I’d like to extend a warm welcome to new and returning University students, faculty and staff. While you were away, Eugene ambivalently enjoyed the longest stretch of sunny, dry weather we’ve witnessed in the 30 years I’ve lived here. We’ve also experienced a major municipal controversy regarding the siting of Sacred Heart hospital.
Last March, after years of planning to expand Sacred Heart at its present site on Hilyard, the hospital’s chief executive officer announced a move to Eugene’s northern city limits.
As the city councilor representing Ward 3, which encompasses the present hospital, downtown, and substantial student housing, I was involved in discussions with Sacred Heart’s CEO, along with another councilor and city staff. My objectives were to:
* Ensure the availability and accessibility of hospital services to residents in my ward, especially the continued provision of full emergency room services. That meant keeping the hospital in the downtown area so residents wouldn’t have to travel halfway to Coburg for emergency medical attention.
* Protect downtown vitality by keeping the county’s largest private employer in the city center.
* Preserve the viability of the small business community that serves students as well as hospital employees, patients and visitors.
* Prevent costly and environmentally destructive sprawl. As a result of my participation in those discussions, a disgruntled constituent decided to file a recall petition against me. He is currently attempting to collect the required signatures to force a recall election. The petitioner’s complaint stems from one specific option emerging from our discussions with Sacred Heart which would have resulted in the hospital expanding on the six blocks due west of its current location. (Originally the hospital wanted to be given eight blocks, partially extending south of 13th Avenue, in addition to their current four-block site.)
In his statement in the Sept. 17 Emerald, the petitioner failed to acknowledge certain facts:
* There was no conspiracy to conduct discussions with hospital officials during summer term. The timeline was predicated on the hospital’s announcement in March and their stated need to start building a new facility as soon as possible.
* When the Sacred Heart proposal became public, the city and the hospital had reached no agreement. Serious incompatibilities had surfaced over provisions in the proposal. As a result, the city council — myself included — voted to take the six-block option off the table.
* If the city had been able to reach agreement with the hospital on any of the proposals, it would have been just the beginning of a 14-month-long process with ample opportunities for public involvement.
The hospital’s relocation is fraught with complexities, variables and competing interests. Even so, it is apparent that the recall process is being misused in this case.
The recall is intended as a remedy for Oregon’s citizens in cases where elected officials have failed to carry out their duties or have engaged in criminal misconduct. Neither is the case here; this recall is simply an instance of a constituent finding fault with my efforts concerning the hospital siting. Many of my constituents have been strongly and vocally supportive of my efforts to keep a hospital in the city center.
I intend to continue working to ensure that there are the full range of medical services accessible in the city center, as well as ongoing efforts to preserve housing and improve livability, especially in University neighborhoods.
I urge you not to sign a Ward 3 recall petition, and encourage you to contact me if you have questions about any issue, including this one.