Palomar Pomarado Health
JOINT MEETING OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS &
STRATEGIC PLANNING COMMITTEE
Pomerado Hospital -- Conference Room E
January 26, 2004
| AGENDA ITEM | DISCUSSION | CONCLUSION/ACTION | FOLLOW-UP!
RESPONSIBLE PARTY |
| CALL TO ORDER | 5:37 p.m. | ||
| ESTABLISHMENT OF QUORUM | Dr. Larson, Nancy Bassett, R.N., Michael Covert, Dr.
Conrad, Ted Kleiter, Bruce Krider, Dr. Otoshi, Dr. Rivera, and Director Scofield. Also attending were Gerald Braclfl, Jim Flinn, Gustavo Friederichsen, Lone Harmon, Bob Hemker, Marcia Jackson, Dr. Kirkman, Dr~ Kolins, Anamaria Repetti, Mike Sbanahaz~, Evelyn Warner, and Lori Wells. Guests: Tom Chessum, Craig Mclnroy, Eyal Perchik, and Steve Yundt (Anshen & Allen); and Joe Hook and Greg Palmer (Rudolph & Sletten). |
||
| NOTICE OF MEETING | The notice of meeting was mailed consistent with legal requirements. | ||
| PUBLIC COMMENTS | There were no requests for public comments. | ||
| MINUTES December 18,2003 | MOTION: Motion made by Ted Kleiter, seconded by Dr. Larson, and carried, for approval as presented. |
| AGENDA ITEM | DISCUSSION
~ |
CONCLUSION/ACTION | FOLLOW-UP!
RESPONSIBLE PARTY |
| STRATEGIC PLANNING
COMMITFEE PROPOSED 2004 MEETING SCHEDULE |
The Committee discussed the proposed 2004 Strategic
Planning Committee Meeting Schedule, which would
have the Committee meeting on the third Tuesday of the
month, with a start time of 6:00 p.m. (dinner at 5:30
p.m.).
Bob Hemker expressed a potential conflict, since the Finance Committee had considered the third Tuesdays of the month for their meetings. ~ |
Lone Harmon to explore other meeting date options and send out matrix to Committee members. | L. Harmon |
| ARCHITECTURAL UPDATE
ON BUILDING PLANS |
The Noven~ber and December Committee meetings
were expanded to full Board meetings in order to
present updates on alternative building solutions to both
the Board and the Strategic Planning Committee. Based
on this information, the Committee invited the full PPH
Board to the January 26 Committee meeting to further
review architectural options.
As a result of the outcome of the December Committee meeting, Marcia Jackson presented an extensive compilation of market demographics, statistical data, and projections/forecasts. Also included were a summary of program and planning options, sample schemes for PMC, POM, and a new site, and a comparison, summary of these schemes. At Michael Coverts request, the discussion about land site options was deferre4 to the next Committee meeting. He requested that tonight, the Committee focus on building options, namely whether to build on the existing sites, and/or add a new site. Our architectural firm, Anshen & Allen, as well as representatives from Rudolph Sletten, presented a |
Mike Shanahan to provide land site options information for analysis at March Committee meeting. | M. Shanahan |
AGENDA ITEM DISCUSSION CONCLUSION/ACTION FOLLOW-UP!
RESPONSIBLE
_______________ _____________________________________ _____________________ PARTY
detailed Project Cost Review, utilizing two methodologies to determine total costs for each facility/proposed facility. Comparative program data and benchmarks were incorporated for new and/or existing facilities.
The first method focused on Building Gross Square Footage per Bed (BGSF/Bed), which accounts for the full scope of services to be provided, programming standards/codes, and planning criteria.
The second, method was based on Project Costs per Bed (Project $/Bed), which accounts for direct and indirect "bricks & mortar" costs, related "soft" costs, and escalation of all costs; the costs were escalated to calculate total costs in future dollars, based on the projected dates of construction.
Each scenario included the 2002 cost projections, and broke down the specific costs that were not included in the 2002 estimates, such as escalation, expansion of services, site development, parking structures, and medical equipment.
Alternative schemes for each project/facility were broken down by Project Scope (full service, high acuity, specialized care). Several alternative system-wide schemes were presented, utilizing different project combinations. A "Preferred Scheme" was presented, along with a potential project schedule. The "Preferred Scheme" included the following key findings:
• Cost per bed is between $1.0 - $1.2 million
• New Site completes construction 2 years earlier
• New Site reduces disruption to current operation
•__PMC to remain a full-function hospital _______________________ ____________
Strategic Planning Committee Minutes 1/26/04
AGENDA ITEM DISCUSSION CONCLUSION/ACTION FOLLOW-UP!
RESPONSIBLE
________________ ________________________________________ _______________________ PARTY
• POM to remain full-service and be expanded
The Preferred Scheme involves maintaining PMC as a full-service hospital, increasing the size of POM, and developing a third site to meet the expanded healthcare needs of the community.
The Preferred Scheme provides
• Integration of clinical services
• Flexible delivery of program and plan options
• Room for future incremental growth at all campuses
• Continuity of current services
• Option for physicians to practice at location of preference
Key characteristics that the Preferred Scheme
demonstrates are:
• Benefit to District voters through increased access to services
• Commitment to local Government needs
Bob Hemker to provide B. Hemker
• Responsible utilization of existing assets analyses at March Finance
Committee meeting
Methods of financing the projects were discussed, including General Obligation (GO) bonds, revenue Bonds, cash reserves, and philanthropic funding sources. Dr. Rivera requested the debt capacity analyses
be updated for the March Finance Committee meeting. FF11 Administration to PPH
continue moving forward in Administration
Director Krider mentioned the possibility that the PMC
the direction of three
Towers could be used for other non-OHSPD uses.
campuses.
After much discussion, there was consensus among the
Board members and Strategic Planning Committee
_____________________ members that the Preferred Scheme should be pursued. _______________________ _____________
Strategic Planning Committee Minutes 1/26/04
AGENDA ITEM DISCUSSION CONCLUSION/ACTION FOLLOW-UP/
RESPONSIBLE
PARTY -
| Bob Hemker expressed the belief that this approach allowed maximal financial and phasing flexibility | ||
| FINAL ADJOURNMENT | 8:25 p.m. | |
| SIGNATURES
Board Secretary Recording Secretary |
,~
MBIf~2//54-_~-- ., Lon armon | |