BEFORE THE
-o0o-
TRANSCRIPT OF
PROCEEDINGS
FORMAL BOARD
MEETING
Reported by: DENISE PHIPPS, CCR #234, RDR, CRR
2
A P P E A R A N C E S
BOARD
MEMBERS PRESENT
CHERYL A. HUG-ENGLISH - CHAIRWOMAN
JACQUELINE JONES
DONALD BAEPLER
ROBIN TITUS
SOHAIL
ANJUM
STEPHEN MONTOYA
JAVAID ANWAR
DRENNAN A. CLARK - Board Counsel
STEPHEN QUINN -
Deputy General Counsel
MAUREEN LYONS - Deputy Executive Secretary
3
1
2 -o0o-
3
4 1. Call to Order and Announcements
5
6 CHAIRMAN HUG-ENGLISH: We'll call this
7 meeting of the Nevada
State Medical Examiners to order.
8 I appreciate everybody being available on
such short
9 notice.
We have just a few agenda items to cover today.
10 So hopefully it won't take too long.
11 It's
good to see all of you, sort of, down
12 there.
13 The first item is we do have a
couple of
14 announcements. And before we get started on those, I
15 would just like to extend good wishes to
Marlene Kirsch,
16 who, as most of
you are aware by now, fell and broke her
17 hip a couple of days ago. So we're all sending our best
18 and to let her know we're thinking about
her.
19 And I'll turn it over to
Tony. He has a
20 couple of announcements as well.
21 MR. CLARK: Good afternoon. The first
22 announcement, you may have seen in the
newspaper that
23 commencing on October 1st the Board will
go through an
24 audit by the Foundation or the Federation
of State
25 Medical Boards. They will be auditing our licensing
4
1
procedures, our investigation and disciplinary procedures
2 and our funding
procedures. That's pursuant to
3 legislative directive.
4 Second, our Deputy General
Counsel, Steve
5 Quinn, who is here with us today, will go
through some
6 training in
7 October 26, with the Federation of
Attorneys on
8 Regulatory Boards. It's certification training for him
9 to be board counsel.
10 And third, just a reminder
about the one-day
11 seminar put on
by the Federation of State Medical Boards,
12 for medical boards and physicians needing
assistance or
13 how to deal with the
impaired physician. That's
November
14 15th in
15 please contact Maureen and let her know
and she'll make
16 arrangements for it.
17
18 2. Consideration of Purchase and Installation of
19 Video-Conferencing Equipment
20
21 CHAIRMAN HUG-ENGLISH: Thanks, Tony.
Our
22 second item is a continuation of a
discussion we had at
23 our last Board meeting, and it relates to
the purchase
24 and installation of
video conferencing equipment.
And,
25 again, Tony has an update for us on that.
5
1 MR. CLARK: At the last meeting on September
2 4th, the Board
authorized staff to purchase video
3 teleconferencing equipment for the board
room in
4 a place in
5 meeting, that because it's a relatively
large purchase,
6 around $49,000, that
we have to go through the State
7
Purchasing Division, the Department of Administration.
8 And so I sent the two bids that we got
down to State
9 Purchasing so that they would know what
equipment we
10 required.
11 They have put it into a bid. It is out now.
12 We should have the bids available for
opening within
13 three weeks. As soon as we have a bid approved, we
14 intend to go forward with the purchasing
and installation
15 of the equipment in
our
16 You will recall that at the
last meeting, the
17 Clark County Medical Society offered its
conference room
18 for video teleconferencing
meetings from
19 As a result of that
invitation, I went down
20 and met with the people at the Clark
County Medical
21 Society, and Don Havens and Larry Mathias
and Dot and I
22
also went over to the State Board of Dental Examiners
23 office. They have a conference room as well. Both
24 conference rooms would meet our
requirements.
25 In both places we could have our
meetings on
6
1 Fridays and Saturdays. They will make the conference
2 room available on Saturdays. They will have someone
3 there to open the place and to set up the
equipment for
4 us. The State Board of Dental Examiners is very
5 interested in partnering with us so that
they would have
6 a place to hold their meetings in
7 video teleconference them. Both places have plenty of
8 parking and are
relatively easy to get to. Both
in the
9 southeastern part of
10 Examiners at Tropicana and Eastern, and
the
11 Medical Society on
12 Because it's another state
agency, a sister
13 agency that we can assist and can assist
us, our
14
recommendation would be that we agree to partner with the
15 State Board of Dental Examiners and
utilize their
16 conference room
and allow them to utilize ours.
17 CHAIRMAN HUG-ENGLISH: Thank you.
I'd like
18 to open it up for discussion from any of
the Board
19 members. Anybody have any comments?
20 MEMBER ANWAR: I have a question. How large
21 is the facility for the dental
association?
22 MR. CLARK: There is enough room for the
23 entire board and as many people as want to
speak, as
24 necessary. It appears to me to be a good sized
room.
25 It's a little -- it's just a little
smaller than our
7
1 conference room in the
2 MEMBER TITUS: What days do they meet or how
3
often do they meet? So there
wouldn't be a conflict on
4 our meetings?
5 MR. CLARK: They indicated they would be
6 willing to accommodate our meeting
schedule. So that's
7 all I can -- I don't know when they meet
specifically.
8 MEMBER BAEPLER: Would they accommodate us
9 for Saturday meetings?
10 MR. CLARK: Yes, they will.
11 MEMBER TITUS: Would they look at then
12 paying, if we buy all of the equipment for
the northern
13 office, would they pay for all of the
equipment in the
14 southern office?
15 MR. CLARK: The initial proposal to them was
16 that we would buy the equipment, both
north and south,
17 and they would set it up for us when we're
having
18 meetings there.
19 MEMBER BAEPLER: How are they set up for
20 amenities for the people we bring in to
interview and to
21 spending many hours
sitting in the hall? Is there a
22 convenient place
for them to sit and be available?
23 MR. CLARK:
Yes, there's a convenient waiting
24 room to the outside of the conference
room. And there is
25 a restroom there
that's immediately available. And
8
1 offices that can be used on Saturday when
they're not
2 there for any -- for conferences that any
individuals
3 might want to have.
4 CHAIRMAN HUG-ENGLISH: Any other comments or
5 discussion?
6 MEMBER TITUS: It seems -- in my line of
7 business, the only people I know who are
retiring early
8 are the dentists. If we are going to put this equipment
9 into their buildings and fund that
equipment for the use
10 of that, their offices, and then they get
to use our
11 office at no
cost to them, I'm a little bit anxious about
12 the MDs supporting the dentists, for them
to then use
13 that when the Medical Society down there
have offered it
14 and at least those are physicians. So I'm a little bit
15 anxious about that particular arrangement
and the
16
financial cost to us, and the dentists seem to me they
17 make out like pretty good.
18 MR. CLARK: The only thought I have about
19 that is that it's a sister state agency
and we'd be
20 assisting them. And it's a public agency's facility that
21 we would have state equipment in. So that's the only
22 response that I
can make about that.
23 CHAIRMAN HUG-ENGLISH: I think in addition to
24 that, if you think about it, we would be
assuming the
25 cost either way, at either location. It was not part of
9
1 the arrangement for the Clark County
Medical Society, for
2 example, to pay
either. And so I think the idea is that
3 we had agreed that we were going to
provide this
4 equipment to provide greater accessibility
to our
5 meetings. We're looking for a place to do that. And I
6 think both offers are very generous.
7 And I do want to again thank
the
8 Medical Society for their generous offer
to use their
9 space. And I think that both offers are good ones,
and I
10 think the only -- I think the appealing
thought with the
11 dental board is that there is some
reciprocity there that
12
would allow, if we're going to put this equipment in,
13 would allow two state agencies to benefit
from the use of
14 it. And so that I see as a side benefit of that
15 combination.
16 MEMBER BAEPLER: I have one more question, I
17 assume in
18 trained as a technician to operate the
system, what about
19 in
20 MR. CLARK:
We would have at least one of the
21 investigators trained to operate the
equipment who will
22 come to
23 trained personnel at both ends of the state.
24 MEMBER BAEPLER: The dental people are going
25 to use it, does that mean every time they
want to have a
10
1 meeting we have to send someone down or is it --
2 MR. CLARK: No, we wouldn't have to send
3 anyone down to
4 our people at our
5 MEMBER BAEPLER: The question still is if
6 it's going to be used by both boards,
somebody from the
7
8 to be trained to
operate it.
9 MR. CLARK: Correct.
10 MEMBER BAEPLER: I think that might be
11 mentioned as part of the agreement. The alternative is
12 that every time they meet we have to send
an investigator
13 down to spend at a
meeting with them to operate it.
14 MR. CLARK: Yes.
If that was a question, the
15 answer is yes.
16 MEMBER TITUS: I just would want to make sure
17 that, don't get me wrong, I think the
dentist office
18 offer is a good
one also, but I would be leaning towards
19 using the state fellow
agency. I want to make sure if we
20 pay for the cost of this on both ends,
which is what we
21 were going to do no matter where we were
going to put it,
22 that if the dental board then needs to use
it after that,
23 I think any personnel costs, if they're
going to use it,
24 should be, we need to make sure it's assumed
by the
25 dental people, not us
carrying the agency any further.
11
1 CHAIRMAN HUG-ENGLISH: My understanding is
2 that we would not be responsible for
personnel for their
3 board meetings. Now, I guess if it's in our office up in
4
5 available to help out. But I don't think it would extend
6 to this board sending someone down to
7 operate the video equipment. I think that in the
8 purchasing and in the training of that we
would make sure
9 that people from both boards were trained
how to use it.
10 Any other thoughts?
11 MEMBER TITUS: Is it a motion item?
12 CHAIRMAN HUG-ENGLISH: It would be.
13 MEMBER TITUS: I would move that we go ahead
14 and go forward with this when the state
has done their
15 bidding. As far as where the location would be, I
would
16 propose we have it at the dental office.
17 CHAIRMAN HUG-ENGLISH: There is a motion to
18 approve having the video conference placed
in the dental
19 board offices in
20 MEMBER JONES: Second.
21 CHAIRMAN HUG-ENGLISH: Any further
22 discussion?
23 If not, all in favor? Opposed?
Chair votes
24 in favor of the motion and the motion carries.
25 So we will go forward then
with the bidding
12
1 process through the state and we'll
proceed when we have
2 completed that, getting video equipment
hooked up in both
3 of those offices.
4 Any further comments on that.
5 Tony?
6 MR. CLARK: And I will advise the Board, as
7 soon as we have the authority to go
forward and what the
8 cost is so all
the Board members will know immediately as
9 soon as we know what the cost is.
10 CHAIRMAN HUG-ENGLISH: Thank you.
And thank
11 you, Tony, for all the
effort. I know it's been a lot of
12 work in getting those, the prices and the
bids and all of
13 that process going. So I appreciate all the work.
14 Because it's really moved along quite
quickly. And we,
15 that's our goal with this, to get it up
and running as
16 soon as we can.
17
18 3. Consideration of Appointment of License
Application
19 and Malpractice Review Committee
20
21 CHAIRMAN HUG-ENGLISH: The third item on our
22 agenda is consideration of the appointment
of license
23 application and malpractice review
committee. This has
24 been placed on the agenda based on
discussions that we
25 had at our last board meeting about the
fact that our
13
1
workload has increased dramatically.
The workload not
2 only of the investigative committees, the
two committees
3 that we have now, but also the appearances
that come
4 before this board. And so this is a proposal. And again
5 I'm going to turn it over to Tony to talk
a little bit
6 about, but to add an additional committee
that might
7 serve a purpose of lightening those
appearances for the
8
Board as a whole.
9 So Tony.
10 MR. CLARK: Recall at the last meeting, we
11 had a number of physicians appear who had
one or two very
12 small malpractice claims against
them. And they were
13 forced to appear and had good explanations
for the claims
14 that were made against
them. It seems a little unfair to
15 the Board and physicians in those
situations that they
16
have to come all the way up to
17 and make an appearance.
18 So we brainstormed this a
little bit and
19 thought that perhaps the three members of
the Board who
20
are not on either of the two investigating committees,
21 might form another committee to look at
malpractice
22 actions or cases that
are $200,000 or less. The Board
23 would still want to see each of those
physicians who has
24 a malpractice claim over 200,000. But for those under
25 200,000 or 200,000 and less, perhaps they
could be
14
1 reviewed summarily by this committee with a
determination
2 being made on whether or not that
individual had to come
3 before the whole board. And if not, then the committee
4 would make a recommendation at the next
Board meeting
5 that those license requests be granted
without a personal
6 appearance by
the physician.
7 And we added into that a
review of the
8 respiratory therapists be
made by this committee as well.
9 Because in many instances the Board
doesn't need to take
10 up its time with respiratory therapists
who don't have
11 significant problems. In those instances where there's a
12
significant problem, or there's some question about the
13 malpractice response, then those items
would be referred
14 by the committee to
the whole Board at its next meeting.
15 Otherwise, the committee would recommend
to the Board
16 that it approve
all of those applicants for licensure,
17 both respiratory
therapists and physicians. And
that's
18 above 200,000 would be before the Board
automatically.
19
Below would be reviewed by the committee.
20 CHAIRMAN HUG-ENGLISH: Comments?
21 We missed that. Could you repeat?
22 MEMBER ANJUM: By that I mean that that
23 physician is being reviewed, he
does not have to appear
24 in front of that
committee?
25 MR. CLARK: No, this would be a records
15
1 review and the review would include all of
those
2 explanations submitted by the physician
and from the
3 courts and attorneys that we receive in
the office, so
4 that there would be a pretty good
explanation of the
5 basis for either
settlement or the claim or the judgment.
6 MEMBER ANJUM: So the physician doesn't have
7 to be there in front of
the review committee?
8 CHAIRMAN HUG-ENGLISH: That's correct.
9 MEMBER JONES: That sounds like a good idea
10 to me.
11 MR. CLARK: If I might say it differently.
12 It's a summary review by the committee as
opposed to
13 having an appearance
by the doctor.
14 MEMBER TITUS: This would actually be done in
15 a timely manner so that if that committee
still thinks,
16 man, he's had five of these
,even though they're only
17 $10,000, then you would still have them
reviewed. I know
18 I was one of the ones very frustrated at
our last
19 meeting, we had these doctors coming, and
I'm just going
20 what are they doing here with our much
bigger schedule
21 and the more people we have to look
at. I applaud
22 whoever had this idea, because I think it
would be -- I
23 think this is a very forward-thinking
idea, and thanks to
24 whoever thought of it.
25 CHAIRMAN HUG-ENGLISH: You know, I think that
16
1 we all have felt after the last Board
meeting that the
2 number of
appearances was rather overwhelming. And
I
3 would like to open it up to make sure that
everyone is
4 comfortable with that level of $200,000 to
see if that
5 seems to be a level that below which this
committee
6 would, the subcommittee would review and
above which the
7 Board as a whole would review. So I'd like some comments
8 on that.
9 MEMBER ANWAR: What I'd like to say is that
10 if the committee on review of the records
that are there
11 of a particular physician finds the need
to visit the
12 physician to ask some further questions
clarifying the
13 application and the lawsuits against the
physician, then
14 they should have that prerogative to do
so. Otherwise,
15 if they don't deem it necessary, then they
don't have to
16
do it that way, then the committee can make
17 recommendations to the
full Board.
18 CHAIRMAN HUG-ENGLISH: I think the way it
19 would work --
20 MEMBER MONTOYA: It's not just necessarily
21 the money, the amount, but somehow we're
going to have to
22 also look at what act. Somebody might have gotten off
23 lucky, just got hit for $200,000, but
maybe he did
24 something that really
we should know about. I don't
have
25 a mechanism in mind to review those
egregious acts, so to
17
1 speak. But seems like we shouldn't
set a monetary level.
2 Maybe something that also protects the
public a little
3 bit better.
4 MEMBER BAEPLER: I would assume if the
5 committee were looking at the case about
MD who had less
6 than 200,000 and thought there were some
circumstances to
7 be brought before the whole Board, we'd
proceed with a
8 full Board appearance, wouldn't we?
9 CHAIRMAN HUG-ENGLISH: Yes, that's correct.
10 And I think that if there were questions
after the three
11 committee members reviewed this, that
rather than pulling
12 that individual in before the committee,
that person
13 would come before the full Board. It wouldn't be like an
14 investigative committee meeting where
we're meeting and
15 pulling physicians
into the subcommittee. If there
are
16 any questions that this committee had,
they would be
17 placed on the full Board agenda for the
next meeting.
18 MEMBER TITUS: One concern I do have about
19 that, as Steve mentioned, is the way some
of these
20 hospitals are paying liability and paying
costs and so
21 the physician gets off, perhaps. And so maybe one way we
22 could look at it is a cumulative $200,000
total
23 malpractice suit awards, a death or a single
case for
24 200,000. So there's a couple automatic criteria so you
25 guys aren't wasting your time either. Because you could
18
1 get pretty busy with this, frankly.
2 MEMBER BAEPLER: Do you consider adding a
3 third function, a preliminary screening of
people that
4 are requesting licensing by endorsement?
5 CHAIRMAN HUG-ENGLISH: Can I just comment on
6 that that I think this committee is going
to be
7 overwhelmed if we add that in. I think that --
8 MEMBER TITUS: Nice try, Don.
9 CHAIRMAN HUG-ENGLISH: I'm a little concerned
10 about adding even the respiratory
therapists, quite
11 frankly, to have three people reviewing
all of those
12 without the full Board review. And I think if we add too
13 many things in, I think licensure by
endorsement is too
14 new. It's too big a concept for this Board. I think it
15 needs full Board attention.
16 Any other feelings? Is everybody comfortable
17 then with the monetary
cut-off. If you recall, we used
18 to have $100,000 that would proceed
without committee
19 review but would be approved through the
regular
20 licensing process. If it was over $100,000, it would
21 come before the Board for review. And then since the
22 last legislative session we've been
reviewing every
23 malpractice claim as a full Board, no
matter if it's
24 $1,000 or 100,000. So this would be a little higher than
25 what we had as a
cutoff. But recall that with that
19
1 cut-off we had no review by any Board
members. This
2 would be a committee looking at it.
3 So is everybody comfortable
with that?
4 MEMBER ANJUM: Is there any way to figure out
5 what percent of cases are reviewed that are
under 200,000
6 so far? Is it a 10 percent number or 20 percent or 50
7 percent?
8 MR. CLARK: I don't think we've done that
9 kind of a calculation,
doctor. I'm not aware of any.
10 MEMBER ANJUM: That might give us an idea how
11 much workload this committee will be and
how much
12 workload will
be taken off the full Board, really.
13 CHAIRMAN HUG-ENGLISH: That's a good point.
14 I think we can certainly look at that and
get some
15 information on that.
16 MEMBER ANJUM: Because if it's a large
17 number, we may
have to reduce the limit. Because we
18 don't want to totally overwhelm the new
committee and a
19 big workload and some
important decisions to be made.
20 CHAIRMAN HUG-ENGLISH: Right.
21 I'm hearing a consensus. I think that
22 everybody likes
this idea; is that correct?
23 MEMBER ANJUM: Yes.
24 MEMBER BAEPLER: Yes.
25 CHAIRMAN HUG-ENGLISH: So maybe what we could
20
1 do then is have a motion to approve this
committee and,
2 with the level set right now at $200,000, that we could
3 then relook at
if it turns out that that's going to be
4 too much or too big a
number. Does that sound
5 reasonable?
6 MEMBER BAEPLER: Sure.
7 CHAIRMAN HUG-ENGLISH: I need someone to make
8 a motion, please.
9 MEMBER JONES: I move that we form this new
10 committee with the three members who are
not on the
11 investigative
committees. Do you want the
details that
12 they will review the cases that are
200,000 or below
13 200,000, so that they don't have to come
before the
14 Board?
15 CHAIRMAN HUG-ENGLISH: Yes.
And also it
16 would include the respiratory therapists
that don't have
17 significant issues.
18 So the motion, just to
clarify, is to approve
19 the formation of a committee for license
application and
20 malpractice review that would review
physicians with
21 malpractice claims less than $200,000 and
respiratory
22 therapists that do not
have significant issues.
23 Is there a second?
24 MEMBER ANJUM: Second.
25 CHAIRMAN HUG-ENGLISH: Any further
21
1 discussion?
2 (No response.)
3 CHAIRMAN HUG-ENGLISH: If not, all in favor.
4 Opposed?
The Chair votes in favor of the motion and the
5 motion carries.
6 So we will proceed in forming
that committee.
7 And we will, I think, activate that
committee prior to
8 our December board meeting, and so
hopefully that will
9 help with some of the appearances coming
up.
10 MEMBER TITUS: Could you go over that again?
11 CHAIRMAN HUG-ENGLISH: That would be
12 Dr. Jones.
It would be myself and Dr. Anwar. Welcome.
13 I think we have some work to do.
14 So we will, before the next
board meeting,
15 we'll convene this committee and we'll
see, we'll be able
16 to give the Board some feedback on numbers
at the next
17 December board meeting.
18 MEMBER TITUS: One concern I do have about it
19 is if somebody is applying for licensure,
this committee
20 gets together and
decides that there does not need to be
21 an appearance, will it be done in a timely
manner so they
22 get enough notice so they can meet at the
next board
23 meeting because I would hate to see some
of the
24 applications delayed because now it's
stuck in this
25
middle committee and so they have to kind of leap frog it
22
1 to the following
meeting. So that's an issue. We don't
2 want to delay people in our state.
3 MR. CLARK: The plan is to have this
4 committee meet and have its
recommendations formulated in
5 time for that physician, if he or she has
to appear at a
6 board meeting,
can make the very next board meeting.
7 CHAIRMAN HUG-ENGLISH: So we'll make sure
8 that it's done ahead of the 30 days prior
to the next
9 board meeting.
10
11 4. Consideration of a Second Board Office to be
Located
12 in
13
14 CHAIRMAN HUG-ENGLISH: Next agenda item is
15 consideration of a second board office to
be located in
16
17 And Tony.
18 MEMBER BAEPLER: Madam President, on this
19 particular item
I believe technically one would have to
20 move to remove it from the table for consideration,
and I
21 would suggest that we not do that, that we
need some
22 additional deliberations and consultations
and that it
23 ought to be considered at a regularly
scheduled meeting
24 of the Board rather
than an interim meeting such as this.
25 CHAIRMAN HUG-ENGLISH: Is that a motion, Don?
23
1 MEMBER BAEPLER: No motion is required unless
2 someone moves to take it off the table.
3 CHAIRMAN HUG-ENGLISH: We're still tabled.
4 Any further discussion by other members?
5 MEMBER TITUS: Has Tony, have you done work
6 on it that you feel
needs to be addressed today.
7 MR. CLARK: Not yet.
8 CHAIRMAN HUG-ENGLISH: Any opposition to
9 continuing to have that agenda item
tabled?
10 (No
response.)
11 MR. CLARK: It's tabled to the December
12 meeting.
13 CHAIRMAN HUG-ENGLISH: We'll continue to
14 table it until December and bring it up at
the next
15 regularly scheduled board meeting.
16
17 5. Consideration of Additional Office Space at
the
18 Board Office and Associated Costs
19
20 CHAIRMAN HUG-ENGLISH: Agenda Item 5 is
21 consideration of additional office space
at the
22 office and the costs
of that. And Tony is going to
tell
23 us about that.
24 MR. CLARK: As the Board's business continues
25 to increase, it appears that we are
getting cramped in
24
1 the
2 Adjacent to the first floor room that we
have in our
3 headquarters building, where the files are
now stored is
4 open office, open about equal space, 540 square feet.
5
The building manager will add that to our lease at a rent
6 of $1.10 a square foot,
which is $594 a month. And
7 utilities of 14 cents a square foot, or
75.60 a month for
8 a total of 669.60 per month. The idea would be, and we
9 will discuss this with respect to
personnel in a moment,
10 but the idea would be that those two
offices side by side
11 would be configured to handle our
licensing specialists,
12 the files would be moved upstairs to the
second floor
13 where the licensing
specialists are now. There is
14 insufficient room
to add an additional licensing
15 specialist in the space on the second
floor where the
16 four licensing specialists are located
now. And this
17 move downstairs
would accommodate an additional licensing
18 specialist.
19 The building manager will have
the carpets in
20 both of the offices where we have both the
files now and
21 the empty one cleaned, will paint both
offices for us and
22 will cut a double door entry between the
two offices in
23 the center wall so that there's immediate
access for all
24 of the licensing
specialists.
25 So since we have this
opportunity, and space
25
1 is a problem, the staff is recommending
that you approve
2 that we add this 540 square foot office to
our current
3 lease in
4 MEMBER TITUS: How is that affecting our
5 budget?
6 MR. CLARK: It would not have any significant
7 effect on the budget as it currently
stands.
8 CHAIRMAN HUG-ENGLISH: Other comments?
9 I know it's
Friday afternoon, but --
10 MEMBER BAEPLER: Sounds like a good idea.
11 CHAIRMAN HUG-ENGLISH: I think the issue is
12 that we just really are literally out of
space and need
13 to expand into some additional space to
continue to
14 function.
And I think we're fortunate that this has
15 opened up at this particular time to allow
us to do that.
16 And I think the cost is reasonable, and I
think it makes
17 good sense.
18 MEMBER TITUS: I'll so move that we agree to
19 contract for this additional space.
20 MEMBER JONES: I'll second it.
21 CHAIRMAN HUG-ENGLISH: Okay.
There is a
22 motion and a
second to approve the additional office
23 space. Any further discussion? All in favor opposed?
24 The Chair votes in favor of
the motion.
25 Motion carries.
26
1 6. Consideration of Additional Staff Positions
2
3 CHAIRMAN HUG-ENGLISH: In line with that, our
4 next agenda item is consideration of
additional staff
5 positions.
6 MR. CLARK: You may recall at the last
7 meeting Executive Secretary Larry Lesley
told you there
8 was a possibility, and he was looking into
the immediate
9 for an additional licensing specialist and
an additional
10 investigator. And he would come back to the Board with a
11 recommendation. Both of the chiefs, the chief of
12 licensing and the chief of investigations,
have indicated
13 that they need an additional person to
assist them with
14 their caseloads, an additional licensing
specialist and
15 an additional
investigator.
16 If the Board approves the
hiring of an
17 additional licensing
specialist and an additional
18 investigator,
what we plan on doing with the licensing
19 specialist is
Casey Miller will be coming back to work.
20 Recall she's the administrative support
person now. She
21 will be coming back to work from maternity
leave on
22 October 1st, or next week. She would be assigned to the
23 licensing division to be trained as a
licensing
24 specialist.
25 Doug Cooper, the head of
investigations, is
27
1 gathering resumes right now. If approved for an
2 additional hire, he would start interviews
to find a
3 person to fill
that position. So that's where we're
4 starting off with on the request for an
additional
5 investigator and
an additional licensing specialist.
6 MEMBER MONTOYA: Now, if we get these extra
7 two people, we're appointing a new
committee to try to
8 reduce the amount of work that the Board
has to do up
9 there. Now, will that be decreasing the number of
10 investigations that
are going to have to be carried out?
11 MR. CLARK: No, they still have to do the
12 investigations. And it is based on the investigation for
13 that that this information is compiled and
forwarded to
14 the committee to look
at.
15 MEMBER MONTOYA: It's my supposition, though,
16 that the new committee will say these
people do not need
17 further investigations on this new
committee. Now am
18 I -- Madam Chair, am I wrong in my
thinking there?
19 CHAIRMAN HUG-ENGLISH: The new committee will
20 not be dealing
with any investigative issues. These
will
21 be people that are applying for new
licenses that are
22 going through the
23 would be under the licensing specialists
for sure. It
24 wouldn't be under the investigator. These would not be
25 people that are being
investigated. These are people
28
1 applying for new licenses in the state
that this new
2 committee would
be dealing with.
3 And the design of this committee
is really to
4 just eliminate the people that the Board
would likely
5 automatically grant licenses to based on
very simple, you
6 know very small malpractice claims or some
other
7 something that was
mentioned on their application.
8 So I don't think that the
formation of this
9 committee would affect the hiring of these
two people or
10 the workload.
11 MEMBER BAEPLER: The role of the investigator
12 will be to take care of the huge caseload
out of the
13 court system.
14 CHAIRMAN HUG-ENGLISH: Correct.
15 MEMBER MONTOYA: The new licensing specialist
16 will be coming under this, more or less
will be handling
17 some of the work from this new committee
also, which is,
18 which we're trying to reduce the number of
licensing
19 specialist's work by trying to
administratively handle
20 some of this stuff.
21 CHAIRMAN HUG-ENGLISH: No.
We're not really
22 trying to reduce the licensing
specialist's work, we're
23 trying to reduce the Board's review of
these people and
24 the appearances before
the Board as a whole. But the
25 licensing specialist has to do just as
much work on these
29
1 individuals because
that's where we get our information.
2 MEMBER BAEPLER: The licensing specialist's
3 work is
completed before the committee.
4 MEMBER ANJUM: As it increases we'll need
5 more investigators and
license specialists, that's what
6 it looks like now.
7 CHAIRMAN HUG-ENGLISH: Yeah, that's the
8 issue.
The workload of both of these staff divisions has
9 really increased. And I think for us to keep up with the
10 workload, and as Dr. Baepler
mentioned, I think certainly
11 we had statements made from the
investigative committee
12 side as to how much the workload has
increased and the
13 backload of cases that
we now have to review.
14 So I think we do need these
two additional
15 staff people in place.
16 MEMBER ANWAR: What about the budgetary,
17 financial
consequences?
18 MR. CLARK: The budget is sufficient at this
19 point to take care of any new hires that
we're proposing
20 at this point.
21 MEMBER TITUS: I move we go ahead and allow
22 the hiring of the new investigator and
license
23 specialist.
24 CHAIRMAN HUG-ENGLISH: We're going to discuss
25 the third one after. But we'll go ahead with the motion
30
1 on these first two. So the motion was to approve an
2 investigator and
a licensing specialist. And I didn't
3 hear a second. Was there a second?
4 MEMBER MONTOYA: Second.
5 CHAIRMAN HUG-ENGLISH: Any further
6 discussion? All in favor. Opposed?
Chair votes in
7 favor of the motion. Motion carries. So we have now
8 approved the hiring of a new investigator
and a licensing
9 specialist.
10 MEMBER TITUS: I think that this needs to go
11 out as a kind of a PR thing for this Board
in that one of
12 the complaints that the Legislature has
placed on us is
13 that the delay in getting physicians to
our state. And I
14
think we are doing everything in our power and everything
15 that we can possibly
do fiscally to see to that end.
16 This goes to that by hiring additional
workers. But that
17 was a complaint, that we didn't have
enough people.
18 CHAIRMAN HUG-ENGLISH: That's correct. Tony,
19 do you want to talk about number three?
20 MR. CLARK: Many of you know that Maureen
21 Lyons, who has been with the Board for
over 13 years,
22 will be leaving at the end of
January. And she is the
23 Deputy Executive
Secretary. So we'll have to
replace
24 her. And the administrative support person, Casey
25 Miller, will be going downstairs on
October 1st to train
31
1 as a licensing
specialist. So I have talked to a
person
2 who would be willing to come on board to
replace Maureen
3 and Casey to act as both the executive
assistant to the
4 executive secretary,
office manager. The information
5 systems administrator and provide
administrative support
6 for any letters and reports that I need
typed and for any
7 pleadings that Steve Quinn needs typed.
8 The lady to whom I have spoken
used to work
9 for me in the litigation division of the
Attorney
10 General's office. She has experience as a legal
11 secretary, a
legal researcher, head of the tort claims
12 division, and
she also worked for a time for the ethics
13 commission, where she set up meetings, set
up the Board
14 books for the commissioners, made
arrangements for
15 commissioner travel. And, when the executive director of
16 the commission got in hot water with the administration,
17 was the acting chief executive officer of
the ethics
18 commission for about six months. And so she is willing
19 to come on board for us in an executive
position for
20 $53,000 a year. Understanding that we would be losing
21 Maureen, whose salary is higher than that
and Casey
22 transferring, whose salary is less. But there's
about
23 $100,000 of salary
there. We would end up saving
money
24 in bringing this young
lady on board.
25 MEMBER MONTOYA: What about the information
32
1 technology portion?
2 MR. CLARK: She has a lot of background in
3 computers. She's going to work with Maureen for two
4 months before Maureen leaves. So she should be
5 up-to-date on
everything. She knows how to run
reports
6 already from the
Attorney General's Office.
7 MEMBER ANWAR: It seems like she may be an
8 excellent candidate
from what we hear as far as her
9 qualifications are concerned. My only concern or would
10 be that we just have a choice of one
person for this
11 extremely important
position.
12 MR. CLARK: Well, yes, the answer is yes.
13 They asked me who I would hire and I said
I know somebody
14 that can meet all these needs, and so I
went and talked
15 to her. But that's how we got to this point.
16 CHAIRMAN HUG-ENGLISH: I think there --
17 MEMBER MONTOYA: I can't see any problem.
18 CHAIRMAN HUG-ENGLISH: I think the other
19 issue is that
because we are under sort of a time line
20 here with Maureen planning to leave in January,
that if
21 we were to wait and start interviewing
multiple
22 candidates at, say bring candidates in in our December
23 meeting, it really wouldn't allow time for
training or
24 cross-training for
that person. I think the nice
thing
25 about this particular person is that she
would be ready
33
1 to come in and spend two or maybe three
months with
2 Maureen learning the job and feeling very
comfortable
3 before she left. So I think that's to our advantage to
4 have that cross-training going on.
5 MEMBER ANJUM: I think we should go ahead.
6 CHAIRMAN HUG-ENGLISH: I think we need a
7 motion to approve that.
8 MEMBER JONES: I move that we approve the
9 person that Tony is talking about for the
position that
10 Maureen is going to vacate.
11 MEMBER ANJUM: I second it.
12 CHAIRMAN HUG-ENGLISH: There is a motion and
13 a second to approve, and her name is Lori
Munson, as
14 executive assistant.
15 Any further discussion?
16 All in favor opposed? Chair votes in favor
17 of the motion, the motion carries. So we will hire her
18 as well. So I think that will make a big difference in
19 our staff going
forward.
20 We are, as you know,
growing. The demands of
21 this Board are growing
exponentially, and we really need
22
to keep up with making sure we have adequate staff to
23 deal with it.
24 ///
25 ///
34
1 7. Consideration of Setting of Biennial
Registration Fee
2 for Practitioners of Respiratory Care
3
4 CHAIRMAN HUG-ENGLISH: All right.
No. 7,
5 consideration of setting biennial
registration fee for
6 practitioners of respiratory care.
7 Tony.
8 MR. CLARK: Respiratory therapists.
9 MEMBER MONTOYA: Does that mean there will be
10 a reduction?
11 Since there's going to be, if
we're going to
12 make it biennial, we're thinking about
also giving them a
13 reduction in a per
year price?
14 MR. CLARK: No. At
this point we're
15 recommending that the fees be the same,
100 a year or 200
16 for the biennium. That is about what it costs us to
17 process them and take care of their
records. As a
18 consequence, we're not suggesting there be
either an
19 increase or decrease but that it remain the same. It
20 would be for the biennium, which is $200,
a hundred a
21 year.
22 CHAIRMAN HUG-ENGLISH: So the only real
23 change in this
is instead of a hundred a year, it's 200
24 every two years. It's the same amount of money but paid
25 like we do every other licensee.
35
1 MEMBER BAEPLER: The appropriate motion
2 you're looking for is that we change the
licensing from
3 an annual to a biennial
license. The fees remain the
4 same, $100 a year.
5 MR. CLARK: I think it's already biennial.
6 MEMBER BAEPLER: Then why is it on the
7 agenda?
8 MEMBER MONTOYA: I look at fee.
9 MEMBER ANJUM: The application is biennial --
10 MEMBER MONTOYA: Why can't we give them a
11 break if we're going through the paperwork
that we've
12 done every year? It seems like the paperwork shuffle
13 would be less.
14 MEMBER BAEPLER: Is it currently annual
15 registration?
16 CHAIRMAN HUG-ENGLISH: No.
17 MEMBER BAEPLER: Currently biennial.
18 CHAIRMAN HUG-ENGLISH: Currently biennial
19 registration.
20 MEMBER BAEPLER: Then I guess I don't know
21 why the agenda item is
here. It doesn't appear that
22 we're changing anything. What am I missing?
23 CHAIRMAN HUG-ENGLISH: I think we're just
24 getting approval to maintain the same fee
going forward
25 for the biennium.
36
1 MR. CLARK: That's exactly right.
2 CHAIRMAN HUG-ENGLISH: So, in essence, by
3 approving Agenda Item 7, we're keeping things
as they
4 are.
But we need -- I think as we have --
5 MEMBER MONTOYA: You've got us lost.
6 CHAIRMAN HUG-ENGLISH: As we have in the past
7 had -- this agenda item has come up for
physician
8 renewals, we've only had the respiratory
therapists for a
9 short time. So this agenda item is really there to say
10 that we're now approaching the biennium of
time and do we
11 want to keep it as it is. And so it's -- a motion would
12 basically keep the fee the same, $100 per
year, $200 per
13 biennium, with no
change.
14 MEMBER BAEPLER: So moved.
15 MEMBER MONTOYA: Second.
16 CHAIRMAN HUG-ENGLISH: Okay.
There's a
17 motion and a
second to keep the respiratory therapists'
18 fees at $200 a
biennium. Any
further discussion?
19 (No response.)
20 CHAIRMAN HUG-ENGLISH: All in favor?
21 Opposed?
Chair votes in favor. Motion
carries.
22
23 8. Matters for Future Agenda
24
25 CHAIRMAN HUG-ENGLISH: All right.
Agenda
37
1 Item 8, are there any matters for future
agenda?
2 MEMBER TITUS: Just a comment since our last
3 meeting on September
10th and 11th. I went down to
4
5 maintenance of
competency. It was a very
interesting
6 meeting. Everybody came with a little bit different
7 reason for being there. And I have to tell you,
8 was leaps and bounds ahead of where most
other committee
9 members were at, in their minds. So I'll enjoy talking
10 to everybody about
that at the next meeting.
11 Also we did discuss at that
meeting license
12 by endorsement and some of the issues that
the federation
13 has looked at on
that. So I have some information on
14 that that I think we'll hand out at the
next meeting and
15 we can look at that before we see these
physicians that
16 maybe it will help us look at that a
little bit better.
17 CHAIRMAN HUG-ENGLISH: Okay.
Thank you.
18 At this time I would open it
up for any
19 public comment. Is there any public comment?
20 (No
response.)
21 CHAIRMAN HUG-ENGLISH: All right.
Dr. Anwar,
22 did you have something that you wanted to
say?
23 MEMBER ANWAR: There's no public comment
24 here.
25 CHAIRMAN HUG-ENGLISH: Thank you.
All right.
38
1 At this time then we will adjourn and I
thank you all for
2 being willing to be
here on a Friday afternoon. We'll
3 see you in December.
4 (Proceedings concluded at
5 -o0o-
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
39
1 STATE OF
) ss.
2
3
4 I, DENISE PHIPPS, Certified
Court Reporter in
5 and for the
6 certify;
7 That on
8 State Contractors Board,
9
10 notes of the Hearing entitled herein, and
thereafter
11 transcribed the same into typewriting as
herein appears;
12 That said hearing was taken in
stenotype notes
13 by me, a Certified Court Reporter, and
thereafter reduced
14 to typewriting under my direction as
herein appears;
15 That the foregoing transcript is
a full, true
16 and correct transcription of my stenotype
notes of said
17 hearing.
18 Dated at
20
21
22 DENISE PHIPPS, CCR
#234, RDR, CRR
23
24
25