Please note at 9:06 I deleted a redundant duplicate paragraph copied from the green letter.There was no change in this posting's message.
I must confess that when I first read the letter on April 5, I though from its format that it could have been written by a prankster on April 1 and mailed to the courier. The time frame for publication would be about right. But then since I know the paper double checks on authorship of letters that the Assemblyman’s signature on this letter was genuine.
My next thought when I read Assemblyman Green’s letter was that it is a strong document that should have been written and acted upon four years ago. That was the time when the entire State government was in Democrat hands. And the power of the “Speaker pro tempore” might well have been effective.
There is always a danger when one takes a phrase in a document out of the context that the meaning may be altered. I will attempt not to give new meaning to any of Mr. Green’s words. If I do misinterpret Assemblyman Green’s meaning I will be happy to give him space in this blog for his rebuttal.
Much of Green’s opus is based on several false premises. He compares a situation that took place in Patterson with Plainfield’s loss. There is no similarity except a hospital was closed.
St, Joseph Medical Center a highly respected facility remained in the community. Paterson suffered no more loss of health care than Elizabeth did as on separate occasions two of the three hospitals there in the 70s closed.
The fact is that there was and still is nothing in Plainfield to replace the definitive acute care services lost when without any political pressure Solaris was permitted to close MRMC.
What Green proposes is a conglomeration of outpatient facilities in a so call medical mall. There are several buildings on Oak Tree Rd near Park Ave that provide in individual offices everything he proposes.
He is correct that any hospital needs the services of multidiscipline providers; physicians of all specialties as well as vendors of all facets including the latest advancements in technical equipment.
At one point he remarks. It is counterproductive to get into a mindset that an acute care facility is the be all, end all for the future of Muhlenberg. I think there is a way to provide our residents with the access to healthcare services, while creating jobs, without necessarily operating an acute care facility.
I certainly would be interested a seeing his proposal to accomplish the above. It sounds too much like a politician’s campaign talk of promising the sky and not delivering when elected.
He has ignored entirely the loss to Plainfield has been an immediately accessible faculty capable of giving needed acute short term in patient hospital care.
We should be making it worthwhile for developers and hospital professionals to open closed hospitals and continue operating them as medical facilities.
Once again if memory serves right while others had proposed legitimate for profit organizations who were interested in the property as a hospital but got no where in talks with the city; Green found a solution in a “medical mall plus housing units" developer from I believe Perth Amboy. Thank goodness that did not fly.
With that in mind, considering the present Solaris push could possibly the true crux of the Assemblyman’s interest is contained in these two paragraphs.
“It benefits the community by reopening closed medical facilities and allows the math to make sense for groups looking to redevelop closed hospitals -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------.
I’m taking an “all of the above” approach in saving Muhlenberg Hospital. It is too important for our community not to look at every viable option and see if we can make something else work while accomplishing our major goals of creating jobs and protecting access to medical services.”
One final question; what “access to medical services “will be protected?