Would this work?

Most of us recall that the voters approved the sale of $120 million of bonds to build our children’s hospital.

Somehow the county hospital got in the act and is charging the children’s hospital $10 million a year for rent.  It looks like the county hospital thinks it got a free building from the taxpayers and the right to charge rent.  Talk about taking candy from babies.

Now the children’s hospital has declared bankruptcy.

What would be wrong with us offering free rent of the $120 million building to a hospital organization that would operate here in El Paso?  Would the Shriners or St. Jude or some other organization be able to make a go of the hospital if they did not have rent expense?

We deserve better


14 Responses to Would this work?

  1. Reality Checker says:

    Hospitals and medical centers in other areas of the state, including the Children’s Hospital in Dallas, are working to capitalize on the UMC and CH problems. They are spending money on advertising in El Paso to lure El Pasoans to out of town hospitals and medical centers. They know the level of distrust and disgust and they are taking advantage of it.


  2. U says:

    Can anyone say Ponzi Scheme


  3. Jerry Kurtyka (on beautiful Cortes island BC) says:

    When the first UMC-CH “agreement” was announced and UMC was going to take an equity swap in exchange for CH debt, Judge Escobar said that this was doable because the debt was really a “soft cost”, i.e., funny money.

    Now UMC is raising taxes and blaming it on the CH non-repayment of debt that was by the County Judge’s estimate, a “soft cost.” You can bet that your tax bill won’t be soft!

    Will we ever get a straight story on this fiasco? Or just more BS from our elected leaders and Valenti?


    • Jimmy says:

      I’ll tell you the same thing I told Children’s Hospital management from the very beginning ,,,,, “trust me”.


  4. will says:

    10 million in rent per year sounds right if the children’s hospital is using the entire wing and all the new area that was built with all the 120 mill bond money. if umc is occupying half then it should be half. i believe the biggest problem are the fees umc is charging for lab work and other services. the bond would have 6 million in interest each year at 5 percent if no principle were paid. 8 mill a year in principle would have to be paid to pay off the 20 mill. of course the interest would go down each year as the principle was paid so the amount of rent sounds in the ballpark.


    • But, your “sounds right” doesn’t explain how UMC can charge rent for space that we (the taxpayers) are paying for!


      • will says:

        if umc was taking the money and paying down the bond i would be ok with it. but it sounds like they were using it for whatever they wanted. would like to know if childrens was using all the area and if they were using less then the rent is out of line. again, why not just let childrens pay the note. why go through umc ?


  5. Haiduc, does your comment mean you understand why and how a tax funded entity can legally charge rent to another tax funded entity? And, that you approve? I still do not understand how UMC can declare itself to be the owner of EPCH’s building, if we, the tax payers, are on the hook for the construction costs!


  6. Haiduc says:

    Dear Brutus,

    Would it not have been mo’better if the EPCH had been a good partner with UMC (EP County Tax Payer) than a bankrupt hospital?

    Now you suggest it be run or sold to an out of town organization..
    Health$Care is NOT free and too much candy is BAD for your health!


    • M.T. Cicero says:

      When it looked like Jim V and UMC were not going to negotiate in good faith, Rosemary C and CH did what any good businessperson would do, get yourself “Hired Guns”. Those who have dealt with the likes of Mr V.and company. Bankruptcy was the answer and the solution. As the facts are being layed out to the public, the millions owed to UMC will tumble and quickly, Mr V stop grandstanding and will settle. This never would have happened otherwise. “U get what u Pay for”. Then,reality will surface,The exaggerated CH payable note on UMC’s books will dissipate and so will the rosy financials. Get ready tax payors


  7. ManintheMoon says:

    You the tax payer are going to cover any cost with increased taxation for CH. Vero done said a tax increase is coming because of CH. Then again common sense should have prevailed from the start in that if two private sector hospital could not make a go for a children’s wing what in hell would make any one believe local government could by funding a private business, Let’s call CH, with UMC and county’s involvement, what it is and has been STUPID,MORONIC, IMBECILIC. Yep and some of the same people that help start this white elephant are repeating the same process expecting a different out come and that is call insanity and the tax payers will suffer for the craziness once again. Their children and grandchildren into the foreseeable future will be paying for this non-sense if some one does not step into stop it. Then CH is the El Paso dream it only has to sound good and look good on the outside and does not have to really function or do what it was claimed to do. It is the El Paso way in the past, present and looks like for the future and seems most here like it that way.


Leave a Reply -- you do not have to enter your email address

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: