Now is the time to approve the Three Rivers Hospital bond issue proposal on the Nov. 3 general election ballot. It’s a commitment that needs to be made sooner rather than later by residents of the hospital district. Waiting for a better idea, of which there are exactly none in front of us, could be catastrophic for this community’s healthcare future.
The $48 million bond issue proposal is detailed and intentional — no fancy frills, no exotic facilities, just modern healthcare basics that will buttress the Brewster hospital’s long-term prospects. Is it a big ask? Yes. But consider the potential cost of putting off necessary upgrades for much longer. Is it a risk for taxpayers? Possibly — but is it any bigger a risk than waiting for another as-yet-unformed solution, and losing the hospital altogether? Action has costs. Inaction can be costlier.
Rural healthcare is in a precarious state, and there’s no one coming to its imminent rescue. There are fewer communities than ever that might have some meaningful say in their own fate. This is one of them.
The hospital’s failed 2025 bond issue request and the 2026 iteration have generated opposition from an informal group of health care professionals who have raised concerns about whether the bond issue is a wise long-term investment. It’s a fair question given the 30-year event horizon.
But their arguments have a couple of weak spots. One suggestion is that we should gather more information and wait for a countywide solution that involves the other hospital districts. That sounds reasonable, and there was talk of coming up with a process to examine the idea, which would be welcomed. But it has gone nowhere in the past year and seems to have minimal momentum.
Some of the opposition group’s other points amount to a “parade of horribles” — what-ifs that are speculative about bad outcomes without offering a practical path forward.
The mathematical calculations about taxpayer costs are just that — math. They don’t in themselves constitute a reason to reject the levy. Property owners can do their own long-term monetary calculations and weigh them against the long-term advantages.
What if other local bond issue requests come along? Well, they certainly will, and each must be evaluated on its own merits. It’s a diversion to suggest that the one in front of us should be rejected because there might be more.
In an ideal world, the reservations raised by the group that is recommending rejection of the bond issue would be given more latitude, and more time for consideration. As it is, the window of opportunity for the kinds of upgrades the hospital requires is steadily closing. It would be great if we could throw it open and explore options, before it slams down definitively. The mechanics for that to happen are not in place.
Three Rivers has provided the information that voters need to make an informed decision about the current proposal. The required 60% supermajority vote for approval remains a big hurdle. But as two of the hospital’s board members note on the opposite page, “Waiting years for an undefined plan does not resolve today’s infrastructure needs. We can continue evaluating how rural healthcare should evolve while being responsible stewards of the hospital we have now.”
If you agree with that, a “yes” vote is responsible and responsive. We recommend it.
Also deserving of voter consideration is a another medical-related request on the Nov. 3 ballot. Residents of the Methow Valley Emergency Medical Service District, which includes the towns of Twisp and Winthrop as well as surrounding rural areas, are being asked to approve a one-year levy increase of 10 cents per $1,000 of assessed property value to help support the operation of Aero Methow Rescue Service.
Approval of the levy request would essentially endorse and continue an action that Aero Methow took earlier this year: funding an additional ambulance crew to meet the growing demand for emergency medical services in the valley. Aero Methow hired three paramedics to staff a second ambulance 24 hours a day from April to October. Those additional positions cost about $310,000. Ongoing staffing a second ambulance is needed to help meet the growing need, Aero Methow has said.
There’s no denying the need, and the cost-benefit ratio of the levy request is convincing. Valley residents would be wise to agree.
