Letters to the Editors

The hospital situation from one senior's point of view

Editor: In the 15 years I have lived in Hernando County, the majority of the letters you receive, it seems to me, have been written by seniors expressing their views and concerns, as well as personal involvement in the health care arena.

As an 81-year-old senior, I wish to put my 2 cents in, some opinions and some facts.

First, let's talk about the lengthy battle between Oak Hill and Brooksville Regional hospitals, which apparently is now resolved. Having been in Oak Hill and Spring Hill Regional as a patient, and Brooksville as a visitor, my choice has been and will be Spring Hill Regional.

Its owners also own Brooksville Regional, so I must assume when it's completed in its new location, it will offer the same quality of service as Spring Hill Regional. I'm not faulting their current quality of service, but instead its need for physiological cosmetic upgrade and less congested location.

As for east Hernando's complaints that it will take it longer to get to the new location, let me submit the following thoughts. If driving by one's own vehicle, it's probably not a life-threatening situation. If using a 911 ambulance, the equipment therein of a most sophisticated modern nature, plus highly trained paramedic personnel, will far outweigh the slightly longer ride. This, however, will be minimized by the direct access of a major highway (State Road 50), as opposed to the congestion (however slight) in their present location.

Now, let's take a look at another factor involving these two hospitals that has not been addressed and, to some, may seem trivial. Oak Hill is going to add a unit for heart surgery.

I applaud this because currently the nearest facility for this specialty is Bayonet Point in Hudson. But, at the same time, Oak Hill is discontinuing its obstetric division. A good reason to have the new Brooksville hospital is to fill this void.

Where the bottom line means everything in so many cases, I guess Oak Hill can make more money through the extremely costly treatment of a heart patient than it can delivering a baby. I know the expenses involved on their part differ vastly, but I'm sure the actuaries have been hard at work.
-- Richard J. Lewis, Spring Hill

Corps of Engineers is best bet for dredging project

Editor: Re: Channel dredging project is a fiasco, Feb. 9 letter to the editor:

Albert Lyons tries to justify our walking away from the Army Corps of Engineers for the channel dredging project, but with a couple of errors:

First, the maintenance would be the responsibility of the Corps of Engineers and not the U.S. Coast Guard. The Coast Guard would be responsible only for marking.

Second, there is no one in county government with qualifications to manage a dredging project, as was proven with the Bayport Channel project.

I have a master's of science degree in geodetic science, was first in the group in the United States certified by the American Congress on Surveying and Mapping in 1984 as a hydrographic surveyor, and was employed in that field for 20 years, with the majority of contracts being pre-dredge and post-dredge surveys for the Army Corps of Engineers.

Shortly after the Bayport project was paid off, I decided to go into Bayport sightseeing, with a boat drawing 27 inches, and fetched up on a sizable rock in mid-channel, suffering considerable damage to the boat. With my background, I decided to look into the situation and asked to see the project drawings of the dredging and survey work.

I was not shown a pre-dredge survey, but the post-dredge survey record was quite revealing. Upon completion of dredging, the dredger was contracted to conduct a post-dredge survey (requiring the fox go into the hen house), for which he conducted cross-channel profiles every 500 to 750 feet and did not conduct a channel center profile.

These profiles displayed a very irregular pattern of cross-section profiles, as opposed to a regular profile with constant slope patterns on either side of the channel, and obviously precluded the discovery of any shoal areas remaining, such as the rock I found.

Standard dredging procedures require the completion of pre-dredge and post-dredge profiles every 50 or 100 feet, as well as at least one channel center profile to tie all information together. These survey records are then processed to determine the volume of actual material removed by dredging, which controls the amount paid the dredger. Also, these surveys and the analysis must be conducted by a qualified survey firm not connected with the dredger. When I asked people connected with this contract, I was told the presence of the rock was known, but the county administration was directed by a commissioner to let it go and pay off the dredger.

Further, "walking away from the Corps" would not save the county money. If you remember, the project cost ballooned by about $2-million when the Corps found out all of the steps to satisfy environmental requirements, which increased the county portion by a like amount. Thus, if we decide to go it alone, this same environmental cost will apply, as well as the some $800,000 we have paid to the Corps, plus dredging and survey costs, if we are to manage it intelligently.

That means the county would be out $2.8-million, plus dredging and survey costs of $1-million to $2-million on their own, as opposed to just $2.8-million payable to the Corps for a properly done project and perpetual maintenance.

I think the choice is a no-brainer.
-- C.F. Willett, Spring Hill

Share your views

The Hernando Times welcomes letters from readers for publication.

Because of space limitations, letters should be of reasonable length.

Letters may be edited for clarity, taste and length.

All letters must be signed and must contain the writer's address and telephone number. Addresses and telephone numbers will not be printed.

Send your letter to Hernando Times, 161 E Jefferson St., Brooksville, FL 34601. To fax a letter call 754-6133. Send letters by e-mail (in text-only format) to hernando@sptimes.com

© 2006 • All Rights Reserved • Tampa Bay Times
490 First Avenue South • St. Petersburg, FL 33701 • 727-893-8111

Contact the Times | Privacy Policy
Standard of Accuracy | Terms, Conditions & Copyright