MORGANTOWN — The House of Delegates on Thursday adopted a resolution calling on the state attorney general to investigate the business practices of the owner of Fairmont Regional Medical Center.
The House also sent to the governor the bill that will make it more difficult, if not nearly impossible for cities to annex territory by minor boundary adjustment.
The resolution, HR 13, deals with California-based Alecto Healthcare Services, which announced the pending closure of FRMC on Tuesday. Alecto previously closed Ohio Valley Medical Center in Wheeling and its sister, East Ohio Regional Hospital in Martins Ferry, Ohio, last September.
The House took up the resolution at the start of the morning floor session. It cites Alecto’s stated mission to seek out and sustain hospitals in underserved communities.
Alecto bought OVMC in 2017, it says, but left the community to take the financial risks, totaling $3 million, then shut it down.
When it bought what was Fairmont General in 2104, it promised to continue community-based healthcare in the area and projected that the hospital would be profitable in 2017. Instead it is closing it.
“Multiple solutions have been offered to assist Alecto which have fallen on deaf ears and cold hearts,” the resolution says.
The state attorney general, the resolution says, speaks for the state’s legal interests and enforces conumber protection and unfair trade laws. So, “The House of Delegates calls upon the attorney general to immediately investigate the business practices of Alecto and determine whether it has violated state laws.”
The resolution originally had five sponsors, with Delegate Erikka Storch, R-Ohio, as lead and Majority Leader Amy Summers, R-Taylor, as a co-sponsor. However, Speaker Roger Hanshaw allowed others to sign on during the floor session. The full list includes all three Marion delegates plus six other local delegates.
HR 13 was adopted 95-4. All local delegates voted for it.
Annexation bill
SB 209 is the annexation bill. It passed unaltered through the House and will go to the governor.
In minor boundary adjustment under current law, the city bypasses the consent of freeholders and voters and applies to the county commission for the annexation. The commission decides if the application meets the various threshold requirements, including whether the annexation could be efficiently and cost effectively accomplished under either of the other available methods.
SB 209 requires each business, resident and freeholder in the territory proposed for annexation to execute an affidavit of consent. If the city is unable to reach the business, resident or freeholder and obtain an affidavit within 90 days of sending the affidavit and a letter of explanation, consent is presumed.
If the county commission determines annexation could be achieved more efficiently or cost effectively via the two other methods in code – via petition by 5% of the freeholders followed by a citywide vote, or via petition by both a majority of the qualified voters and a majority of the freeholders in the proposed new territory – it must deny the application.
The bill places a two-year moratorium on a reapplication for the same area, except upon a court order issued in response to appeal by the city.
Discussion on the floor was minimal. Delegate Larry Kump, R-Berkeley, was among the few who opposed the bill. He called it “too much dad gum government.”
Delegate John Doyle, D-Jefferson also opposed it. He said Jefferson County is the only county so far where a municipality has taken the step of growing by taking in territory within its urban growth boundary. He believes the bill upsets that growth option.
The vote was 94-5. All local delegates voted for it except Barbara Evans Fleischauer, D-Monongalia.
Tweet David Beard @dbeardtdp Email dbeard@dominionpost.com
