will be the owner. The building lease was for $1,138,000 over a twenty year term. If TMH reneges on that agreement this month they will have left $1,002,428 in unpaid principal.
Yes, they can “opt out”, but is that the way Moffat County should do business? Do we really want to “stiff” two local business people?
“There are two sides to every story, except here in the CDP reader forum, then it is only one side.”
The reality is taxpayers don't know either side. I guess we can surmise that Quorum's CFO and Controller are no longer at TMH. I believe neither were TMH employees, but per the Quorum contract with TMH were “on loan”. TMH reimburses Quorum for all salaries, payroll taxes and expenses for such employees.
Not only are we in the dark about either side, we don't know why the financial heads left. If they were rat's jumping a sinking ship, that's one thing. If they were dismissed (fired) that's quite another thing. Either way the CDP is remiss in not reporting this news. The commitment to build a new hospital is the biggest event in Moffat County history, more than $105,000,000 (million) with interest. Still, the CDP has not published and interview with TMH or the disaffected employees.
I can tell you from TMH financial records that February 2009 accounts appear not to balance, it is not the first time, and the operating losses are substantial. How many of you know that TMH took cash back from the $40 million loan for the new facility. In other words, loan proceeds may be used to pay the loan payments.
I have reviewed the 2008 audit and accompanying notes. It reads more like an endorsement than an objective audit. I would bet the audit firm has a connection to Quorum.
So, here's the deal, if the two employees jumped ship, why? Did they finally realize they couldn't cover anymore? If they were fired was it because the Board and CEO didn't like the facts? Did they kill the messenger?
It appears that TMH is not a county hospital, it is a Quorum hospital. When $40 million is spent on a $27 million building there is ample money to spread around, but not in Moffat County, we only get to make the payments.
I just read a Craig Daily Press article that stated you are a proponent of confiscating workman compensation premiums paid by Colorado employers to Pinnacol Assurance, a private workman compensation carrier.
I pay about $60,000 annually in premiums to Pinnacol. My belief is that I am protecting my employees should they have an unfortunate on the job accident. That protection is in the form of wage and medical benefits. I do not pay those premiums with the intent of backfilling a shortfall in state funds. Historically, Pinnacol returns part of those premiums to qualified employers when Pinnacol has accumulated sufficient funds to cover their projected obligations.
The CDP article says you intend to blackmail Pinnacol with the threat of making them unable to “maintain their licensure in the state of Colorado”. This is beyond belief! Those premiums were paid by private Colorado employers to a private carrier. Any excess premiums belong to Pinnacol and the employers and cannot be stolen by the state.
What's next, confiscation of excess money in our operating checking accounts?
Mr. White, you've certainly lost the respect I held for you. Your proposal is blatant theft!! This legislation would render Pinnacol non-competetive. So when they're gone, who's next? What CRAP!!
Good health care in the private sector currently costs at least $18,000 per year for an employee, spouse and dependents. Or put another way an $8.65 per hour perc for that employee. Are you all ready to pony-up your share for the 47million uninsured? Do you really think anything conceived by the government will be competetive?
It all starts at the top. To categorize all TMH employees as uncaring or incompetent is grossly unfair. As in any service business, the tone and expectations for quality begin with management. Most employees will endeavor to follow a mandate for perfection, and most employees will feel very useful when they achieve that goal. If management sets goals based only on monetary return, then employees will likely lose that pride of accomplishment. Bottom line, if you can't be successful by being the best at what you do, then there is little hope for any other approach.
TMH and the CDP are both expected to be community leaders. They have no local competition, and therefore should be able to set the standard for perfection. Instead, this forum finds them both playing defense! “They doth protest too much”!
The campaign slogan of last year may apply here, “You can put lipstick on a pig, but –—”.
John Albert V.P.of project management said, “I've worked on almost 300 hospital projects and built almost 100 hospitals”, and “I've worked almost continuously since 1976”. That equates to building more than 3 hospitals per year, plus involvement in construction of another 9 hospitals per year. An impressive resume!
17 May 2009
at 6:47 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
STANHATHHORN (Anonymous) says…
My company recently received a check from Pinnacol for $10,658. This was a return premium for the last fiscal year. As I stated in my post of 4/11/09, when Pinnacol has funds in excess of projected claims it is returned to employers. If Al White had his way my return premium would belong to the state. That would have been a huge theft.
12 May 2009
at 6:05 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
STANHATHHORN (Anonymous) says…
Birdchanp,
You have brought up two seemingly exhausted threads that mean little. Is the new hospital on time? Is the price per square foot for a satellite building congruous with new hospital construction? It doesn't matter, none of us can control either factor. Why don't you answer the ethics problems with dumping a contract with two local business persons? Perhaps you can also explain the $ 2,174.000 booked in March in new loan obligations. Why is TMH borrowing more money? You seem to want to attract attention to matters that are not controllable. I'll bet I can identify the donor name on your paycheck!!
10 May 2009
at 3:46 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
STANHATHHORN (Anonymous) says…
TMH Board considers moving facilities”
Let's try to put some perspective to this statement. Not long ago TMH was apparently negotiating to purchase or lease the Told facility to make space for an incoming physician. Then, we were told that space would be made available in the leased MRI building for the new doctor. Just a few days ago (5/2/09) TMH released information that it was studying the feasibility of a 37,000 Sq. foot annex to the new hospital to house local physicians. TMH's resident Service Excellence Officer, Johnston said “building the medical offices was not a question of if, but how”. Then, in this (5/8/09) article, TMH stated, “but, with a price tag of more than $7 million, it was not known how the hospital would fund such a building.” Now, apparently, the plan is to ditch their obligations on the MRI building and use the old TMH building for physician offices.
As I said in an earlier post, TMH can legally dump the 20 year lease/purchase contract on the building. All counties use the lease/ purchase arrangement, but they are always honored.
It is hard to believe that those TMH Board members that voted 6-1 to adopt the lease would agree to “opt out” of the obligation.
Sue Lyster (Chair), Don Meyers, Melton Sullivan, Brenda Mckey, Missy Bonaker, Ron Danner, Gene Bryant.
Moffat County commissioners Tom Gray and Saad Tyyara, chaired by Darryl Steele also voted unanimously for the lease.
In a few short weeks, there have been four sites proposed for physician offices. Perhaps the “Craig Memorial Press” will clarify this comedy. What are we missing??
8 May 2009
at 6:47 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
STANHATHHORN (Anonymous) says…
“Rohrich said the hospital would be able to legally opt out of its leases in the MRI Building, 651 Yampa Ave., and in the mall.”
That's true they can opt out. County entities are forbidden by statute to enter into multi- year contracts. So, the PSC the new hospital and all large equipment purchases were set up as year to year leases, recommitted each year.
The MRI machine and the MRI building were “leased” by TMH in February 2005. The MRI machine was leased for $1,196,730 and will be paid out in early 2010, at which time TMH will be the owner. The building lease was for $1,138,000 over a twenty year term. If TMH reneges on that agreement this month they will have left $1,002,428 in unpaid principal.
Yes, they can “opt out”, but is that the way Moffat County should do business? Do we really want to “stiff” two local business people?
14 April 2009
at 2:21 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
STANHATHHORN (Anonymous) says…
al.white.senate@state.co.us
13 April 2009
at 6:11 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
STANHATHHORN (Anonymous) says…
“There are two sides to every story, except here in the CDP reader forum, then it is only one side.”
The reality is taxpayers don't know either side. I guess we can surmise that Quorum's CFO and Controller are no longer at TMH. I believe neither were TMH employees, but per the Quorum contract with TMH were “on loan”. TMH reimburses Quorum for all salaries, payroll taxes and expenses for such employees.
Not only are we in the dark about either side, we don't know why the financial heads left. If they were rat's jumping a sinking ship, that's one thing. If they were dismissed (fired) that's quite another thing. Either way the CDP is remiss in not reporting this news. The commitment to build a new hospital is the biggest event in Moffat County history, more than $105,000,000 (million) with interest. Still, the CDP has not published and interview with TMH or the disaffected employees.
I can tell you from TMH financial records that February 2009 accounts appear not to balance, it is not the first time, and the operating losses are substantial. How many of you know that TMH took cash back from the $40 million loan for the new facility. In other words, loan proceeds may be used to pay the loan payments.
I have reviewed the 2008 audit and accompanying notes. It reads more like an endorsement than an objective audit. I would bet the audit firm has a connection to Quorum.
So, here's the deal, if the two employees jumped ship, why? Did they finally realize they couldn't cover anymore? If they were fired was it because the Board and CEO didn't like the facts? Did they kill the messenger?
It appears that TMH is not a county hospital, it is a Quorum hospital. When $40 million is spent on a $27 million building there is ample money to spread around, but not in Moffat County, we only get to make the payments.
11 April 2009
at 12:35 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
STANHATHHORN (Anonymous) says…
Senator Al White,
I just read a Craig Daily Press article that stated you are a proponent of confiscating workman compensation premiums paid by Colorado employers to Pinnacol Assurance, a private workman compensation carrier.
I pay about $60,000 annually in premiums to Pinnacol. My belief is that I am protecting my employees should they have an unfortunate on the job accident. That protection is in the form of wage and medical benefits. I do not pay those premiums with the intent of backfilling a shortfall in state funds. Historically, Pinnacol returns part of those premiums to qualified employers when Pinnacol has accumulated sufficient funds to cover their projected obligations.
The CDP article says you intend to blackmail Pinnacol with the threat of making them unable to “maintain their licensure in the state of Colorado”. This is beyond belief! Those premiums were paid by private Colorado employers to a private carrier. Any excess premiums belong to Pinnacol and the employers and cannot be stolen by the state.
What's next, confiscation of excess money in our operating checking accounts?
Mr. White, you've certainly lost the respect I held for you. Your proposal is blatant theft!! This legislation would render Pinnacol non-competetive. So when they're gone, who's next? What CRAP!!
6 April 2009
at 11:04 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
STANHATHHORN (Anonymous) says…
Good health care in the private sector currently costs at least $18,000 per year for an employee, spouse and dependents. Or put another way an $8.65 per hour perc for that employee. Are you all ready to pony-up your share for the 47million uninsured? Do you really think anything conceived by the government will be competetive?
17 March 2009
at 9:42 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
STANHATHHORN (Anonymous) says…
It all starts at the top. To categorize all TMH employees as uncaring or incompetent is grossly unfair. As in any service business, the tone and expectations for quality begin with management. Most employees will endeavor to follow a mandate for perfection, and most employees will feel very useful when they achieve that goal. If management sets goals based only on monetary return, then employees will likely lose that pride of accomplishment. Bottom line, if you can't be successful by being the best at what you do, then there is little hope for any other approach.
TMH and the CDP are both expected to be community leaders. They have no local competition, and therefore should be able to set the standard for perfection. Instead, this forum finds them both playing defense! “They doth protest too much”!
The campaign slogan of last year may apply here, “You can put lipstick on a pig, but –—”.
12 March 2009
at 3:57 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
STANHATHHORN (Anonymous) says…
John Albert V.P.of project management said, “I've worked on almost 300 hospital projects and built almost 100 hospitals”, and “I've worked almost continuously since 1976”. That equates to building more than 3 hospitals per year, plus involvement in construction of another 9 hospitals per year. An impressive resume!