LETTER: KRUGER CONTINUES TO MAKE CASE FOR INVESTIGATION OF NEW HOSPITALS AND LOSS OF OBSTETRICS IN SOUTH OF MUSKOKA

LETTER TO EDITOR: To Muskoka Algonguin Healthcare, MPP  Graydon Smith and Bracebridge Town Council

Re: Public deserves full transparency of South Muskoka Memorial Hospital development — and obstetrics decision delay

I am writing (again) to express profound disappointment — and growing concern — over the actions of Muskoka Algonquin Healthcare regarding hospital site selection and obstetric services in south Muskoka.

Although I previously served as chair of the Save South Muskoka Hospital Committee, I now write as an independent citizen concerned with the future of health care in our region.

On January 2, I wrote too Sylvia Jones, Minister of Health and Long-Term Care, to express serious concerns about the proposed bed count and the chosen location for the new hospital. It was copied to MAHC board and several levels of government.

Yet I received no response from anyone.

May 22 MAHC presented an update on its chosen Pine Street location.

Sadly it failed to address very important long-standing concerns, clearly outlining the extreme costs and unsuitability of its new hospital location.

Despite MAHC’s commitment to transparency and community engagement, the process has lacked openness and accountability. MAHC not only refuses to disclose any reasoning, but also appears to have been deceptive in relocating the Bracebridge obstetrics to Huntsville with full assurance of it reopening once again in the south.

MAHC’S health care decision continue to compoundly get worse, writes Bruce Kruger in another letter to the editor. FILE PHOTO Mark Clairmont

Site Selection Concerns

MAHC reported evaluating 20 potential sites in Bracebridge before narrowing it to three and choosing 300 Pine St. However, this decision was made without acknowledging significant deficiencies in the location, which is being donated by Bracebridge.

MAHC says it’s “moving forward with the acquisition of the land,” despite ongoing and legitimate community concerns.

This action must be paused until a full public review is conducted, and all issues are addressed with absolute transparency for once.

300 Pine St. has serious challenges:

  • A large pit with a depth variation of up to 30 meters (100 feet) will require costly fill and preparation.
  • The estimated preparation cost ranges between $50 and $180 million; costs that MAHC denied initially were included in the Stantec engineering report. The chief financial officer later acknowledged this figure as accurate yet not revealed it to the public. These savings alone would pay for dozens of patient beds in the new hospital, greatly expanding the bed count.
  • MAHC has also failed to disclose the need to acquire additional adjacent lands to build the hospital, including parcels owned by the Catholic School Board, a privately-owned property and/or a portion of J.D. Lang Park.

The public hasn’t been told we may lose a portion of our parklands, rather than MAHC reconsidering a previously preferred option site at 1975 Muskoka Beach Rd. MAHC must explain this.

  • The Pine Street site does not meet the required forty (40) “usable” acres for hospital development.
  • It fails to meet ministry standards for future area growth and lacks sufficient space for expansion, labs, and medical training facilities.
  • A significant rocky ridge on-site severely complicates and limits development at this location.

Lack of Transparency and Due Diligence:

MAHC:

  • Did not — Complete the second due diligence phase before initiating the acquisition on Pine Street.
  • Did not — Disclose all costs and property limitations in its public updates.
  • Did not — Provide sufficient evidence supporting claims that the Muskoka Beach Road (MBR) site includes provincially significant wetlands. A claim contested by the landowner and unsupported in publicly available documentation.
  • Did not — Outline that a retired senior district services official determined that Beach Road site would be significantly less costly to service than Pine Street; contrary to MAHC’s claim that it would be a lot more expensive.
  • Did not — Advise that the Muskoka Beach Road (MBR) site was the preferred site of the previous Gravenhurst town council.

Opportunity for Tremendous Savings to Town of Bracebridge:

The owner of the MBR site, Mr. George Chen, has offered to donate land valued at $10 million — plus an additional $10 million cash donation from his company, Muskoka Royale.

MAHC allegedly rejected this offer because the offer was received two days late, which affected no one. To ensure the Town of Bracebridge is not-of-pocket, Chen has also offered to purchase the Pine Street property, relieving the Town of Bracebridge of all associated costs spent to date.

Additionally, Mr. Chen advised that he would donate a portion of the Pine Street property as parkland for the town. This would be a tremendous savings for Bracebridge to put towards a great deal of medical equipment or more hospital beds.

At the very least, these savings to the town would completely rehabilitate the Rona property in the centre of Bracebridge into beautiful parkland, which the town hadn’t previously had funds to complete.

Call to Action:

Given these facts, I strongly urge:

  • The Town of Bracebridge to launch an independent investigation into MAHC’s site selection process and to disclose council’s reasons for donating the inferior land on Pine Street, while rejecting the financially enhanced offer of Muskoka Beach Road, saving taxpayers more than $20 million dollars.
  • The Ministry of Health must reject MAHC’s recommendation to proceed with 300 Pine St. as non-conforming for a hospital site.
  • Full public disclosure of the Stantec engineering report and any related due diligence documentation that reveals the unsuitability of the chosen Pine Street property.
  • That MAHC directly address the above concerns to the public rather than continuing to state in press releases that they are acting in a transparent manner, when, in fact, they are not doing so.

Their current recommendation of site selection threatens the long-term financial viability, service effectiveness, and growth potential of health care in our community. This decision should not be taken lightly or without full public scrutiny.

We deserve a hospital location that is forward-looking, fiscally responsible, and in the best interests of all residents, both now and for future generations. Pine Street does not provide this.

Obstetrics: Yet Another Broken Promise

It is deeply concerning and wholly unacceptable that MAHC has again failed the residents who live in the south of Muskoka.

After facing strong and widespread opposition to MAHC’s initial proposal to eliminate obstetric services from Bracebridge entirely, MAHC eventually relented.

They assured the community that, moving forward, Bracebridge would retain one of three designated obstetric beds, complete with appropriate medical staffing. In good faith, we accepted this assurance from MAHC, ensuring equitable health care access across the region.

Yet, within mere weeks of this commitment, MAHC transferred all obstetric services to its Huntsville hospital.

The stated reason? A “temporary staffing shortage” at SMMH due to maternity leaves and broader recruitment challenges. We were told this was a short-term measure, nothing more than a pause, until staffing levels could be stabilized.

Now, however, even that explanation appears to be unravelling.

Instead of fulfilling its promise to restore services to Bracebridge, MAHC has launched a study to determine the future of the obstetrics unit, but only after having already dismantled obstetrics in Bracebridge and relocated operations to Huntsville.

This sequence of events is not only disingenuous; it strongly suggests a predetermined agenda.

To now entertain the possibility of a permanent obstetrics closure in Bracebridge flies in the face of MAHC’s own assurances.

It also defies logic. If staffing shortages were truly the issue, they are by nature, temporary and resolvable. Not a justification for permanent removal, especially for a hospital not to open for years yet.

South Muskoka families now lack critical maternity care, contrary to promises by MAHC.

This is not just a policy failure by MAHC’s board; it’s a complete lack of credibility and openness to the public. Women and families in the south of Muskoka deserve reliable, compassionate, and accessible care.

Obstetrics at SMMH is not optional. It is essential. Our citizens all deserve much better from those involved, whether involving site locations or obstetrics.

Sincerely, Bruce C. Kruger

Bracebridge