Opinion

Judge's suspension, resignation overdue

Sometimes the wheels of justice grind exceedingly slow – witness the more than two years it took for former Van Wert Municipal Court judge Phil Campbell to be suspended after the filing of complaints against him by attorneys and former defendants in his court.

At least in this case, though, we feel justice was finally done and a judge who forgot – or never knew – why he was elected to sit on a judicial bench will never have the chance to do so again (if there really is such a thing as justice).

Judge Campbell was the antithesis of what a good judge should be: an officer of the court who seemingly had little respect for the very law he was sworn to uphold.

“Justice” in Phil Campbell’s court was capricious and often changed with who the attorneys were in a particular case and, seemingly, with his mood of the day.

He was a petty tyrant and a bully, browbeating hapless defendants and mentally abusing attorneys, law enforcement officers and members of his own staff who were mostly just trying to do their jobs.

Judge Campbell made more than one city law director tremble merely at the thought that they would have to endure another degrading, embarrassing session in his courtroom. And those are the “good guys”! Treatment of defendants was occasionally more criminal than the offenses they committed.

As the complaints against him show, Judge Campbell insulted lawyers, badgered defendants – including making a woman cancer patient in a wheelchair cry – and was not above acting as prosecutor, as well as judge, when the occasion suited him.

Judge Campbell even tried a case that didn’t belong in his courtroom in the first place – a case of contributing to the delinquency of a minor that lies within the jurisdiction of Van Wert County Juvenile Court.

Unlike the defendants who entered his courtroom at their own risk, Judge Campbell doesn’t even have the flimsiest of excuses for his actions, since he was trained to understand the law, and what it represents.

In fact, the sad truth is that the (now former) judge, who prided himself on his knowledge of the law, apparently had the opinion he was above it – a person so powerful and mighty that the law didn’t apply to him.

If anything, the Ohio Supreme Court’s suspension of the judge has overturned that opinion, proving that blind Lady Justice does sometimes hit the mark.

--Dave Mosier
7/16

Hospital land transfer plan a good deal

While we respect our county officials for the job they do providing services to the community and sympathize with them over the county’s financial problems, we must respectfully disagree with the group of elected county officials seeking payment to the county as a condition to approve transferring hospital property to the Hospital Association.

There are a number of reasons we could cite for our stand, but we feel two of them pretty much sum up our position.

The first is this: The $1.225 million raised to build the hospital in 1956 was not the county’s money in the first place.

It was the county taxpayers, not the county itself, that provided money to build the hospital through a bond issue, so we can’t imagine why some elected county officials think the county’s general fund should be the beneficiary of any money the hospital would pay as compensation for the land.

After all, the county and its elected officials have done nothing to earn that money and county taxpayers have already made a statement on county finances in their rejection of the recent property tax levy.

If they were being fair about it, county officials would acknowledge that any money paid out by the hospital should be returned to the taxpayers or, better yet, be used as reimbursement money to repay the hospital for the free health care it provides to indigent patients.

The second issue is this: who will do more with $1.225 million (or whatever payment would be decided on) – county government or the hospital?

The hospital has approximately 430 employees, all of those jobs created over the past 62 years. Many of the hospital jobs are high-paid positions that provide significant tax dollars to the local economy.

We have heard some elected county officials infer that hospital officials are too highly paid, but hospital trustees say they have done studies that show most administrative jobs are somewhere in the middle to upper-middle range for people in similar jobs at similar hospitals.

On the other side of the coin, government in general is not known for creating jobs, and it would be fair to say that Van Wert County government job creation has been minimal, at best, over the above time period.

In fact, if we were nitpicking, we’d probably say the county could probably cut a few jobs in a couple of departments without impacting services to county residents in the least.

Bottom line: We feel the county is getting a good deal with the land transfer agreement just the way it is. The hospital association is giving up a number of important ownership rights to the county, such as the ability to veto selling the land, to receive any profits if the land is sold without incurring any liabilities for debts owed by the hospital.

The agreement also gives the county a seat on the Hospital Association Board of Trustees and also mandates that the hospital remain a non-profit entity.

Does anyone really think the hospital would pay out real money to purchase the land without withdrawing some or all of those rights? If not, it’s time for a reality check, people.

It’s time to stop hamstringing hospital officials and allow them to “own” the hospital property for the purpose of borrowing money for capital improvements.

Those dollars will keep coming back to local taxpayers – and county government as well – in the form of tax payments and new jobs created. That, to us, is the best deal the county could ask for.
--Dave Mosier

Writer: Voters should decide transfer

To the Editor:

It appears that the Hospital Commission, comprised of nine members, will be meeting July 20 at 7 p.m. in the conference room just east of the hospital cafeteria. This is supposed to be an open meeting. 

I understand this meeting is to discuss and vote on whether to SELL or GIVE the 18 acres of land that the hospital sits on to the Van Wert County Hospital Association.

I have a copy of the warranty deed, notarized November 3, 1956, in which the Van Wert County Hospital Association deeded 18 acres to the three county commissioners. This land was to be used for a Van Wert County Hospital.

I also have a copy of a proposed Bond issue in 1956.  The issue states "Shall bonds be issued by the County of Van Wert, Ohio, for the purpose of purchasing a Hospital site; and for the purpose of construction of and equipping of a PUBLIC COUNTY HOSPITAL: and for the purpose of landscaping and improving the grounds of said Hospital in the sum of $1,225,000.

This issue was approved at the Primary Election May 8, 1956, by a vote of 4,475 Yes and 2,218 No.

In the Brumback Library microfilm, I found where the new Van Wert County Hospital cornerstone was laid Sunday, October 26, 1958.  The dedication was to be February 21, 1960, and OUR HOSPITAL was cited as the most modern in the State of Ohio at that time.

I believe since voters were asked to vote for a much needed hospital in 1956, they should also be asked to vote as to whether the 18 acres and the hospital should be sold or given away.

I don't want the nine member hospital commissioners to give away the grounds and hospital or sell them for peanuts.

If the Hospital Commission and three county commissioners give away or sell this property without taxpayers voting on these issues, I believe they should all resign and be replaced.

Tom Wise

Van Wert

via email

Editor’s note: As a side note, land transfers are not typically something to be voted on, but are dealt with by elected or appointed representatives of the people. The hospital transfer is also not a “giveaway,” since the county is offered ownership rights to the property as consideration for the transfer (see the editorial above for a different opinion on the issue).
7/20

Library director grateful for financial aid

To the Editor:

On behalf of the Board of Trustees of the Brumback Library, I wish to extend our very special thanks to the members of the Crestview Education Association, Lincolnview Education Association, Vantage Teachers Association, Van Wert Federation of Teachers, and the Van Wert County Retired Teachers Association who, along with the Eaton Corporation, the local Eaton Grant Committee and the Eaton Charitable Fund, have provided major financial support for the Brumback Library’s 96th annual Summer Reading Program.

Words cannot truly convey the gratitude we have for the afore-mentioned organizations’ collective roles in raising the funds needed for the Library to host a time-honored tradition, which helps to instill a love for reading, learning, and discovery in children of all ages.

In 2009, over 1,800 of our youngest patrons registered and actively participated in our eight-week array of activities. As of last Friday, over 1,400 have registered for this year’s program, but we expect 1,900 or more children will “Make a Splash and Read” at the Main Library and our five branch facilities.

In addition, the Library would like to recognize and thank Mr. Jerry Lewis and McDonald’s, as well as the Parkway School District, and more than 50 local businesses who donated prizes for this worthwhile endeavor. 

At a time when our funding has continued to significantly erode, the generous financial assistance and interest in the Library’s services, resources, and programming efforts by so many is appreciated more than we can say!

Yours truly,

John J. Carr, Director

Brumback Library

via email
6/25

Former hospital trustee supports transfer

To the Editor:

I was honored to serve 14 years as a member of the Board of Trustees of Van Wert County Hospital, two of those as chairman.

One of the first things I learned is that its legal and operational structure makes it one-of-a-kind.  1) Its name identifies it as a county hospital, which it is not. 2) It is not operated by the county; 3) the employees are not paid by the county, and should it fall into financial difficulty; 4) County taxpayers would not be called on to bail it out.

When attending meetings with trustees and administrators of other hospitals these facts were always perplexing to them. Our hospital is a county hospital only in that it is devoted to serving the residents of our county as set forth in its Mission Statement.

I have heard that some critics are concerned that if the transfer is implemented the Association could sell the building and build another elsewhere in town.  That is ridiculous!

I cannot imagine how that could possible benefit anyone.  In the first place Van Wert cannot support two hospitals; at times it's a struggle supporting one.

I recall during my tenure we received offers by out-of-state mega-hospital chains.  We always discussed them with bemusement, or in other words never in a serious vein. We would review our mission statement and agree that it could not, and would not be met by outside management.

I have heard criticism about the CEO's salary (although I can't see the connection with the real issue).  Hospitals are like any other business. To keep good people you have to pay competitive salaries. During the past 20 years, it has been very difficult to successfully manage a small town hospital (as evidenced by the many that didn't make it).

Mark Minick has done an excellent job. Our hospital has kept up-to-date technologically, which is no small matter. Many new doctors recruited right out of training are amazed that our equipment is the same as where they did their residency at large teaching hospitals.

In 1956 the county came together and raised $1.225 million to meet a need. They made a decision at that time to contract with the Hospital Association to operate the facility. Since that time, the Association has contributed nearly $40 million to maintain and upgrade the facility.  In my experience, the trustees, medical staff, and the employees are dedicated to providing quality health care to the residents of the county. I cannot envision that changing.

I certainly hope we don't get hung up on the $1 spent in 1956 and the $1 to be spent in 2010, and lose sight of what a wonderful small town hospital we have. I feel it's time we come together again.

Roy Souders

Van Wert

via email
6/12

Dr. Jarvis addresses hospital transfer

To the Editor:

I write to you several comments related to the Van Wert County Hospital transfer debate. I do so declaring out front that I have a double-edged conflict of interest in this matter as the elected Van Wert County coroner on one side and an employee of Van Wert Medical Services, an entity of the Van Wert County Hospital Association, on the other side.

I have remained silent to date due to this conflict, and knowing that some will take my words out of context. Furthermore, this letter is being submitted of my own free will and is completely and totally unsolicited. I also submit it as I will be unable to attend the June 21 open forum and I believe it is important for my opinion to be heard.

I feel compelled to at least interject on a couple of points.

First, I must tell you that it has been my honor and privilege to serve the Van Wert area as both the coroner and a physician for nearly 16 years (12 years as coroner). I have served the office of the coroner to the fullest of my abilities and I truly appreciate the trust that the commissioners and county have given me. I also have served our hospital and its patients to my best capabilities and continue to do so. I have served on numerous committees and have also served as the secretary, vice president and president of the medical staff over the time period from 2002-2009. I also am currently the immediate past president of the medical staff. I only give you this background to discuss a couple of points.

In 2004, I became aware of the relationship the hospital had with the County of Van Wert with respect to the land and the building. I need not review this relationship, as this has been discussed in the independent and The Times-Bulletin. At that time, it was discussed at the executive committee level what the benefits of a transfer of the land and the building transfer would be for the community. To that end, I had opportunity to have several informal discussions with the commissioners regarding a proposed transfer.

It (the proposal) was presented formally to them in written form by various hospital board members at that time, and, as I recollect, informal discussions had occurred before that time also. The commissioners, for several years, did not want to enter into formal conversations regarding this transfer for various reasons. That explains, I believe, why none of the other department heads heard any news of such a transfer. I only knew about the issue through my dealings with the hospital – not as the coroner. These are the facts, as I know them.

I have a few other comments.

First, I know that this transfer was not brought about due to any issues with the banks. The bank had already extended financing to the hospital for the ER project, as well as at least two other projects over the past 16 years. Obtaining this financing would have been easier with a building as collateral, but it was achieved regardless.

Second, the Van Wert Hospital Association has been a more than excellent steward of the building, to date. Repairs, projects updating the facility and general investment in technology, allowing for provision of the best possible care, have been undertaken. I would estimate that around $20 million or more has been spent on the physical plant and technology over my 16 years here. This was done to remain competitive, viable and progressive in a difficult market. I have served on the Technological Equipment Committee for the hospital, which sets the capital budget since 1996. This committee always strives to provide the best technology to support the patient care at the hospital.

Third, and finally, I agree with the beautifully worded letter by Mr. Purmort, whose family has long and deep roots in the Van Wert community. Approving the transfer with the safeguards attached to the transfer agreement guarantees the county and surrounding areas a viable and progressive hospital into the distant future. Approving the transfer agreement as is proposed, without a large monetary exchange, gives the community and our patients locally controlled healthcare for years to come without the fear of the hospital "closing shop" or building in another location.

This is a win-win situation for all parties, especially the people that our hospital serves. If the monetary exchange, as proposed by some, becomes part of the transfer, the safeguards built into the agreement would likely not be there, making the agreement less concrete for our community.

I encourage all interested parties to attend the June 21 forum related to the transfer, hear the information presented, and come to your own conclusion. I feel the transfer is best for the community and will ensure that future renovation projects will be viable.

The hospital fourth floor needs updated and the eventual vision of the hospital is to go to all private rooms through expansion of the second floor. Without this transfer, it is possible that financing may not be as easy to come by, as the economic landscape has changed.

We have been fortunate as a community hospital in our ability to obtain capital to meet our needs, but there are no continued guarantees. With the transfer, the agreement does give a guarantee – a guarantee to the future of healthcare in Van Wert County.

Scott Jarvis, MD

Van Wert County Coroner since 1998

Member, Van Wert County Hospital medical staff, since 1994

via email
6/7

Farmer answers letter on livestock board

To the Editor:

In response to the recent editorial I would like to clear up several misconceptions. First and foremost the passage of the Livestock Care Standards Board was not a victory for the large megafarms, but rather a victory for the protection of animal agriculture and the safe production of the consumer's food supply.

Yes, the passage of this board was precipitated by threatened actions by the Humane Society of the United States. The passage of this board is meant to provide for the proper protection and care of the animals, which, by the way, I believe that the American farmer does a very respected job, and to ensure an ample food supply to feed the world.

While HSUS would want you to believe that all they want is the elimination of cages and crates, all you have to do is look at what they stand for and what they have done following passage of these measures in other states. They want nothing less than to eliminate meat, milk, and eggs from your diet. Following passage in California they immediately asked legislators for more rules, a move that threatens to cripple California's food supply.

To claim that this board was created to hide our production practices from the general public could not be further from the truth. We own one of these so-called "factory farms" and anybody that knows us knows that we are very open to explain to, and within reason, show anyone what we do. What the public needs to understand is that we do not restrict people from our facility to hide anything, but rather protect our animals from disease that can be spread by unlimited exposure to whomever and whatever would want to hurt them.

To claim that we are no longer traditional farmers is not only a lie but a major insult. We are a sixth generation farm family, and I stress the word family. We participate in our children's activities, we are active in our church, and we are active in our community – not the “megafarmer” monsters we are sometimes made out to be.

Yes, we make money on this facility, but that is what we are in business for. Our passion is to produce the quality product the American consumer has come to expect. Yes, we also use science, but that is to also produce that product and to produce it in a way that is safe, not only for the consumer, but also for the animals. Production practices of yesteryear are not able meet all of today's demands and in a few instances cannot meet some of today's health and safety standards.

The Livestock Care Standards Board was passed last year by a majority of Ohioans. Let us not handcuff or handicap the board by trying to dictate what this board must find. I urge you to not sign any petition if asked and if they do get the signatures to deny their request.

Michael Schumm

Willshire

via email
6/7

Former jail worker raps county officials

To the Editor:

Let me start off by saying I resigned as a corrections officer supervisor in 2006 from the Van Wert County Correctional Facility. I worked there from February 1997-November 2006 and loved my job. One of the main reasons for my resignation, as well as many other good officers who have left over the years, was due to the extremely low pay that we earned for working such a dangerous job. I also would like to state that I am not eligible for any of the back pay from the upcoming arbitrator's settlement regarding the VWCF correction officers’ Fraternal Order of Police, Ohio Labor Council and the County of Van Wert.

After reading the articles in the different papers over the past week regarding the sheriff and county commissioners and their stance, I felt that I should shed some information as well that hasn't been brought out in the papers regarding this situation.

The corrections officers and the FOP are not the bad guys and should not be blamed for what can only be described as ineptness on the part of the Van Wert County government.

If the sheriff hadn't treated the corrections officers like low-level pond scum over the last 13-14 years and paid them what they were actually worth to begin with, he and the county wouldn't be in this predicament.

Why don't the commissioners and sheriff reveal to the county taxpayers exactly how much of the taxpayers’ money that they have wasted in attorney and legal fees over the years, all while fighting the FOP corrections officers’ union? Why couldn't they pay them accordingly for the dangerous job that they perform everyday? Van Wert County sheriff's deputies have always been held to a much higher standard than Van Wert County corrections officers by the sheriff and have always been paid much more handsomely than the "bargain mart" wages that Van Wert corrections officers receive.

I am in no way saying that the deputies’ jobs are meaningless; I am however again bringing up the question as to why the sheriff feels fine with giving the deputies much larger raises, sometimes $1-$3 an hour more per year, when corrections officers fight to get pennies. The deputies are deserving of what they make; however, the corrections officers’ work is just as dangerous and worth just as much as the deputies are.

There is no wonder that the deputies’ Teamsters Union has agreed to more than $40,000 in concessions through wage freezes. They make so much more that they can comfortably agree to concessions. The sheriff and commissioners should also let the taxpayers know how much they have already promised the deputies for future years to agree to these current concessions. If the corrections officers made as much or even close to what the deputies made, I am fairly sure that they, too, would agree to concessions and wage freezes, if necessary.

There have been some corrections officers, full and part time, working additional jobs just to make ends meet. I have heard from deputies, police officers and state highway patrol officers over the years that they cannot believe how low paid the VW corrections officers are for the jobs that they are doing. There are even sheriff's office employees who secretly agree with most everything I am saying; however, they are afraid to speak out against their current employer.

Even the jail cooks and jail secretaries make much more than the corrections officers. The jail cooks and secretaries do play an important role in the daily operations of the jail and do a great job at what they do; however, they are not dealing with 40-70 inmates (or more) at a time and dealing with all the problems and issues that the corrections officers’ jobs require of them.

The cooks and secretaries do not have to deal with any jail operation problems that arise throughout the day or night or over the weekend. Corrections officers work three shifts, seven days a week, 365 days a year.

The sheriff has said repeatedly over the years that the corrections officers will never make anything near what the deputies make. Again, why? What exactly does he have against the Fraternal Order of Police?

Van Wert County corrections officers have always been one of the bottom 10 lowest paid counties in the state, while Van Wert County is no longer, but used to be, one of the top 15 richest counties in the state.

The commissioners and sheriff have fought the FOP on pretty much everything and never budged on anything even when the county had an overabundance of extra cash. There were several years when the out of county inmates housed in the Van Wert jail resulted in more than $250,000-$350,000 profit for the county General Fund, yet the corrections officers still weren't allowed to make any money.

The sheriff has said that the jail staff didn’t deserve it over and over and over again and now they (corrections officers) fight and win arbitration with the state, plus interest, because the sheriff decided to continue to challenge the ruling and use further tax dollars to do so.

It is all now coming back to "bite" him. This was never about greed for the corrections officers; they just wanted their fair share of what the job position called for and hated being looked down on year after year after year, all the while watching Van Wert County deputies getting hefty raises year after year after year.

Most people do not know all the things that the corrections officers deal with on a daily basis while performing their job. They should be held as equals, but the sheriff has refused to see it that way since the jail was opened.

I applaud all of the corrections officers for continuing the fight for fair wages for a very tough job. We know all of the surrounding counties’ corrections officers make much more an hour than you do. Yes, we are in economic hard times; however, as I stated above, this could all have been prevented several years ago.

It is a shame that the sheriff and commissioners continue this game of wasting taxpayers’ dollars just to try to make themselves look good.

It is sad that the county is threatening to close the jail, which would cause several people to lose their jobs, all because the sheriff and commissioners refused to fix the problem when they had the resources to do so.

Regards,

Jeremy Carlson

Rockford

via email

Writer for humane animal treatment

To the Editor:

Last fall voters approved a constitutional amendment to set up the, “Ohio Livestock Care Standards Board,” by 64 percent. It was a victory for Ohio Farm Bureau, and indirectly a victory for Ohio’s large agribusiness community. The board was created to give the appearance of reform in Ohio. The way it was presented was purposely done to confuse people. It was created because the Humane Society wanted to pass humane legislation, proposing only that egg laying hens, breeding pigs, and veal calves would be able to stand up, lie down, turn around, and extend their limbs. That’s all they asked for. This legislation has been passed in several other states and the entire European Union. But, millions of dollars were spent to market the Ohio Livestock Care Standards Board, and millions of dollars were spent to confuse people. If they really cared about humane treatment of livestock, why wasn’t this board created before? Why did it take the presence of the Humane Society for Ohio to create this so called care board?

When you really get down to the nitty gritty of it all, this is really about factory farming. That’s who this will affect. Back in the day, Americans were closely connected to the ways and places their food was produced. Now we live with a “disconnectedness.” Most people now give little thought to where their food comes from. This allows big agribusiness to shift “farming” into unhealthy inhumane systems without public scrutiny.

Their practices are purposely kept out of public view because they know the majority of people would be appalled if they knew what was going on. Today, traditional and ethical husbandry is being replaced with industrial methods that come from “animal science” departments. There is an entirely different mind frame now. However much you want to ignore it, factory farming is wrong on so many levels. It’s wrong, and people know it’s wrong. It’s hard for me to imagine who, besides those that profit from it, would defend it. The way the animals are now housed, are like a can of sardines. They are housed by the thousands, are genetically engineered, restricted in mobility, and fed unnatural diets. They never walk on grass, or feel the sun on their backs. They breathe toxic waste 24/7. This disgusting way of raising food, comes back to us on our plates. The things I have learned over the last couple of years has changed me forever: the way I look at food, the way I think about food, and the way I choose my food.

The values of the factory farmer are not the same as the traditional farmer. There is no longer respect for neighbors, land stewardship, or respect for the creatures given into their hands. How sad would our ancestors be if they could watch us destroy our American farming heritage?

There is a ballot initiative in the works, to require the Ohio Livestock Care Standards Board adopt certain minimum standards. They need 600,000 signatures by June 30 to get this put on the November ballot. As of last week, they only had about half of the signatures. What they will be asking for is that the animals be able to stand up, lie down, turn around and extend their limbs. That cows and pigs be killed in a manner deemed acceptable by the American Veterinary Medical Association. Prohibit strangulation as a way to slaughter cows and pigs, and prohibit “downer cows,” (cows that are too diseased, sick or hurt to stand or walk) from entering our food supply. I’m surprised they even have to ask for the last one.

The link below will tell you a little more about it. Make sure you read the myth vs. fact section. If you are interested in signing the petition, please contact me at: stem_1969@yahoo.com Keep in mind, we are running out of time. If you are interested in learning more about what you eat, and our food supply, I would highly recommend renting, “Food Inc.” It’s in the video stores now. What I beg of you more than anything else is to please educate yourself on what you are eating and where it came from. Thank you so much for your time in reading this,

Lisa Stemen

Union Township, Convoy

http://www.ohiohumane.com/

via email
6/4

Wassenberg director shares nice letter

To the Editor:

 Recently, Wassenberg Art Center received the attached letter from Barbara C. McGuinness, group travel coordinator for the Massillon Branch of the AAA:

"Thank you for a wonderful close to our Vera Bradley Girls Getaway Weekend Tour. Our 17 lucky guests who enjoyed your hospitality were thoroughly impressed by the gallery... What a wonderful display and opportunity for your community to share and enjoy... I hope to increase tour activity to our west and will definitely include a stop at the current Wassenberg display with each event."  

Ms. McGuinness said many other nice things about how much the group enjoyed their visit to the Wassenberg Art Center.  We are very pleased that the Wassenberg Art Center is attracting more visitors to Van Wert!

I hope that all of you who are reading this letter will take the opportunity to visit and enjoy our exhibits.  Admission is free! Our next exhibit is the 54th annual June Art Exhibit, June 6-25. 

Wassenberg Art Center is located at 643 S. Washington Street in Van Wert.  If you visit our website at www.vanwert.com/wassenberg, you can click on "calendar" and see our upcoming exhibits and other events. 

Sincerely,

Michele L. Hiegel

Executive Director

Wassenberg Art Center

via email
6/4

County officials oppose transfer plan

To the Editor:

I would like to respond to the independent’s article in its May 28, 2010, addition.

In that article Mr. Minick cites as “preposterous” my assertion that the hospital’s reason for seeking the land transfer is pressure from lenders who are funding the current emergency services project. He continues by saying that the hospital has sought this transfer since 2004. While Mr. Minick is certainly entitled to his opinion, the fact remains that I have been the county’s (commissioners’) attorney since 1989 and the first time I heard that the hospital officials were seeking the transfer was January 22nd of this year when the transfer plans were announced in The Times-Bulletin (and independent). That is some six years after 2004.That happened to be the same day that Mr. Minick issued a press release for public consumption announcing the proposed transfer. As well, it appears that the out-of-town attorney who is the commissioner’s attorney in this transfer agreement only started drafting the current transfer agreement in 2009 at about the same time the construction for the new emergency services project started. By the way, some folks might find it strange that this out-of-town attorney is being paid for his work for the commissioners by none other than the hospital, the other side of this issue.

The independent’s May 28th article also cites Sheriff Stan Owens’ position that having the hospital association pay for the citizens’ property would help save the county jail. Perhaps the article should have also cited the human impact on Van Wert County citizens in terms of jobs lost if the commissioners are forced to close the jail for lack of money. What is wrong with the county selling the hospital ground and using a portion of the money to keep the jail open? We do not need any more unemployed workers in this county if it can be avoided. Finally, a check with all department heads (Treasurer, Auditor, Clerk of Courts, Recorder and Veterans Services) would have revealed that I and the Sheriff are not alone in our opposition to a giveaway of the hospital property.

The May 28th article states that with approximately $18 million worth of capital projects scheduled to take place in the next few years, hospital officials say the land transfer would allow them to mortgage the physical hospital property and borrow money at a better interest rate. Commissioner Clair Dudgeon adds that the proposed transfer agreement provides many safeguards for the county. I agree with both of these statements. I was provided a copy of the latest draft of the agreement by the commissioners’ attorney when I finally met him on May 25th. The agreement is good for the citizens of Van Wert County – AS FAR AS IT GOES TO DATE.

The article quotes Mr. Minick as saying that because taxpayers paid $1.225 million as a part of the 1956 bond issue that resulted in the building of the current hospital, the hospital should now reimburse the county has some “sticking points”.

“Minick Sticking point” – the hospital association is the original owner of the land and sold it to the county for $1 in 1956 in exchange for the bond issue needed to build the new hospital according to Mr. Minick.

HISTORICAL AND LEGAL  FACT – The 1956 deed from the hospital association to the citizens of Van Wert County is a “contract”, a legal document with certain legal obligations imposed on both the seller and the buyer. Every valid contract has a “consideration” as its underlying basis. What is the “consideration” in the 1956 deed? Let me quote from the deed itself, “…for the consideration of one dollar and other valuable considerations, and more specifically in consideration of a certain agreement entered into between the Grantor (hospital association) and the Grantees (commissioners representing the citizens) dated the 12th day of September 1956…” (the grantors (hospital) sells to the grantee (county) 18.25 acres).

The legal obligation imposed on the hospital in this deed is to convey the land to the county. The county’s legal obligation in the deed is to pay $1 and the county citizens’ obligation to pay an additional $1.225 million in the form of bond money so that the hospital could be built in the first place. The September 12, 1956, agreement is very interesting reading. Among other things it contains the hospital association’s written acknowledgment that it cannot raise the money on its own from private sources to build the hospital and is therefore turning to the citizens of the county for the $1.225 million. In other words, Mr. Minick is both factually and legally wrong about the sale price

The rest of the consideration in that document is the hospital’s agreement that in exchange for the $1,255 million, it “will agree to conduct and operate a hospital on said premises and to maintain and keep in repair both the inside and outside of said grounds or real estate upon which said building or buildings are located and to include all repairs, both major and minor…”

So then, what does the September 12, 1956, agreement say? (a copy can be obtained from the commissioners’ office). The agreement obligates the citizens of Van Wert County to underwrite the $1.255 million used to build the hospital. In plain words the hospital association says, citizens, if you give us $1.255 million (consideration) so we can build a hospital, we will give you 18.25 acres of land and we will operate a hospital there and do everything necessary to operate a good hospital. The agreement goes on to say that if the new hospital is built, the hospital association agrees to “…faithfully and efficiently administer, maintain and operate such hospital as a public general hospital….”

Mr. Minick says that the association has repaid the $1.225 million many times over by the association’s own investment in the facility. That’s right, that’s exactly what the association agreed to do in 1956 and the citizens of Van Wert County gave the association the $1.225 million to enable it to do it. Now, what is “sticky” about that?

Mr. Minick also points out that “the hospital provides millions of dollars’ in free health care to the county’s poorest citizens. That is also right. It provides the free health care not out of goodness of heart, but because federal law requires it to do so.

The article then goes on to say that:

 “Minick also addressed the county prosecutor’s assertion that paying money to the county would help county taxpayers, saying he (Minick) feels Kennedy’s idea is, rather, an attempt to get funds from an entity that’s doing well financially to pay for raises for county employees.”

Let’s examine that position. First, this present economy has not been any kinder to county employees than it has to many of their brothers and sisters in Van Wert County. In addition to not having had a pay raise in three years, since the middle of 2009, county employees have had their wages cut by approximately 10% with the closure of the Courthouse on Friday afternoons. The county employees voluntarily accepted this pay cut, and if anything, the citizens of the county have every right to be proud if them. Elected department heads, the prosecutor included, have their salary set by state law so they are not included. Personally, I am perhaps the third highest paid department head in county government behind the Common Pleas Court and Probate/Juvenile Court judges. In fact, I even had a pay raise a year and one half ago that was allowed by statute if I gave up my private practice of 28 years, which I did. So, this is not about pay raises, the commissioners decide on those anyway, instead it is about fairness to the citizens of the county. It is about fairness to the citizen who wants to get a car title on Friday afternoon and can’t because the title department is closed; it is about fairness to the citizen who wants to record the deed to that new house on Friday afternoon and can’t because the Recorder’s Office is closed; it is about fairness to the citizen who wants to pay real estate taxes on Friday afternoon and can’t because the Treasurer’s Office is closed; it is about fairness to the citizen who wants to conduct auditor’s business on Friday afternoon and can’t because the Auditor’s Office is closed; it is about fairness to the citizen who wants to get a passport or check on a lawsuit they think they might be involved on a Friday afternoon and can’t because the Clerk of Court’s Office is closed; it is about fairness to the disabled veteran who, on a Friday afternoon, wants to see why his disability check didn’t come that month and can’t because the Veterans Service Office is closed. And last but not least, it is about fairness to the citizen whose home was broken into on a road that used to be regularly patrolled but wasn’t patrolled any longer or as much because of budget cuts at the Sheriff’s office.

Near the end of the piece, the May 28th article states that if the hospital association has to pay for the citizens’ land, changes will have to be made to the proposed transfer agreement. That’s not true. Parties, including the county and the hospital, can contract to anything they want to as long as it is not illegal. The current draft agreement is certainly legal and, as I said earlier, is good for the citizens of the county. It also gives the hospital what it wants, the land. The current proposal could still be used without any changes except for repaying the $1,255 million and the hospital association would still have improved its equity position and could still mortgage the ground. The question is, how badly does the hospital association want the ground? If it truly wants or needs the ground, then it should repay the citizens of Van Wert County, the original $1.225 million instead of the $9 million to $11 million that the sane 1956 dollars are worth in 2010; no one that I am aware of is asking for that. In the alternative it can continue to lease the ground for $1 per year.

I would make several final points. First, it is my opinion that the hospital association administrators with their superior knowledge have perhaps taken advantage of the county commissioners; transfers such as the one being contemplated can be complicated. I would like to believe that this is the case and would wonder if perhaps the commissioners don’t now feel trapped with no choice but to proceed – they do have a choice. Second I am somewhat concerned and was surprised to learn that the hospital association has volunteered to and is paying for the commissioners’ attorney. Third, a suggestion – if this matter has in fact been under consideration since 2004 waiting another 6 or 7 months until the new commissioner takes office won’t hurt. Let the new commissioner take a look at this issue with fresh eyes and then make the final decision.

Finally, $1.225 million sounds like a lot of money and it is, but I would urge folks to get on the Internet and to go to “GuideStar.org” and search “Van Wert County Hospital Association”. When they get there they should look at the IRS Form 990 documents filed by the hospital association for years 2006, 2007, and 2008 and see what the hospital association is compensating its administrators each year. Then they can make up their own minds on this hospital land transfer issue.

Charles Kennedy

County Prosecutor

via email

To the Editor:

First of all, we want to compliment the Van Wert County Hospital for the medical care they supply to our county residents, and also to those outside the county who use and trust this facility. Van Wert County is blessed to have such a great hospital. We do, however, have some concerns, along with Charles Kennedy, the Van Wert County prosecutor, and Stan Owens, the Van Wert County sheriff.

In January of this year, we read in the Times-Bulletin that the county commissioners were going to deed the land and everything affixed to that land (the hospital) to the Van Wert County Hospital Association. We then expressed our concerns at a department head meeting.

No elected official remembers this transfer being discussed in 2004 as Mark Minick had stated in the Van Wert Independent. And if it had been, we would have given it as much attention then as we are today. It is a very sad coincidence that due to the economic conditions we are currently experiencing, the hospital’s representative thinks this is only being done to save the jail and give county employees pay raises. This isn’t true. We represent the citizens of Van Wert County and truly feel the county has a vested interest in this property.

We appreciate the Van Wert County commissioners scheduling a public meeting sometime in mid June.  In 1956 it was the citizens that voted for the bond issue to build the Van Wert County Hospital and we think the citizens should be included in this decision today. We encourage everyone to attend this important meeting.

Sincerely,

Jan McIntosh, Van Wert County Recorder

Cindy Mollenkopf, Van Wert County Clerk of Courts

Beverly Fuerst, Van Wert County Treasurer

Nancy Dixon, Van Wert County Auditor

via email
6/3

Central president for VWCH land transfer

To the Editor:

I've been reading the several articles regarding the potential Van Wert County Hospital transfer with a great deal of interest. I believe there are numerous errors in people’s belief that the transfer should in someway be the financial panacea for all of the problems facing Van Wert County.

One of the arguments is that the taxpayers in 1956 paid moneys in a bond issue to build the hospital and that money should be paid back. I believe there was even a reference to these funds being a 50-year interest-free loan. 

There is nothing further from the truth. The truth is that the citizens believed deeply enough about our community's future that they were willing to fund a hospital. The county chose not to operate it and lent that obligation to the Van Wert Hospital Association in turn for a dollar a year rent. The logic of taking back those funds in 2010 and spending them on salaries is so far from the original will of the people that the legality of its suggestion should be reviewed.

The truth of the matter is that the building realistically only has value as one thing, a hospital.  What everyone is overlooking is that the tenants (Van Wert County Hospital Association ... the doctors and nurses) can leave anytime they choose. 

All over the state of Ohio, large for profit hospital groups have come into communities, built satellite facilities and hired the doctors away from county-run hospitals. There is nothing to stop Lutheran or Parkview from coming to Van Wert, building a nice new facility and striking a deal with the Hospital Association or even bringing in their own people. 

When that happens, the county has a world-class problem ... an empty building that is worth zero.  Who is going to buy it? It's a great location, but what would it cost to tear that building down?  Do you think someone would pay $1.2 Million and another $1M or $2M to tear it down? Do you think another hospital group is going to come in here and buy it to compete with a brand new shiny facility? Financially, we do very well in supporting one hospital, but Van Wert could never support two.

The building has no value to anyone but the association; the money was given to support the health and welfare of the citizens, the citizenry of 1956 supported a hospital building, not a jail, and certainly not salaries. 

The commissioners understand that the answer to Van Wert's financial concerns are jobs, which generate new tax dollars and revenue streams over long periods of time. We have to have a vibrant community to attract new businesses, one of which is local health care. The commissioners understand that the Hospital Association represents hundreds of jobs in the community, jobs we want to keep in the community.

These certainly are not easy decisions, especially when our needs are outpacing our revenues, but the transfer of the property to the Association perpetuates the will of the taxpayers of 1956 and continues to benefit our community. The Association has funded multi-millions of dollars of improvements and additions to the original wishes of the community, all without taxpayer support. 

I believe they deserve the asset that means so much to our community – an asset that has been paid for 50 times over with medical care to our citizens. An asset they are willing to continue to invest in to return positive developments to our community.

Please support the commissioners in their foresight to keep our health care locally provided and controlled.

F. W. Purmort

Van Wert

via email
5/29

Writer raises questions about new rules

To the Editor:

On Tuesday, May 18, Van Wert County's Regional Planning Board met to discuss ways to strengthen our county and ensure economic growth, and they hope to capture that in the Comprehensive Plan, a document that lays out rules and regulations for the county, effective in August 2010.

Last year, our commissioners, together with all area mayors and representatives from each township, began discussing the option of placing a moratorium on new housing in the unincorporated (rural) areas of the county. 

To be more specific, page 7 of the Comprehensive Plan states that new housing should be allowed only if one of the following is met: the proposed house is located in an incorporated area where public water and sewer exist, OR if the proposed house in an unincorporated area is built on an EXISTING house site with an EXISTING fire number.

Additionally, page 24 of the Comprehensive Plan states that PRIOR to the sale and deed transfer of a home, the home's septic system must be pumped and brought up to current specifications, and the home's well system must pass the Board of Health's inspection.  According to the Comprehensive Plan, the purpose of such regulation is that "by requiring that septic systems be brought up to current health code specifications prior to a sale and deed transfer, the community will have another home taken care of."

To paraphrase the commissioners’ language: no one will be able to build outside of city limits, and home sellers who are already taking tremendous economic losses on their homes will be forced to pay a $12,000 to $30,000 "septic tax" before they can be released from their real estate liability. 

Considering our county's economic depression, it is difficult to comprehend why our county leaders would discourage growth and penalize the real estate industry. Such regulation equates to economic ruin for our county, for it provides no where for new residents to build and no where for current residents to go. 

Perhaps that is their very intention.

Gene D. Pool 

Van Wert County

via email
5/29