Hard Copy of Blog available at Gabriola Library

We have had many requests for a hard copy of the blog for those concerned individuals who do not have access to a computer. A hard copy of the blog is available as reference material at the Gabriola branch of the Vancouver Island Regional Library. It will be updated on a regular basis.

                                                                  

Health Care – Do You Care ???

(   ) We are all Members:  We are told that all Gabriola residents over 19 years of age, who support the objectives of improving health care on Gabriola Island are members of GHCS & GHCF. All members are required to uphold their constitution and abide by the bylaws.  Membership fees can be assessed to cover costs for the clinic. Did you consent to this?

(   ) The Community Owns the Clinic:  Whose name is on the line when problems arise, such as financing shortages, liability issues, public health concerns, equipment failures, building inspection difficulties, etc.? Are all members to be held responsible?  

(   ) Business & Financial Plan:  When will we, the owners of the clinic, see the business plan and proposed financial plan for building and running the clinic? All we have heard to date are vague statements about “costs will be covered” but no projected “Income & Expense” statement has ever been made public. What has been budgeted for payment of property taxes, insurance costs, ongoing maintenance costs, equipment certification and repair, snow removal, water treatment, security system, parking lot upkeep, landscaping, signage, waste removal, common utilities, etc.?

(   ) Why Not Rent Instead of Building:  The Health Care Foundation states it believes “a community built, owned and controlled clinic allows better control over costs and operation over the long term than if the clinic were privately owned.” Whether you own or rent a property, you are still responsible, either directly or via your landlord, for payment of property taxes, insurance fees, and maintenance costs. Just because the community or society owns the clinic does not exempt them from these basic and real costs.

(   ) Why do we need a larger clinic?  The GHCS/GHCF are building a clinic to host three full time physicians, but no doctor has yet stepped up to the plate to become the third on-call clinic physician, despite many months of advertising. Why would we build for someone who does not exist.  Most medical offices hosting three physicians work out of a space of approximately 1500 -1800 square feet.  Having a clinic of 4,300 sq. ft. will make this one of the largest and most prestigious medical clinics in British Columbia.

(   ) Is Gabriola Likely Get a Third Physician to Join the Clinic:   It is claimed that the construction of a new facility will attract a third physician to the island, who would be willing to provide on-call services.  Gabriola Island has an official population of 4050 residents, and Ministry of Health statistics indicate that a practicing physician needs a patient base of at least 1200 patients to survive financially.  Medical Services Plan statistics show that approximately 50% of Gabriola residents seek their health care off island, indicating that any new physician, potentially interested in locating to Gabriola, and young enough to be willing to provide on call services, would not be able to financially support themselves. That means the physicians will not come, regardless of the facility. 

(   ) Physicians:  “The physicians will pay the rent”, is what we are told. What written contract has been signed with these physicians? Do they guarantee to stay and pay rent for five years, or can they leave whenever they want? Could the departure of one of the physicians force the clinic into bankruptcy?

(   ) Why an Urgent Care Treatment Room to Handle Multiple Casualties?  When was the last time we actually experienced such an incident on Gabriola and, even if we did, would we have sufficient staff and medical supplies, such as units of suitable blood, to accommodate such an event?  Not likely.

(   ) Why an Office for a Nurse Practitioner?  Gabriola does not have a Nurse Practitioner, nor are we likely to have one in the foreseeable future.  A proposal was presented to VIHA in 2008 to acquire the services of a Nurse Practitioner for Gabriola Island and VIHA turned it down, primarily because the Twin Beaches clinic physicians and the GHCS refused to support the proposal.

(   ) Fundraising: What percentage of the funds raised through community donations will be used to build and equip private offices for the physicians? How much will be left over to build and equip an urgent treatment room for the community? 

(   ) VIHA Funding: What contractual commitments for funding has Vancouver Island Health Authority signed with the Gabriola Health Care Society?  Currently VIHA helps pay for supplies for sutures and wound care in the Urgent Treatment Room. VIHA representatives state there will be no change in the funding for Gabriola once the clinic is built, yet the GHCS and GHCF claim VIHA will pay rent for office space. Who do we believe?

(   ) Staffing & Equipment: What staffing & equipment have actually been contracted for the urgent treatment room? If it is not staffed and equipped on a full time, twenty-four hour basis, it is not viable.

(   ) Zoning:  Why are we considering rezoning a parcel of forestry land to create more commercial and institutional land when Gabriola already has an excess of vacant commercial and institutional properties? Why do we trust the rezoning process to an applicant who refuses to sign a legal and binding agreement to assure the clinic ownership will be transferred to the community?

(   ) Contingency Plan: What contingency plans do the GHCS & GHCF have in place in the event they are unable to attract and retain three full time physicians?  What happens if they do not receive sufficient funds to build or complete the clinic?  This is a multimillion dollar undertaking, and not one on which we can just cross our fingers and hope for the best.

Are you concerned? 

If so, please check the issues that concern you and sign here

 _____________________________________________

either print out form and mail to

Tony Gibson, 1374 Harrison Way, Gabriola, B. C., V0R 1X3

OR

cut and paste into an email and send to shenam@shaw.ca

These questions will be presented to the GHCS/GHCF

formally requesting a public response

Please reply by March 20, 2011

Thank you

How those who question the clinic are regarded by those who don't...

This email was received in our mailbox February 21 in the normal way that we receive items through Ken Capon’s mailing list. We have posted it in its original format. There was no name anywhere on the document. We have emailed back requesting the author’s name. At the time of posting no reply has been received.

The Gabriola Health Care Foundation and our hopes for great long term health care may have been dealt a serious blow by the Advisory Planning Commission (APC) which advises the Islands Trust on zoning matters. The members are unelected individuals appointed by the Trust. At its Feb.15, 2011 meeting the Committee refused to recommend rezoning of the proposed site for the new clinic from forestry to N4 which would have specifically enabled the facility to locate on the site. It is hard to tell how the Islands Trust, which must make the necessary change, will proceed from here on.
The Trust can, if it wishes, completely ignore the APC. I believe that as a community we must
press the Islands Trust to ignore the APC on this issue and move forward with the rezoning, if we are ever to achieve proper health care and safety for us all. We probably do not have another chance.


Please take a few minutes to read the summary below, I am happy to receive corrections. If you wish to contact the Trust, and you may want to if you care about the new clinic and your health, please e mail or mail your comments to the Trust.  Sheila Malcolmson and Louise Bell (the voting trustees) will get your comments in their meeting book. Your trustees need a strong demonstration that the rezoning is warranted and they need it quickly. The Trust meets next on Thursday Feb. 24. Please send your note to both of the e mail addresses below or deliver it to the Trust directly. Do not delay and do NOT send it directly to Sheila Malcolmson or Louise Bell as staff will get it to them. Be sure to show the subject as “GABRIOLA MEDICAL CLINIC – I SUPPORT THE REZONING”. 

Gabriola Local Trust Committee
bmcerlean@islandstrust.bc.ca

And also to 
kkazmierowski@islandstrust.bc.ca
Street Address:

700 North Road

, Gabriola.

By way of background, the Foundations Twin Beaches clinic/urgent care centre, which was always intended to be replaced, has proven its worth but it is not adequate. It is too small, too inefficient and in the wrong location. It has helped attract two marvelous doctors, Bosman and Thorne and it has convinced about 3,000 residents to use the clinic as their prime source of care. Formerly many of these people had to leave Gabriola to seek help. Most importantly, a substantial number of Gabriolans have had their lives saved because of the facility and countless others have had pain and suffering reduced.   

The downside is that we cannot have 24 hour protection because there needs to be one more doctor to help with the on call problems and to help meet the daily case load. We are wearing the doctors out and my great fear is that we will lose them due to overwork and stress. They are both
immediately employable elsewhere. IF THAT HAPPENS, EXCELLENT COMMUNITY HEALTH CARE ON GABRIOLA IS FINISHED.  Furthermore, while the existing urgent care facility has been helpful, it is too small, it needs to be better equipped and it can only handle one seriously ill patient at a time. A single serious incident in which more than one person requires urgent care will be a huge problem. Two simultaneous heart attacks for instance or a car crash in which several people are severely injured and all bets are off. 

The only other medical facility is the Gabriola Health Care Centre, operated by Verna Gregson. That building appears to be fully utilized by a variety of medical interests but there is only one doctor. While he is a highly reputed doctor he does not provide on call (out of regular business hours) service. In regular business hours he provides urgent care but otherwise his patients must go to the clinic or Nanaimo.  Even during regular hours his seriously ill patients may have to go to Twin Beaches for immediate attention and stabilization if the problem is serious enough. The Gregson facility provides good community care in a number of ways but for a medical facility such as the one contemplated by the Foundation, the Gregson building itself seems to be very awkward. It contains no urgent care facility and its ability to withstand seismic events is not certain. 

The Gabriola Health Care Foundation, which raises funds and will own the new building, has been attempting to resolve these problems by looking for land on which to build.  Two parcels were offered, but they both which proved too small or rather poorly located. The Foundation then looked at all other possible options, to no avail. Dr. Bob Rooks, through his position as director of Potlatch Properties Ltd., then offered to subdivide a piece of an 80 acre property to donate 4.1 acres at no cost to the Foundation. The site at the top of is adjacent to the ambulance stations and fire hall and presents no major construction issues. Furthermore it could accommodate the emergency helicopter pad that is required to prevent unnecessary rough extra transport and time delays which could be fatal to patients. The site is ideal. 

The Foundation has progressed in other ways. Cash donations and pledges in excess of $666,000 have been raised and further donations are pending. As well, businesses and individuals have offered materials and labour at cost or for no charge. The fund raising is not complete but it is well underway. Confirmed zoning will be a great help to successful completion of the capital raising. It seems as if the project could be completed to all seismic standards within the anticipated cost of just over $1,000,000. Final costs are currently being estimated. Once the building has been constructed by the Foundation all operating costs will be paid for by the building tenants, the 3 doctors and VIHA. This is in fact the experience of the Twin Beaches clinic. Upon completion the Twin Beaches facility will be closed.  Gabriola will still have just two medical clinics.

While there is huge support from the Community a very small group seems to be opposed. At a recent sparsely attended meeting held by Tony Gibson, Sheena Meadowcroft and with Verna Gregson at the head table, a number of objections were raised. About 30 people attended of whom perhaps 10 were in favour, 10 opposed and 10 were there because they were interested but did not understand many of the issues or are new to the island. Also in attendance was Jacinthe Eastick, an APC member.  The meeting consisted mainly of a presentation in which there was a great deal of negative innuendo, uncertain statements and the reading of many letters from the papers, which apparently have credibility, even those proudly read out by and written by the organizers, without attribution until questioned.  No one from the Foundation was invited to present the facts. 
At the APC meeting Eastick repeated all much of what she had heard at the Gibson/ Meadowcroft meeting. The main concerns seem to be:

The 4.1 acres of forestry zoned land needs to be protected - I disagree. The land is question is a very
small piece given that there 12,983 other acres on Gabriola. The soil is poor and the vegetation is slightly regenerated clear cut. This is little more than a convenient argument that can be twisted to sound good, but which is not sensible at all. Far more large trees are cut down on Gabriola, likely monthly, than exist on the 4 acres. No-one on the APC wanted to talk about that. The real question is whether it makes sense to use the land for the betterment of all Gabriolans. I believe it is. If the
new clinic saves one life is the rezoning worth it?  YES. 

Detractors claim that Dr. Bob Rooks, who is a director of Potlach Properties Ltd. The property owner, can’t be trusted. This was a major insinuation  at the Gibson/ Meadowcroft meeting and the same attitude was reflected at the APC through questions about ownership of the property in question. The reality is that Dr. Rooks, a successful American businessman, has chosen to make Gabriola his home. He has legally developed some
property and created employment for many Gabriolans. He has restored properties and has financially supported various causes. Now he has offered to donate 4.1 acres free of charge. What more could we wish for? 

Eastick and others say there is a string attached. The string is that if the project is not done in 5 years he gets the land back. The Foundation believes that it can complete the project in a fraction of the time but in the event of the unforeseen there is plenty of time to resolve any issues. Delays could be due to financing (unlikely) weather or numerous other unforeseen events. Any project faces these risks. What the opponents, including certain APC members, don’t understand and don’t want to understand is that this type of clause is normal in many transactions. There is a reason. In the event that the project does not proceed Dr. Rooks will have given up his land for no medical gain to the community. If he lives up to his part of the deal the Foundation should live up to its side. If it cannot the deal should be unwound.  

Concern has been raised by certain people that Dr. Rooks should transfer the property immediately. Nice, except the property does not yet exist as a lot since it has not been rezoned and subdivided. They then change the question to one doubting that Dr.Rooks will transfer it once the subdivision is done. The rezoning will do Dr. Rooks (who is a vet) no good as the rezoned land can only be used for an urgent care facility and supportive necessities such as doctors’ facilities. The detractors want certainty that the property will be transferred. Potlatch has provided a Pledge Agreement and a Certified Resolution of its Board that it will do so, that is about as good as it can get. Somebody had the brilliant idea that a Legal Undertaking should be in place and has spread the idea. The suggestion is silly and unnecessary. Legal undertakings are a waste of time in most cases because enforcement is costly and can take years. Who would ever bother in a case where something is being given away free. The best thing in every transaction is two have willing parties to the proposal, which is the case here. Dr. Rooks is very willing and for the detractors to suggest otherwise is absurd and destructive. 

Public or private? Eastick has demanded a covenant saying that the Foundation will not let its facilities ever go private. Gregsons definition of public, as expressed at the Gibson/Meadowcroft meeting, is that the clinic should accept Medical Service Plan of BC cards. Of course, her clinic is privately owned and MSP cards are accepted for insurred services. Eastick and others think the Foundation clinic must be community owned forever. They seem to have never thought about MSP as being the key part of the equation that we all need. Why one public and one private (whatever that means)? The reality is Gregsons clinic and the Foundation clinic will both take MSP and that is the end of it. This is a non issue trumpeted by objectors who don’t get it.  Property ownership does not factor into the delivery of insured services.  Some also didn’t want non insured services offered,something Gregsons clinic almost certainly does (nonmedically required flu shots and PSA tests for instance). I believe this would rule out a visitor to , RCMP, firefighters or workers with injuries and many others. When it was pointed out to the Chair that his annual PSA screen could not be offered or done at the Foundation clinic, because the test is optional, folks seemed to get the point. Not that it mattered. In any case, the Trust has made it clear it cannot restrict ownership. That makes little difference to the opponents, they just keep spreading the ridiculous argument. In any case, in almost all clinics are private (like Gregsons) with some community owned. It works and health care is delivered. APC members demonstrated in their discussion that they just don’t understand.

The location is wrong. It should be in the village area, perhaps next to Gregsons, suggested Eastick and then patients could run between the buildings. As well it was suggested by Eastick at the APC and others at the Gibson/Meadowcroft thing that there is lots of property available in the village for this sort of building. None could be identified by Eastick or anyone else as being available but still the idea gets pushed. The fact is that the Foundation has looked everywhere. Buying land in the village would be prohibitively expensive and likely make the clinic non viable, costs for the building would be similar and the all important helicopter pad would not exist. Cost effective delivery of health care would not exist.

APC member Nancy Crozier seems to think that a clinic competing with Gregson would be unfair and that it would take all Gregsons business. She has mentioned this at least two meetings recently and it seems to be her main concern. Why would this be? She didn’t seem to raise any other matters.The reality is that the Foundation cannot accept acupuncture practitioners and massage therapists, among others no matter how excellent their services,as there would be no room for them. Three doctors, the urgent care facility and other permitted uses such as VIHA will fill the clinic. The Twin Beaches clinic will close and the new clinic will offer much the same as it does now, the one difference being another doctor. Nothing is changing in any meaningful way. I am not sure why Gregson is objecting now nor why Crozier et al are supporting her. Property owners have had many years to do exactly the same thing but it has not happened. Now that is going to there are objections. 

Eastick talked at length about membership in the society and so did Gregson at the Gibson/Meadowcroft thing. Gregson claims that Gabriolans had been “conscripted” into the Society and that everyone might have to pay dues. She then went on to say that the Foundation should make it clear how “OUR” money is being used.  At the APC meeting Eastick said the Society is using negative billing to get its members. Another member of the APC wisely pointed out that negative billing usually applies to commercial outfits trying to get money out of people (presumably he meant telcos and the like) and that is not the case with the Foundation. At a previous meeting another one of the naysayers said we would be charged property tax for this clinic. To set the record straight, how much fairer could it be than to allow anyone who wants to to belong? There are no obligations on anyone included in the definition of member, no dues, no taxes, no work required –absolutely nothing.  That’s the way it is for the Twin Beaches clinic and that is the way it will be for the new clinic. And that is how health care should and will be delivered.

The Foundation has been questioned by the detractors about who is eligible for treatment. Everyone. Those who have MSP will not be billed. Presumably those without will have other plans of some sort or even perhaps a credit card or on occasion may even be treated on a compassionate basis, exactly as is the case in all BC facilities including hospitals.

The APC claims that the Official Community Plan currently in existence does not contemplate forestry zoned land being used for the clinic. A convenient argument but it is not good enough. The problem is that no document can ever contemplate everything that may become necessary in the future, as this rezoning application demonstrates. This rezoning could be considered as the most important change in many years since its impact on the community will be huge, and it will be favourable. I am not convinced that the APC had an adequate understanding of the proposal and its impact on everyone.

The APC discussed all sorts of things, some relevant and some not but failed to address the key question which is “What do the people of Gabriola, including the 3,000 patient expect us to do?” They have made a terrible mistake. They did not serve the population of Gabriola well. 
So what should believers in the proposal do?  E mail the Islands Trust and express your concerns. Ask that the trust ignore the decision of the APC as it is wrong. It is time for the vast majority of Gabriolans, who believe in a viable health care system for Gabriola and the clinic, to put an end to the destructive methods of a few.

Editors Note: No grammatical or spelling corrections have been made

Intimidation continues against anyone who questions

One of our primary reasons for initiating this blog was the concern we felt at the ongoing intimidation tactics towards Gabriolans who express concern or raise questions about rezoning, or other issues surrounding the proposed Urgent Care Clinic. Unfortunately these intimidation tactics have escalated,  to viscious, personal attacks on people within the community.

This is an email received after the Public Information Meeting Feb 10, 2011.

Dear Shena,

There's something I would like to clarify with you immediately.  My 'personal' reaction to your current campaign has to do with your use of rumour, gossip, innuendo, accusation and how that affects people, in this case the GHCS specifically.

Three key areas of my life were destroyed by the above.  Ergo, I did a bit of research into slander, gossip and defamation of character, so, when I say that some of your comments were dangerously close to slander, I'm not talking through my hat.

If any one of my accusers had spoken directly to me for five mintues, or looked at the books, looked at the facts, they'd have known they were incorrect in their assumptions.  Instead, it was a witchhunt which had ripple effects - tsunami effects - throughout my entire life.

I read your blog thoroughly.  I saw nothing in the way of facts - just innuendo - comments that raise suspicion without making a case.  'Would you take this to the bank?' - well, yes, unless you can prove to me why not.  

You quoted figures from the GHCS website last night as if a changing bank balance was something suspicious.  Doesn't your bank balance change when money comes in and goes out?  More innuendo.

It is clear to me that you don't understand the workings of a Non-Profit Organization, the BC Societies Act, and Zoning By-laws.  There was no one present who could explain them adequately.  (I'nviting the island' does not constitue presenting a balanced case. )  No time was provided for the GHCS to present their case or their history.

You and Tony did exactly what I predicted you would do - set up an evening where you could present only your argument, read letters you wrote, and undermine the credibility of the GHCS with quasi-slanderous comments.  Rumour, innuendo, gossip - powerful tools in the hands of an intelligent, articulate manipulator.

The GHCS folks who did attend were left to defend themselves in an atmosphere which you had made hostile from the get go, the first ten minutes or so being an explication of emotional blackmail, bullying etc.  You are not the victim here, Shena.  You went into this argument with your fists up and apparently you feel bullied and victimized by anyone who doesn't agree with you, myself included.

Where was the 'full and accurate disclosure' you advertised?  You created the opposite.  It's manipulation of the worst kind and I don't buy it and I don't respect it.  I am sorry you have chosen to use your intelligence and critical faculties to such destructive purposes.

Penny Sidor

The following email was sent to us after an email notifying people of the Public Information Meeting February 10 were sent out, and then forwarded to other people within the community.

What are you doing sending me this bullshit. Why are you not for a 
proper facility? You sound like a real troublemaker. I sure hope I 
don't see you at the new emergency ward when it IS built. You sound 
like the kind of person who uses the food bank and complains about 
the food.

Gabriola has enough nutbags, we don't need more.

Regan Lall

This email was sent to others who forwarded the email announcing the Public Information Meeting February 10, 2011. This reply was brought was to our attention.

I will not forward this.  I have looked closely at the nonsense Shena and Tony are sending around.  I see nothing factual - just innuendo, paranoia and fear-mongering.   I say shame on them. 

Fine to raise questions and get clear on some issues, but they are waging a very nasty campaign and I strenuousls object to their methods.

This is not about 'public information'.  The  GHCS is not invited.  It's a self-organized forum for their idiocy.

Penny Sidor

Editors Note: Several members of the GHCS/GHCF were personally sent email notices about the meeting by email, including the GHCF secretary, whose responsibility is to advise members of such.

Here's an except from a recent letter to the editor in the local press:

...I imagine this article was intended to add controversy to the clinic issue. I wish The Shingle would stop giving credence to the miniscule ragtag group of dissenters and their opposition to the Gabriola Health Care Society (GHCS) Board. Their petty irrational complaints are wearing thin on the majority who want to move forward with the clinic process. Give credit where it’s due, that being the generous offer of land from Dr. Rooks, and the hard working efforts of the GHCS.

Graham MacDonald

Rezoning decision being made by too few people

Monday, February 7 2011

Flying Shingle

Dear Editor,

The Under-represented Islands

As residents of Gabriola and surrounding Islands, we find ourselves in difficult circumstances.

The one important issue which our local Islands Trust committee deals with is once again being dealt with by one elected Trustee.

The primary function of our Islands Trust is to act as a land-use planning body for most of the Gulf Islands. Gabriola and surrounding islands have only two elected representatives to the Trust, who speak for a population of approximately five thousand people. If one of those trustees finds themselves to be in conflict of interest on any matter, they must excuse themselves from the planning and decision making functions of the Trust, and shift the full responsibility of that role to the one remaining Trustee, who must then carry on as the sole voice for our community.

We currently find ourselves in exactly this situation. On a matter of major community importance, that being the potential rezoning of a significant piece of property to accommodate the wishes of a self-appointed, not for profit society, Trustee Deborah Ferens has discovered herself, through no fault of her own, to be in conflict of interest in the decision to rezone. She has, rightly and properly, removed herself from the process, leaving the decision in the hands of Sheila Malcolmson, the only remaining elected Trustee.

Both Trustee’s actions are being vigorously and continuously defended, but for me it is not about the actions of a couple of Trustees. I am quite certain that they are acting correctly according to the letter of the law and therefore do not need to be defended. However, there is something much bigger at stake here.

What is being forgotten in all of this is the fact that we, the residents - those of us who make this place our home - who work and live without the help of handouts or donations, remain totally under-represented in this process. In fact we are being treated with disdain, as though we are in the way and unnecessary. That fact is the underlying problem, and it is absolutely and totally indefensible.Those who think it is just fine to hand out millions of dollars’ worth of zoning in such an irresponsible manner, should hang their heads in shame. Those who think it is okay to force our only remaining elected Islands Trustee to take full responsibility for making a decision that will affect our entire community for decades to come, need to go back to school and take a civics course. Those who think it is acceptable to allow the Islands Trust, represented by one elected person, to make long term planning decisions, over which they have no power of enforcement, should wonder at their own future stability on this island.

The question we need to ask ourselves is: are we content with reactive zoning and unenforceable bylaws or do we want what we deserve, real and inclusive proactive planning based on true representation?This is not an easy question to answer, as the solution involves conviction and dedication and requires us to put aside our comfort and complaining, and put in the work and effort required to make the change. If we are not willing to put in the work and effort, then all there is for us to engage in is endless complaining and name calling.

It is time for all of us to stand up and say enough is enough! We are no longer going to be governed by self-appointed special interest groups and not-for profit societies, who are determined to have their own way by shouting the loudest and the longest. It is time for reason and democracy to prevail.So I guess the real question we need to ask ourselves is, and it’s a big one:

How do we want to be remembered by future generations?

Berni Sperling

www.FlyingShingle.com/cgi-bin/coranto/viewnews.cgi?id=20110207192724137161

---

Since when do we divorce the right answer from an honest one?”

“Professor Norman Corbett:

 Since when do we divorce the right answer from an honest one?” – a critique

by Muriel Weins

The Flying Shingle

Monday, February 7 2011

Long ago, when I entered university, I expected to be presented with a view of the world which would somehow cast all of existence in a different light – to actually be enlightened, in the original meaning of the word. Of course, to my dismay, it turned out to be just a replay of high school, except that nobody gave a damn whether you studied or not.

I had a flash of recognition when I watched this film. The theology teacher, who somehow stumbled upon the methodology to truly enlighten his students, of course brought down on his head the wrath of the university. It has been centuries since the university was actually a place where a different way of seeing the world was actually on the curriculum. Theological studies, like all other “courses”, have become mere instruments of indoctrination, teaching students to cut the world up into categories and forcing them to disown their innate wisdom.

The protagonist of this film had discovered how to deprogram his students, leading them, through astonishment and insight, out of the cultural hypnotic trance and into tenure of their own minds. He showed them how to enter their own humanity. He gave them a taste of the experience of Self which is supposed to be the goal of all religion. He was an ecstatic; an artist of the mind.

His vision of Truth eventually attracted to his classroom the luminaries of the artistic tradition. How could the university, a mere factory of degrees understand that? So they took away his tenure, his right to teach, and have refused to tell anyone on what grounds they refuse to allow him to teach. He was wrong, in their view, because his method created “knowledge” which did not fit into the pattern of “received opinion”; could not be analysed, described, categorised, measured, or fit into any model of “information”.

This will always be how someone will be treated, who interferes with the current cultural belief system.

A great documentary - part of the gracious presentation of films generously organised by Tsiporah and Paul Grignon.

www.FlyingShingle.com/cgi-bin/coranto/viewnews.cgi?id=20110207321957244932

---

Public Information Meeting

Have you had questions around the necessity of the proposed new Urgent Care Medical Clinic? Or concerns over the financial viability of building and maintaining such a structure? Perhaps you have been wondering about why other perfectly acceptable sites have been discounted? Or have concerns about, or oppose, the by-law application for rezoning from “forestry” to “institutional” that this building entails? Do you have reservations about what price Gabriolans will have to pay for the “gift” of the land being donated for the clinic.

Most individuals on Gabriola have serious concerns that have been raised within the community over the last several months, or years. An on-going campaign of intimidation using a variety of unacceptable methods has attempted to silence these concerns. It hasn’t worked!

We will be holding a

PUBLIC INFORMATION MEETING

(NO GHCS/GHCF AFFILIATION) 

THURSDAY FEBRUARY 10 at 7:00 p.m. 

ROLLO SENIORS CENTRE 

We will provide a full and accurate disclosure of information based on extensive research and primary source material, pertaining to the inception, development, and proposed building of the Urgent Care Medical Clinic, including rezoning issues. This will be an opportunity for the people of Gabriola, Mudge and Decourcey to participate in an open forum in a safe and supportive environment. All forms of ridicule, bullying, intimidation or fear factor techniques will not be accepted. Anyone attempting to do so will be asked to leave.

This is your island, your money,
your community, your health!  

YOUR MEETING.

For more info please contact Shena Meadowcroft or Tony Gibson (250) 247-9354 or shenam@shaw.ca www.proposedgabriolaclinic.blogspot.com

A "NO" uttered from the deepest conviction

is better and greater than a

"yes"

merely uttered to please,

or what is worse,

to avoid trouble.

- Ghandi

PUBLIC INFORMATION MEETING

(NO GHCS/GHCF AFFILIATION)

PROPOSED GABRIOLA CLINIC 

CONCERNS, FACTS & QUESTIONS

Providing an open forum for full and accurate disclosure
of information pertaining to the inception, development,
and proposed building of the Urgent Care Medical Clinic

including rezoning issues

THURSDAY FEBRUARY 10

7:00 p.m.

ROLLO SENIORS CENTRE

For more info please contact

Shena Meadowcroft or Tony Gibson

(250) 247-9354 or shenam@shaw.ca

www.proposedgabriolaclinic.blogspot.com

Pledge Agreement Due Diligence

In the agenda package for the LTC meeting tomorrow, Thursday January 27, 2011 there is a "pledge agreement" between Potlatch Properties Ltd. and the Gabriola Health Care Foundation that is being presented. 

Here are notes from a conversation with a real estate attorney regarding this "agreement":

·  Why is the document not dated?  It is not valid if it is not dated.

• Who signed the document?  What are their names and why are they not printed on the document?  Do these people actually represent the parties they claim to, that is Potlach Properties Ltd. and Gabriola Health Care Foundation?  If not, the document is useless.  Who witnessed the signatures?  We need their names and contact information to ascertain that these are actual signatures, validly obtained.  Why is there no corporate seal attached to a document of this significance?
• What is the legal description of the land being pledged?  We have the legal description of the total parcel, but not that of the actual piece being pledged.  All we have is a drawing with a black square outlined, but no specific legal description of it.  Too easy for the donor to change his mind, move the lines, or deny it altogether.
• Owner (pledgor) should be the one who undertakes the subdivision, then we would have a legal description of the land in question and would actually know what we were talking about.  The pledgee could then register a caveat against it in the agreement and have some legal power. Right now, we just have a black line in the approximate location of where we think the land might be.
• What proof do we have that Potlach Properties Ltd. actually owns the land?  Could it be held by the donor personally, or by one of his other corporations, or by someone else altogether?
• What bankruptcy searches have been undertaken to ensure that the holder of the land is not facing bankruptcy charges, either here or in the US, which could result in loss of the land?
• What court searches have been undertaken to determine who might be suing the landholder or anyone associated with him or his corporations, which could result in loss of the land?
• Has there been a search undertaken to prove that the property taxes have been fully paid to date?  If not, the land could be seized.  
• Has there been a corporate search undertaken to ensure that Potlach Properties Ltd. is indeed a corporation in good standing according to Canadian law?  Are they properly registered, with all corporate taxes paid to date, and year end reports duly filed?
• Is there an assurance in the agreement that the property in question will not be sold to another party during the five year term of this Pledge Agreement?  If not, and a sale should occur, do the terms of the agreement still stand?
• Who is the attorney representing the GHCF, and thus representing the community of Gabriola, in this endeavour?  If they want our support, we need to know they are adequately represented and advised by appropriate legal counsel.

We have it on authority from two lawyers that they have never heard of a pledge agreement and that it appears to come from an American source.

Directors of GHCS & GHCF are NOT Members of the Societies they Represent

The question of the nature of the membership lists for both the Gabriola Health Care foundation (GHCF) and the Gabriola Health Care Society (GHCS) came under question at the January 6, 2011 extraordinary meeting of the GHCF.  There has been much concern in the Gabriola community as to how the GHCS/GHCF could, according to their constitutions, simply conscript all residents of Gabriola Island into membership in their societies, without even consulting anyone.  That is, though, the basis on which these two societies are operating.  This means that everyone who is a resident of Gabriola, be it full time, part time, property owner, renter, or long term visitor is a member of both the GHCS and the GHCF.  However, when questioned further at the Jan 6/11 meeting about the exact structure of their membership list, Brenda Fowler, president of both societies, admitted that they don’t really maintain actual membership lists.  She stated instead that, “The telephone book is our membership list”.  Okay, so be it, the Gabriola telephone book, not residency, is the basis for their membership lists. 

HOWEVER:

The Gabriola Health Care Society lists a total of nine members on their Board of Directors.  Of those nine members, only four names appear in the telephone book, while the remaining five do not.  That is, according to the president’s statement about their membership list being the telephone book, only 44% of the Board of Directors of the GHCS are actually members of the society.  The remaining 56% are not members!

The Gabriola Health Care Foundation fares a little better.  They list a total of fourteen members on their Board of Directors, of which eleven names appear in the telephone book, and three do not.  That means, according to the president’s statement, 79% are members and 21% are not.

How can these people claim to represent the best interests of the community of Gabriola Island, via their position as Directors of the GHCS and GHCF, when a large percentage of them are not even, by their own definition, legitimate members of these societies?

Verna Gregson

FREE (Clinic) FOR ALL???

At the Extraordinary General Meeting on Thursday January 6, 2011 one of the questions raised was whether a poor person would have access to the clinic for free once it was built.

Brenda Fowler, President of GHCF/GHCS and Chairperson of the meeting assured the individual that EVERYONE could attend the clinic FOR FREE, residents, non-residents, Americans and (agreeing with another member of the audience) even the Brits!

CORRECTION Madam Chairperson.

NOT EVERYONE CAN COME FOR FREE

~ people without BC Health Coverage, CAN'T
~ people from out of province who do not have their provincial health care coverage with them, CAN'T
~ Americans, CAN'T
~ even the Brits (or any other nationality for that matter) CAN'T

Would you  P L E A S E  stop misleading the public on such an important issue as our health?

Thoughts from a medical perspective

Gabriola Sounder
The Editor,
Monday, November 6 2006

Before the Health Centre locomotive - lobby gets up more steam, we should all try to agree where its going. As one of the Island doctors offering medical care, I venture also, to offer my thoughts on the choices of destinations and on the chances of arriving.

Would the lobby please define/refine their expectations of the Health Centre!

My sense is of an expectation that the facility will be staffed 24 hours/year round and have a friendly, competent person to listen and look, assess and treat. Great! Should it also have Xray, Lab and the techs to operate them - probably not!

Staffing appropriate to such a facility would require 4 to 6 nurses, working 12 hour shifts, say 4 days on, 3 days off and allowing for holidays. I am not at all sure that Government, in our case VIHA, is about to cross the line to fund 24/365 nurse staffing, where it presently does not exist, for an island, geographically, a ferry-ride-suburb of Nanaimo.

Hornby Island is arguably (and clearly accepted as) a special case, with two ferry-rides and a significant road journey to a hospital. Gabriola Island is not so isolated.

However, in my opinion, THE critical limitation of manning the centre will be the availability of doctors willing to provide extended on-call coverage. Such a doctor will run an office in the day and will be available, on-island for on-call rota, one night in two, three or four, depending on how many wish to take call. This level of on-call is the norm for doctors working in under-serviced, isolated communities such as Hornby Island or, as in my former practice in remote Northern BC. During my time there, there was no stipend for on-call work whereas, now, it is generously rewarded, call or no call during a shift. This was a previous Health Ministry’s legacy to keep doctors there.

Present Health Ministry policy, currently spending 38% of the total BC Budget for 2006/07, is going to be reluctant to make the quantum step of commencing on-call stipends for a ferry-ride suburb of Nanaimo. If we factor in the expectation for our facility of Xray, basic Lab services, with on-call techs and physiotherapy, my guess is Government will want to negotiate or impose a less-costly scenario. And, so far all we have discussed is staffing.

What do I suggest? NURSE-PRACTITIONERS - government loves them - doctors have reservations. Dr. McPherson and I were invited by Athabasca University to intern a nurse practitioner. She gained valuable experience in our clinic and graduated successfully in 2005. Realistically, much work currently done by doctors could be done by these well trained nurses.

Three to five nurse practitioners could offer constant staffing (or a lesser number for only after-hour call) in the setting in a small emergency room where they would assess and triage, usually with doctor consultation. Clearly, illness or injury beyond the Centre’s scope for instance, serious fractures, heart attack, acute abdomen e.g. appendix would be transferred to Nanaimo, as at present with the aid of our excellent Paramedics.

I do not see the need for doctors to transfer their day-time office to a purpose-built building: We should recognize the effort, time and money, present and past doctors have invested in their offices. Doctors would continue to bill fee-for-service and offer to be available as back-up for the out-of-hours nurse practitioners. My doctor colleagues may criticize my concentration on the dollars - sorry it HAS to come into the equation because it is important to ALL parties, Government and staff.

We should be aware that building, staffing and maintaining a facility will be in the millions of dollars.

Do we need a new building at a proposed site (with view) nearly a kilometer from the Village? Not really. The present Gabriola Professional Centre accommodates in 6,000 sq/ft of its nearly 10,000 sq/ft, a cohort of independent health professionals, namely Dentist, Doctors, Chiropractor, Massage Therapist, Acupuncture, MDS Metro Lab and soon, a replacement for the previous Physiotherapist. Presently, there is a nearly 2,000 sq/ft wing of the building potentially available which would make an adequate small emergency room and possibly even also a doctors office. It is ground floor, well lit, has adequate parking and is central. I think Government would be more amenable to rent such space than build and maintain a dedicated building.

Finally, my argument is, yes, let’s make our island less dependent on Nanaimo General Hospital whilst making the best use of what facilities and health professionals we already have.

Sincerely, Dr H.G. Harding

http://www.soundernews.com/fullstory/EEykluEyZytHiJCwuR.shtml

Intimidation long term problem

Except from: The Flying Shingle

Thursday, May 15 2008

Democracy requires debate
Which brings me to the topic of informed decision. What became abundantly clear to me while I was investigating this issue, is the level of fundamentalist fervour among the fans of the clinic.Among the many questions the Shingle received about the GHCS project, came comments about the discomfort folks felt about asking questions about it. Some said they were treated disparagingly, were subjected to sarcasm, or treated like pariahs for not immediatley jumping on board. Others simply found it hard to ask questions about such a “motherhod” issue.As I was given less than subtle invitations to drop the subject after the last edition of the Shingle, I have no problem believing this is true.

Forget the fact that such responses are a signal to any semi-decent editor that deeper investigation is necessary. Let’s consider the harm this does to any legitimate enterprise and democracy in general.

What does it tell community members about a project when queries and/or doubt are met with snideness and hostility? And what good advice does the Board miss out on when those who counsel caution are frozen out of the conversation? In many ways this project appears to have been the victim of being loved unwisely and too well, and that has done no favours to the GHCS Board.The Board, on the other hand, has answered the Shingle’s questions (many of which were both blunt and pointed) civilly and quickly, and have welcomed the opportunity to clarify their project and intentions. Hopefully others will take instruction from this.

Online source: www.FlyingShingle.com/cgi-bin/coranto/viewnews.cgi?id=20080530084590900622

---

An Obituary to Common Sense

An Obituary printed in the London Times. Interesting and sadly true:

"Today we mourn the passing of a beloved old friend, "Common Sense", who has been with us for many years. No one knows for sure how old he was, since his birth records were long ago lost in bureaucratic red tape.

He will be remembered as having cultivated such valuable lessons as: Knowing when to come in out of the rain; why the early bird gets the worm; Life isn't always fair; and maybe it was my fault. Common Sense lived by simple, sound financial policies (don't spend more than you can earn) and reliable strategies (adults, not children, are in charge).

His health began to deteriorate rapidly when well-intentioned but overbearing regulations were set in place. Reports of a 6-year-old boy charged with sexual harassment for kissing a classmate; teens suspended from school for using mouth wash after lunch; and a teacher fired for reprimanding an unruly student, only worsened his condition.

Common Sense lost ground when parents attacked teachers for doing the job that they themselves had failed to do in disciplining their unruly children. It declined even further when schools were required to get parental consent to administer sun lotion or an Aspirin to a student; but could not inform parents when a student became pregnant and wanted to have an abortion.

Common Sense lost the will to live as the churches became businesses; and criminals received better treatment than their victims. Common Sense took a beating when you couldn't defend yourself from a burglar in your own home and the burglar could sue you for assault. Common Sense finally gave up the will to live, after a woman failed to realize that a steaming cup of coffee was hot. She spilled a little in her lap, and was promptly awarded a huge settlement.

Common Sense was preceded in death, by his parents, Truth and Trust. His wife, Discretion, his daughter, Responsibility, his son, Reason. He is survived by his 4 stepbrothers; I Know My Rights; I Want It Now; Someone Else Is To Blame; I'm A Victim.

Not many attended his funeral because so few realized he was gone. If you still remember him, pass this on. If not, join the majority and do nothing.