Reader Mail: Hospital Concerns
06
March
3/6/2009:
When you receive over 20,000 emails per month – some are certainly bound to get overlooked.
One such email was from Hoboken resident Jamie Steiner – who has some thoughts about Hoboken University Medical Center:

So what is going wrong?
“There are few reasons to be optimistic that the HUMC can return to profitability this year. We know the hospital suffered a 4.3 mm dollar operating loss, but that is not the whole story. There are two ways that the hospital could be forced to close within the next year, causing an interruption of services, or triggering the 52 mm dollar loan guarantee given by the city. Do not rely on Hoboken taxpayers to get you out of your mess!
Added to the 4.3 mm loss is a depreciation expense of 4.6 mm and interest of 2.2 mm, totaling over 11 mm. Accounting rules state that depreciation and interest are separate from “operating losses”, but this is an accounting fiction. It will be necessary to borrow when repairs inevitably must be made. Interest expense is also real and is being made up for by borrowing yet more money.
Borrowing has gotten harder. Last November, due to these losses, the hospital needed cash. Unable to get long term financing, the authority issued 9.7 mm dollars of short term debt due this May. The hospital kicked the can down the road until after the municipal elections. Now, credit markets are worse, and Hoboken’s credit – upon which the hospital relies – is worse too. If the hospital cannot roll over the debt before May, the city could be called upon to pay 9.7 mm dollars in cash or close the hospital. Higher taxes, anyone?
Read the rest of the letter after the jump…
(Letter about Hoboken University Medical Center, continued…)
“In addition to borrowing, hospitals can obtain financing by putting off its vendors until cash comes in – they hope to put off the day of reckoning.
The HUMC’s accounts are 90 days overdue – the statewide average is 60 days.
Vendors eventually become unwilling to deal with the hospital, stopping its operations. The hospital assures me that they are not having this problem yet.
So what is going wrong? New Jersey hospitals must provide medical care to everyone, regardless of their ability to pay, but the state “Charity Care subsidy” has changed. The HUMC will be getting as much as 3 mm dollars less from the state in 2009 than in 2008. At the same time, more people than ever do not have health insurance. The HUMC’s plan is to reduce non-essential staff and pay the doctors less. We hope that the quality of care will not suffer.
These discouraging difficulties raise the specter of closure, but closure isn’t all bad. A nearby regional hospital could operate the new emergency room. This should comfort those who fear that traffic could delay life saving treatment for residents. In fact, patients would probably achieve a better standard of care in regional hospitals with more resources.
The city should not keep the hospital open at any cost when other alternatives exist. If the hospital administration is unable to turns things around, don’t ask the taxpayers to foot the bill – it is not the only answer.”





















March 7th 2009 - 11:17:45 |
Kids First – Kickoff – Tomorrow, Sunday March 8 2-5 Maxwells
Kids first are opposed to foolish spending and decisions. The boe is full of fat that needs trimming – Jack Raslowsky, Raia and Garcia need to go. Raia Oland and Martinez are in support of spending our tax payers money for pet projects such as HOLA that benefit olands and martinez’ kid.
Please Vote for Minutillo, Sullivan and McAllister April 21
Login or Register to reply
March 8th 2009 - 07:09:33 |
Why are we paying the CEO of a small municipal hospital $800K/yr?
Login or Register to reply
March 8th 2009 - 07:41:42 |
taxed_to_death wrote:
Don’t worry. The more he and his cronies make, the sooner it gets shut down and we can put up some 75 story condos on that plot of land. All that development will magically make our tax problems disappear. Didn’t you hear? Roberts said so……..ha ha
Login or Register to reply
March 8th 2009 - 08:57:04 |
Change the City Govt. Leadership and get your $ worth with the hospital. Vote intelligently in May elections
Login or Register to reply
March 8th 2009 - 09:45:58 |
I hear the situation in the hospital has been solved. After a nationwide search we have found another insider to fix the problem. Hey, sounds like he police force too.
Login or Register to reply
March 8th 2009 - 12:23:00 |
davidcdavid64 wrote:
Who’s cousin is it?
Login or Register to reply
March 8th 2009 - 12:29:07 |
As I understand it, it’s not really a matter of an insider getting the job. No outsider wanted to go near the hospital because of its dire financial condition.
Who would want to come aboard just as the ship is sinking?
Login or Register to reply
March 8th 2009 - 12:38:52 |
estevens wrote:
Well, it appears that the city of Hoboken, personified by its smart and responsible city council, was eager to be on deck when the ship goes down. AMAZING!
Login or Register to reply
March 8th 2009 - 12:42:15 |
truth1 wrote:
And how the @@@@ are we going to vote intelligently??? You put the stupid phrase all over; People thought they ‘intelligently ‘ voted Obama in – and how exactly are we now more intelligent?
We need to take all these crooks down! Not vote more in!
Login or Register to reply
March 9th 2009 - 08:27:25 |
checkers wrote:
It’s more like I bought a car on credit, I can make the interest payments, but I have no way to pay back the principle – and when I need a new car, I’m going to have to borrow more money, but I still won’t be able to pay back the original loan. Oh, and I’m borrowing money for gas and oil and repairs along the way.
But lets assume for a second that your right: they will magically make money some point down the road and make up for all of these accumulated losses. They still don’t count interest expense – so 4.6 mm is still not the right number because there was 2.2 mm in interest.
If you look at the bond docs, they say the maximum interest rate they can pay is 10%. The bonds they are rolling over currently yield more than 10%, and that’s only until may: longer dated debt usually requires a higher interest rate to place. So what happens if they can’t issue for 10%? Will they issue with a 10% coupon and be forced to accept a huge discount? If they have to issue a 10% coupon bond for 12% yield, they will only be getting around 85 cents for every dollar borrowed. And they still won’t have enough cash to pay the bills, so will they dip further into the 52 mm trust fund by defeasing to cover operating expenses? So this issue is very immediate – it has nothing whatever to do with depreciation. Also of immediate concern is my third point, which is reduced revenue from the state for charity care. So, if you aren’t concerned about depreciation, what about interest expenses, liquidity, and charity care?
Hoboken is secured by the property, but we come after other creditors, so the further in the hole they are if they finally have to call it quits, the bigger the tab the taxpayer will have.
I sincerely hope that they turn it around and return to profitability. It would be fantastic to have a profitable hospital for our community, and I hope they are sucessful. At the same time, I think it behooves people to be aware and not take for granted the things we are being told by those who have their hands in the public coffers – as we know, in Hoboken, that approach doesn’t usually pan out well for the taxpayer. After this letter was submitted, the monthly report for February stated they broke even on an operating basis. So good for them, lets hope they turn that into a profit next month, and going forward.
I happen to think the Hospital is much better run than the city – at least the hospital made the tough choice for layoffs and has responded to the problem – so far, that’s more than we can say for city hall.
Login or Register to reply
March 9th 2009 - 10:38:42 |
A special meeting of the Hospital Authority has been scheduled for 7pm this Wednesday for approval of the 2009 bond resolution (rollover of a short-term $9.7M note to a 10-year bond, proceeds of note having been used to address cash-flow issues). That’s $9.7M removed from the capital improvements plan that was to bring the hospital back to profitability.
At the same time, the city council will hold a special meeting for introduction of the amended 2009 budget.
Login or Register to reply
March 9th 2009 - 10:46:52 |
estevens,
This is a new special meeting? They presented the 2009 budget last wednesday, plus the bond resolution AFAIK. Is this something new?
Login or Register to reply
March 9th 2009 - 10:50:36 |
matt_72 wrote:
The salary is high end, but not out of range. Additionally, since his tenor was always meant to be temporary, this is probably appropriate IF he can make the hospital operate at breakeven or profitably. I have no issues with private compensation agreements.
Login or Register to reply
March 9th 2009 - 10:59:49 |
estevens wrote:
to put this action in perspective for those that may not spend much time focusing on muni finance; this action is akin to taking out a cash advance on your Visa card to pay your rent, and then opening up a home equity line to pay off the visa account cash advance. do YOU think this is a viable strategy? is there anyone here who DOESN’T think this whole hospital charade is a disaster on a countdown?
i would compare this situation to the Dems pouring money down the GM rat hole just to pay back the UAW for their votes. it is a waste of money. they are still going to fail. and all the taxpayers are paying for the few jobs that should have been eliminated already.
Login or Register to reply