Shut it down?

As a part of the Alameda Hospital affiliation discussions the Alameda Hospital Foundation commissioned a phone poll to get a sense of what a sample of registered voters in Alameda (400 people)  felt about the Alameda Hospital in general and the possible affiliation with Alameda Health System (AHS).   The results were, surprising.

I figured at any given time against any issue there’s about 25% of registered voters against that issue.  Sometimes it grows to an unfortunate 34% in the case of parcel taxes for schools, but in general 25% is always sort of a good rule of thumb for the opposition.

Which is why the petition against the In-N-Out is just sort of par for the course for any proposal.  And the burgeoning movement to oppose Ron Cowan’s plans to move the Harbor Bay Club and build the rest of his entitled units there.   So far, just a day in the life of any proposal or just any thing in general.   The thing about it is, people who are against stuff have a much larger reason to speak out against it, folks who are generally supportive or agnostic are more than happy to let things run its course.   Does that mean that only the people who show up and shake their fists are representative of the community at large?   Nope, it just means that the folks who support are not as emotionally invested in showing up to hearings and such.  Anger is a great motivator.  But I digress.

Anyway, my rule of thumb is 25% of registered voters will take the opposing side in general.   For example, Measure D in the last election.   It had all the requisite buzz words: “park,” “open space,” etc.  and still 20% of registered voters voted against it.

You have your Health Systems

Inevitably when I go on vacation some BIG DEAL newsworthy thing always drops when I have limited access to a computer. While I was away that BIG DEAL was the affiliation Letter of Intent signed between the Alameda Hospital and Alameda Health Systems which would make Alameda Hospital part of a larger “network” of hospitals.  Yeah, I know you all discussed it a bit over on the Elliott Gorelick resignation post, but this post has a timeline screenshot (oooOooooohhh).

It would be a relationship similar to the one that San Leandro Hospital had with the Sutter Health network until a deal was recently brokered — after a series of unfortunate events that left San Leandro Hospital with a dangling ax over its neck — to have Alameda Health Systems take over San Leandro Hospital.   Apparently that deal though has hit a bit of a stumbling block — should be resolved some time today — over $20 million (on top of the $22 million Sutter Health has agreed to pony up to keep operations going during the transition period) that would be required of their governing board.

Anyway, back to Alameda Hospital, so what does this mean for Alameda Hospital.   Well, one of the reasons why Alameda Hospital was doing so poorly was because it just couldn’t get enough people into its doors.   According to a press release from Alameda Hospital this affiliation will help generate more revenue by bringing in more customers:

Green light

In the “Wow, really?” files, last week Alameda Hospital Board member Elliott Gorelick probably best known for really really not liking the mere existence of the Alameda Hospital did the unthinkable and resigned from his seat as an elected boardmember.

Why he did it, who knows.   The first indication of his intent was posted on his personal blog last Tuesday:

Bits and pieces, again

Sometimes there are just lots of little bits of news, not big enough for an entire post, but not insignificant enough not to share.

Yesterday, Susan Davis posted this bit of great news on Twitter:

Good news: #Alameda teachers no longer seeking impasse; district & union to bargain again 2/8. Fingers crossed! http://t.co/lZ2iJmHO

— Susan E. Davis (@Susan_E_Davis) February 5, 2013

Which means that, hopefully, everyone can be on their best behavior and work together to finalize a contract.   As I wrote in this post, the District and AEA weren’t that far apart, number wise, but of course the District’s proposal was contingent on teachers buying into the Professional Learning Communities to get the annual $1000 stipend during the two year pilot.

In other school related news, Ruby Bridges Elementary did not meet its fundraising goal via the gospel show which would help send 100 Fifth graders to sleep away Science Camp.   It fell a lot short of the needed dollars, so if you have a few bucks you can spare to help out, you can give the Ruby Bridges campus a call at 510.748.4006 to see how you can help.

Replace you

When all the dust settled from November’s election and Stewart Chen was appointed to fill out Rob Bonta’s term, there was a vacancy on the Hospital Board that — unlike the City Council — is filled by the Hospital Board and not handed to the third place finisher in the election.    The application period has ended and there are four candidate for the Hospital Board to consider:

• Lynn Bratchett
• Shubha Fanse
• Terrie Kurrasch
• Tracy Jensen

That’s a wrap-up

For some reason, I didn’t feel nearly as invested in this election as I did two years ago.   It felt like there was so much more at stake two years ago, this year it just seemed like any which way the election went, it wouldn’t be THAT bad if any of the candidates won this time around.   This year the City Council race was kind of “meh” and even though the outcome was pretty much as my gut anticipated — although I expected Jane Sullwold to do much much better than what actually happened — Marilyn Ezzy Ashcraft ran a nearly pitch perfect campaign.    She had collected nearly all the important endorsements, but she also had a good ground game and it showed in the outcome.

Tony Daysog ran a lean campaign but in the end the combination of name recognition and the door-to-door campaign put him over candidates that had a lot more money.   Name recognition was probably the biggest asset in Tony Daysog’s corner.   If Beverly Johnson had stayed in the race, it’s pretty much a gimme that she would have won, probably beating out Tony Daysog, but perhaps not Marilyn Ezzy Ashcraft.

In the end I think Stewart Chen lost the campaign for himself because with the amount of money raised and the type of endorsements he had, he should have easily won over Tony Daysog.   I think the endorsement scuffle might have lost him some key votes and in the end, it doesn’t appear that the addition of the AEA endorsement was much help on election day.

Reading the tea leaves

Much like the “Bronco Bamma” girl, I’m really quite “done” with this whole election.  Between the national and local elections, next Tuesday can’t come fast enough.   While I’m not quite at the point of shedding tears quite yet, my stomach lining can’t take any more of the stress.  But I just wanted to point out that, if you haven’t had quite enough about election stuff and you still haven’t quite done enough research yet, I’ve been keeping my election roundup page quite updated.

And in the grand tradition of trying to read the tea leaves, my election Brain Heart Gut predictions.   I can’t recall if I did this for 2010, but my 2008 guesses were right on City Council wise, but I was way off on my School Board predictions.  So for those new to the Brain, Heart, Gut game, you make predictions based on who you logically think will win (Brain), who you want to win (Heart), and who you believe will win (Gut):

Who I’m voting for: Hospital Board and City Council

As promised — and given that absentee ballots have already gone out — my election recommendations!

First, the sort of lighter stuff out of the way:

Vote YES on A1, because the Oakland Zoo is a regional jewel dammit.   Have you seen those Sun Bears and their habitat?  It is awesome.  Did you read about how the Oakland Zoo saved four tigers that were living in some crazy personal zoo in Texas?  That’s the kind of stuff you’ll be supporting.

Vote NO on Prop 32, I don’t know how this one stays out of the courts if it passes, plus it’s ridiculous.

Vote YES on Prop 37, because knowing what is going into your food empowers you to make better food choices.

Now on to the local stuff:

You asked, they answered: J. Michael McCormick, Hospital Board candidate

1. Under what circumstances do you think the Healthcare District should be dissolved, and what process would you use to determine whether or not to pursue that course of action.

Alameda Hospital is an ongoing business and has been so for many years. I see change and not closure as a remedy for the times we face. The real question is how to keep the ER open. My understanding is that if an emergency room closes, the county conducts a hearing and issues findings to the state. However, the state has not used this information to keep hospitals open even when the data is dire. I would support legislation to put more teeth into the county’s findings or force the state to consider the option of alternatives to closure. I would support a local ordinance regarding declarations of “essential public services” for ER, trauma and ICU. This is truly the case in Alameda where the nearest emergency room outside of the island is at least a 15-20 minute ride whereas an on island trip to the ER is 5-7 life saving minutes.

You asked, they answered: Jordan Battani, Hospital Board candidate

1. Under what circumstances do you think the Healthcare District should be dissolved, and what process would you use to determine whether or not to pursue that course of action.

The original ballot language is pretty clear that the purpose of creating the healthcare district in 2002 was to keep Alameda Hospital open. So, from my perspective, if there is ever a moment that Alameda Hospital needs to be closed – it will be time to reconsider the role and function of the City of Alameda Healthcare District as well. What’s important to keep in mind, is that the Board of the Healthcare District does not have the authority to dissolve the District, nor to restructure the parcel tax (other than to set the amount that should be collected each year). Dissolving the District, or fundamentally changing anything about the parcel tax (like the method of calculating it, or who has to pay it) would have to be decided by the citizen voters of the City of Alameda, in a special or general election.