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.
Friday, March 11, 2011
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
( ) 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
( ) 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
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 orNanaimo
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.
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:
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
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?
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.
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.
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 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.
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
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)