Union County Council members began the process Tuesday night to correct an issue where physicians employed by the Union County Hospital District also currently serve on its board of trustees.

The council met in special session to discuss the matter after the county’s committee on public health and social services met with members of the hospital district board and community members to get their take on the issue on Monday evening.

Council members spent nearly an hour in executive session Tuesday discussing the issue. They made no decisions but did reach a consensus.

The council voted unanimously to request the Union County delegation to the South Carolina State Legislature to change the law regarding the make up of the hospital board to include seven at-large members and three advisory members from the hospital’s medical community to be appointed by the council.

At the root of the issue surrounds a 1946 law and an opinion from the state’s attorney general. As it stands, the hospital district board needs to have at least three members who are active physicians but cannot be employed by the district. Furthermore, those physicians need to reside in Union County and have active practices within the county.

That’s where the problem lies.

Most local physicians, including sitting board members Dr. Christopher R. McWhorter and Dr. Robert A. Yannetti, are employees of the district and therefore could not be reappointed to the board.

McWhorter’s and Yannetti’s terms end in March along with those of at-large member Jeff Cannon and current board chairman Tim Svedlund.

So the county would need to fill three seats on the board, according to the existing law, with physicians who currently are not employed by the district and who have an active practice in and reside within Union County.

Sinclair said the discussion in executive session Tuesday was passionate.

“Because we all care about the hospital,” he said once Tuesday’s meeting reconvened in open session.

The council’s consensus reflects sentiments of members of the public health and social services committee and some from the public. The request to change the law was one of the options the committee brought back to the council following its meeting with hospital board officials and members of the public.

The other was to appoint three candidates who offered their letters of intent to serve on the hospital district board to the public health and social services committee and continue looking at the issue to find a solution over the next several years.

McWhorter brought those three names of physicians who would be interested in serving on the board to Monday night’s committee meeting; however, with such a narrow field of choices set forth by the existing law some of those attending that meeting were unsure of the three doctors’ eligibility to sit on the board.

Sinclair pointed out the council’s request to the local legislative delegation to get the law changed would retain a medical — or physician — voice on the hospital board. He added council members agreed a new board composition with three advisory members from the medical community would still allow those who work in the hospital — walk through its halls — each and every day to still have their opinions heard but would not be able to vote on hospital board items needing approval.

Gregg Walker reiterated this at Monday night’s committee meeting. He said even with changing the make up of the hospital district board to this type of committee, those in the medical community still would have their say on matters of the hospital district and still have influence over decisions because they would be able to have that input.

There’s also the possibility all of those people who showed interest in serving on the board now that McWhorter brought letters of intent from could still serve on the board as at-large members.

Sinclair said anyone who meets the residential requirements and is not employed by the hospital district can apply for any of the board’s open positions.

With time running out to fill four hospital board seats by the time current members’ terms expire at the end of March, however, timing is a key factor in where the council goes from here.

Sinclair said — through conversations with local legislative representation — he’s learned getting the law changed in Columbia could be done he just wasn’t ready to say how long that might take.

However, he added the council is looking at this issue as urgently as it did the special referendum to change the form of government at the county level and there is some indication it could be possible to get it done before the March 31 deadline.

“It’s possible,” Sinclair said.