COLONY — On April 2, Anderson County residents will have a decision to make regarding a new hospital — and hospital affiliates say the county needs one more than ever. DAVID LYBARGER, chairman for the hospital’s board of directors, then presented the proposal for the new hospital.
A town meeting was held in the Crest High School gymnasium Wednesday evening to give more information about the possibility of a new hospital in Garnett. The presentation outlined the state of the current hospital, as well as what it would take to construct a state-of-the-art replacement.
Travis Pigott, the owners’ representative for the hospital, opened the meeting by describing the disrepair that exists in the old hospital. It was constructed in 1949, and much of the elements of the construction have not changed.
“We have decided that the hospital is at the end of its useful life,” Pigott said. “Basically we have multiple systems failing.”
These systems span throughout the entire hospital, he said.
Much of the hospital is not compliant with current county building codes, including the electrical system, water connections, plumbing and air conditioning. The boilers in the hospital, which are the original from 1949, have lived far past their usefulness.
Pigott said the hospital is not compliant with the American with Disabilities Act (ADA), which must be remedied immediately. Space is an issue as well, as several staff have “offices in closets and one is working out of the old dark room.”
The current plan is to construct a one-story facility with no basement. Lybarger said the new building, located on the plot of land directly behind the current building, would “basically have no steps,” allowing for easy access.
Lybarger said the number of in-patients has remained the same, but out-patient care has risen yearly since the original hospital was built. The new construction would better accommodate visiting specialists who see patients on an outpatient basis, he said.
The cost for a new hospital would be approximately $25,365,000 with 16 months of construction. The cost to taxpayers would be based on a 5.299 mill levy for a 30-year loan — which comes out to $2.54 per month for a $50,000 home and $5.08 for a $100,000 home.
Lybarger said renovating the current hospital, instead of building anew, would be less expensive as a total cost in the beginning, but would be more of a burden to taxpayers.
“We could rehab this building, it is possible,” Lybarger said.
The estimated cost of renovation would be $21,325,657 with seven years of construction. The construction would force the hospital to close different branches for extended periods of time. The cost to taxpayers, also based on a 30-year loan, would be a 14.4 mill levy. This amount would be $6.92 per month on a $50,000 home and $13.84 per month on a $100,000 home, well over double the amount of a new hospital.
Lybarger said the reason for the increased tax for renovations is because St. Luke’s of Garnett, the tenant organization for the Kansas City-based hospital system, would not contribute to the cost if no new hospital is constructed.
St. Luke’s has agreed to cover two-thirds of the lease payment per year, or $1,024,000 on a yearly basis. They have also agreed to pay $2 million up front for new equipment costs.
Lybarger said St. Luke’s has an option in the agreement to back out of their commitment after 10 years, with a two-year notice. He said this is the biggest risk in the entire agreement.
“Ladies and gentlemen, this is our single greatest risk right here,” he said to the audience.
While there is risk in the agreement, he also said it wouldn’t be practical for St. Luke’s to nix the contract after 10 years. He also said the faith-based organization would contribute as long as they could financially afford it.
“I don’t see them going anywhere, that’s a heck of an investment to walk out on after 10 years,” Lybarger said.
The audience had the opportunity to read the question that will be on the ballot coming up in April. Lybarger urged the attendees to vote yes, because the new hospital will need to happen either way.
“One of these days we will be talking about a new hospital because the old one is broken and doesn’t work anymore,” Lybarger said regardless of what the taxpayers vote on April 2. “I have a feeling that would be very expensive.”
Anderson County to vote on new hospital
