An editorial comment on how the Hospital board made its decision | Eastern North Carolina Now

     Publisher's Note: We do very much appreciate this fine article on the BRHS debacle from our friends at the Beaufort Observer. It is the opinion of this publisher that complete reporting and analysis of this controversial issue is unparalleled in scope.

    We have often enough been critical of Alice Mills-Sadler's leadership of the Hospital board. More specifically, we have lamented her tendency to operate too much behind closed doors. Her predecessor, Sandy Hardy, was much worse, but that does not excuse Alice from not only adhering to the letter of the law, but also to the spirit of it.

    But when it came down to crunch time she came through.

    Most of the public will not realize what happened Monday. They will focus on the outcome of the choice between CHS and UHS. But we think the process was just as important. So let us share with you how the decision was made.

    The Negotiating Committee has met for weeks and always in closed session. We did not contest that, even though it was clearly a violation of the law. They have the legal right to meet behind closed doors when they are considering confidential information, but only when considering that information. Much of the information they considered was public information, sitting on a shelf in Brown Library. But they treated it as confidential.

    The reason we didn't contest this is because the Negotiating Committee needed to ability to haggle with the "suitors" and that was more important then transparency at that stage, simply because the Negotiating Committee was only an advisory body with the full board being the decision-maker.

    So we were very concerned prior to Monday's meeting that the "real" decision would be made in a closed session when the Negotiating Committee would meet with the Full Board behind closed doors and then the board would come back out into open session and make a faux decision without the public knowing what really was behind the vote. That did not happen, as you can see if you watch the video of the meeting.

    For those who are not inclined to watch the several videos, here's what happened. Sadler called the meeting to order and immediately called on the CFO, Richard Reif, to review a financial analysis of the three proposals. He did an excellent job. And his exceptional preparation and ability to communicate esoteric information in an understandable manner was a superb example of a true professional rendering his board an invaluable service. (And on that point we might add that we wish Mr. Reif would do some training of the various auditors who report to our local boards in this county. They would benefit from learning how to make the complex understandable.) But back to the point.

    After providing solid data to all the board members and the public, the chair then called upon each member of the Negotiating Team to explain their positions, after having sat through all the negotiating sessions with the proposers. And each did so in a clear and concise manner. It was obvious that each had prepared their comments in advance and we commend them for that.

    Once that round had been completed Mrs. Sadler opened the floor to other board members to ask questions and for each to advocate for their position.

    It almost got out of hand because Sandy Hardy persisted in trying to rhetorically trump other individuals and the process, but he's an attorney so what more can we say.

    Nonetheless, as you see in the #7 video, Mrs. Sadler held the reins tightly to allow every board member to speak. When Clifton Gray and Allen Roberson spoke not only was to outcome clear but every person watching the video could tell why each board member was voting the way they did. The vote was then taken.

    In our 35 years of observing and even teaching boards good decision-making process, we have to say this was among the finest examples we have ever seen of an effective group decision-making process applied to a very complex and emotional decision.

    The people of this county were served well by Alice Mills Sadler, the board attorney Joe Hahn and every member of this board, whether we agree with their position or not. And for that we commend Mrs. Sadler and the board members.

    Let us hope the County Commissioners do as well with their part of the process.