By Jim Mimiaga

Advance public notice for special meetings of the Montezuma County Hospital District board will remain at 72 hours, despite an effort by some board members to lower it to 24 hours’ notice.

The amendment would have changed the special district’s bylaws to coincide with Colorado statute requirements that require at least 24 hours’ notice. It also would have allowed the chairman or any two board members the authority to call a special meeting, rather than only the chairman as it stands now.

But a motion made at last week’s regular meeting to officially alter the rules, following a 30-day public notice of the proposed changes, died after a 3-3 vote.

"This is a small, rural community, and people need to have enough time in advance to attend a special meeting so they can be heard on issues," said director Florence Bane, who along with directors Don Jolovich and Joe Reed voted down the measure. "Twenty-four hours is not ample time."

Proponents of the bylaw amendment, introduced by director Rick Beisel in October and supported last week by directors Susan Keck and Lois Rutledge, argued that the board needed more flexibility to call a special meeting in case of an emergency.

They point to a recent incident involving the ER-expansion project that required quick board action in order to avoid potential construction delays. Confusion over who would pay, Southwest Health System or the district, for a $10,000 automatic bypass switch needed to safely upgrade the hospital’s utility plant reached a boiling point last October, requiring an emergency meeting between the two boards.

A three-day advance notice was posted for a special meeting that solved the problem (SHS paid), but momentarily held up construction, a delay supporters say could have been avoided if less notice was required.

Also, in the event the chairman cannot be reached, no special meeting could be called by another director under the current bylaws. Ironically, Chairman Randy Smith was absent from the meeting.

"If you had a subject, Don, that you felt needed to be discussed in a special meeting four days from now and the chairman is opposed to that, then you would have no way to call that meeting," said Beisel, "and that is not in the best interests of the public."

But opponents of the measure feared that the new rules had the potential for dishonesty, and would allow future boards of questionable integrity to call a special meeting and discuss or decide on a controversial issue without the full board present.