Why does Sheriff Wilson oppose proposal that’s good for DN?
Sheriff Dean Wilson recently traveled to Siskiyou County to declare his opposition to Klamath dam removal.
Pacific Power, though, officially notified me in its last bill that “the CPUC (California Public Utilities Commission) affirmed the company’s analysis that the KHSA (Klamath Hydroelectric Settlement Agreement) would expose customers to less cost and risk than relicensing and continuing to operate the dams.”
So removing the dams would benefit ratepayers as well as the river, the fish, the tribe and commercial and sports fishers.
I have two simple questions for Sheriff Wilson: Are you working for the people of Del Norte County or Klamath Basin potato farmers and a giant corporation owned by the world’s second-richest man? Are you sheriff of Del Norte County or an itinerant would-be politician?
I also have a question for Roger Gitlin, who is involved with the same Tea Party chapter founded by Sheriff Wilson: What is you position on the Klamath dams, Mr. Gitlin?
Board members should explain why they support regionalization
I recently attended a town hall meeting in which three local doctors and a former Palmdale, Calif., hospital board member presented their views opposing the proposed “regionalization” of Sutter Coast Hospital.
The empty seat at the table was reserved for Sutter Coast Hospital CEO Eugene Suksi, in case he changed his mind at the last minute from the previous week’s declining of an invitation to present the Sutter Board’s side of the decision to close local decision-making at our hospital.
The subsequent transfer of decision making to a geographically distant board, with absolutely no guarantee of having a single voice representing Del Norte County and environs, is sadly in need of a voice explaining the need for such action.
This letter appeals to the nine Sutter Coast Hospital Board members who voted to turn over their duties/powers to a board in a distant galaxy. I mention no names here in order to spare them the embarrassment and humiliation they must feel for leaving their neighbors and friends in the lurch. It seems to me that they have a responsibility to us all to clearly and unambiguously present their reasons why they do not see this as a move by corporate power brokers to glad-hand them into the position and hunker down under pressure.
Come on board members, be up front with your convictions!
Dale L. Bohling
Regionalization could improve quality of services in long run
I was born in Seaside Hospital here in Crescent City in the 1970s. Grew up here, moved away, obtained a graduate level education in health care, obtained health care through a huge Health Maintenance Organization (HMO) and got along just fine with the HMO system.
I’m not saying HMO is the best but when compared to the Preferred Provider Organization (PPO) that most government workers in Crescent City have as their only health insurance option ...
When I first read about Sutter Coast Hospital’s pending “regionalization,” I was actually happy to see it. I feel that in the long run regionalization would improve not only the quality of staff and services provided but also give the people living in the area more and cheaper options for heath insurance/health care services.
Sutter-Health Net Plan is an HMO comparable to Kaiser here in California. For government workers and union representatives it may be worth exploring what options regionalization would mean to us in regards to our health insurance and the possibility of being able to obtain an HMO as opposed to a PPO.
One must wonder, with whom/where did this business come from of Sutter Coast, once regionalized, becoming a “critical access” facility.
Sutter and local stakeholders have publicly denied critical access even being on the table in the scheme of regionalization. The people of the community should do their homework, attend the meetings and publicly provide verifiable evidence before condoning or condemning regionalization.