Recovery Month
Dear Editor: I once read that only about 7% of all people are truly healthy and the rest of us are on a journey of recovery.
Today kicks off Recovery Month. This is the month in which we remember, support and walk for ourselves, our friends, our family and our community members on a journey of recovery from the impact of substance misuse, mental health related struggles and other forms of trauma.
In 2020 we lost over 143 Alaskans due to just drug-related overdoses. Countless more lives were lost to other drug involved events. Sitka has not escaped loss due to substance misuse.
There are several potential reasons for this loss. Stigma is one part. As I stated at the beginning of this letter, most of us are on some kind of recovery journey, which means recovery is the norm and not the exception. It is time we accept this fact. It is time we bring recovery into the light. It is time we create and promote pathways for people on their recovery journey to find and walk on.
The simple fact is that recovery is for everyone: every person, every family and every community. Recovery Month reminds us that recovery belongs to all of us. We are all called to create pathways and welcome everyone to recovery by lowering barriers to recovery support, creating inclusive spaces and programs, and broadening our understanding of what recovery means for people with different experiences.
Each recovery journey may look and be different, but each recovery journey begins with that first step. On Sept. 25, 10 a.m. in front of Centennial Hall, we will take that first step. We invite our community to take that step with us and walk with us in support of “Recovery.”
Bring a sign, bring a friend, dress in purple (the official color of recovery month), become informed and support all those on their journey of recovery.
Loyd Platson, Sitka
Hospital Sale
Dear Editor: The good folks of Sitka will be asked by the city to give a thumbs up or thumbs down advisory vote on the sale of the hospital to SEARHC.
I am unable to support the sale based on present information of lack thereof. My goal is not to kill the deal but to obtain a better understanding as to the value of the hospital, realizing that SEARHC is the only buyer that has come forward at this time.
It is unclear to me how the city marketed the property. It appears that they did not cast a wide net by not using a marketing firm. I believe it would have been a better business decision if the city had used a marketing firm. This may have brought additional buyers to the table.
There are several other reasons I cannot support the advisory vote. The city and SEARHC both used the same appraiser. It would be a better business decision for the city to seek an additional appraisal from a different appraiser to avoid an appearance of a conflict of interest.
It is a truism that the most important part of an appraisal is the appraiser. With this understanding it appears that the hospital would fall under a special use. Therefore, I recommend that the city seek a special use appraiser as opposed to an appraiser that specializes in hospital appraisals. There is a notable distinction among appraisers in the business community.
The good folks will be asked to vote without seeing any appraisal. This is not good optics in that this gives the appearance that the city has something to hide in the appraisal. The city needs to make public all city generated appraisals so that we are adequately informed.
Kenneth Cameron, Sitka
