Town Square

Post a New Topic

Kim Griffin attacks Hickey and Stogner

Original post made by Jack Hickey, Woodside: Emerald Hills, on May 7, 2014

Kim Griffin is one of 3 Sequoia Healthcare District Directors who I asked to resign. Web Link
My request was made after the 3 refused to return $1,800 each in benefits for which they voted.

Now, Kim has posted a bizarre attack on me, as well as Supervisorial candidate Michael Stogner. Web Link

Posted by Kim Griffin, a resident of Menlo Park: other
on Apr 25, 2014 at 2:23 pm

Any affiliation with Mr. Hickey is unfortunately a cause for concern. Mr. Hickey cost the tax payers over two hundred thousand dollars last election by running for another term when his current term had not yet expired. He explained his reason for doing so was to attempt to prove district residents did not want a health care district. This dogmatic and irrational approach to governing is expensive and dishonest. Most voters believe the officials they are electing will actually support both the voter and the mission of the entity where that candidate will serve. Make no mistake; the agenda of Mr. Hickey and Mr. Stogner is similar to the current controversy of the demented rancher in Nevada who does not believe in paying taxes because of a disenfranchised group of people who "did not learn how to pick cotton." This is the same ideology and obnoxious behavior that has disrupted Health Care District Board meetings, created liability, and made a mockery of the election process. While change in many levels of government is sorely needed; this is the wrong direction with either one of these individuals. Kim Griffin, RN Sequoia Health Care District Board

Comments (10)

 +   Like this comment
Posted by Why are you surprised?
a resident of another community
on May 7, 2014 at 11:14 am

Instead of embracing people in SMC who are working to eliminate corruption and enhance the quality of life for residents, entrenched officials like Kim Griffin, Steve Wagstaffe, Greg Munks, Carole Groom, and Don Horsely attack them. Stogner, Hickey, and anyone else who might stand in their way.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Michael G. Stogner
a resident of another community
on May 7, 2014 at 11:48 am

I support the 2000-01 San Mateo County Grand Jury Recommendation re: Sequoia Health Care District.

That is what upsets Kim Griffin


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Arthur Faro
a resident of another community
on May 7, 2014 at 1:01 pm

Interesting that both Stogner and Hickey refer to a 2000 Grand Jury report and not all the subsequent Grand Juries which support the work the Sequoia Health Care District does.
Why don't they recognize the results of the Districts work and the many people who benefit from it?


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Jack Hickey
a resident of Woodside: Emerald Hills
on May 7, 2014 at 4:37 pm

Art Faro said: "Why don't they recognize the results of the Districts work and the many people who benefit from it?"
We do. So did the latest Grand Jury.
The District's Nursing Program,which has cost more than $10,000,000, benefitted 350 nurses, most of whom do not work in the District or surrounding areas. The District attempted to get preferential treatment for resident applicants for the program. The latest result shows the following applicant statistics; "...32 students of which 12 live in District and another 12 are other San Mateo County residents."
The District's AED program, which places defibrillators in schools and other places, is used strictly as a PR tool to promote the District. The function should be handled by San Mateo County EMS. Or, better yet, by the state which has passed legislation mandating AED's in gyms, etc., and has legislation pending which would expand that mandate to department stores. Many other states have already mandated these in schools, and have obtained funding from insurance companies.
The Children's Health Initiative receives $1,350,000/year from the District. This is a County operation which should be funded equally by all County taxpayers. That would happen if the District were dissolved.
The District also acts as a philanthropic organization, a function unintended by voters when they established the Sequoia Hospital District in 1948.
The Sequoia Healthcare District should be dissolved. Michael Stogner supports that goal. Don Horsley does not.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Michael G. Stogner
a resident of another community
on May 7, 2014 at 4:51 pm


I would at least want the voters to determine this issue. Put it on the ballot.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by James
a resident of Portola Valley: Los Trancos Woods/Vista Verde
on May 7, 2014 at 8:46 pm

I always hesitate, and usually don't click on the hickey posts, for obvious reasons having been in the area awhile. As someone pointed out a couple years ago, the 'donkeyhottie' quests get old.

Arthur Faro - do you have links or other substantiation?


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Jack Hickey
a resident of Woodside: Emerald Hills
on May 8, 2014 at 10:01 am

Art Faro is one of the three Sequoia Healthcare District Directors who I asked to resign, because they refused to return $1,800 each in benefits for which they voted.
Web Link
He was CEO of Sequoia Hospital in 1996 when it was sold to Catholic Healthcare West. Glenna Vaskelis took over after the sale.
Prior to that,
"Sequoia lost more than $29 million in its most recent fiscal year, after Faro had pegged its losses at around $5 million." See:
Web Link
Director Faro was a leading advocate of the plan to relocate Sequoia Hospital. See:Web Link
Here are two links to information on the District: Web Link Web Link


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Jack Hickey
a resident of another community
on May 8, 2014 at 10:45 am

James, here are links to the San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury reports:
2000-2001 Web Link
2001-2002 Web Link
2004-2005 Web Link
2008-2009 Web Link
2012-2013 Web Link
The following is from the 2012-2013 report:
BACKGROUND
Health care districts, formerly called hospital districts, have been authorized in California since 1945. Recently, taxpayers across the state have questioned the need for health care districts since many districts no longer operate hospitals. California Grand Juries have questioned health care district practices and LAFCos in other counties have dissolved or reorganized five districts since 2000.
In the County, four previous Grand Juries have conducted investigations of SHD.
The 2000-2001 Grand Jury recommended that SHD reduce property taxes for its residents and limit its expenditures to those purposes previously approved by voters since it no longer operated Sequoia Hospital.
The 2001-2002 Grand Jury recommended that SHD correct misinformation previously disseminated to the public, and disclose plans for its allocation of tax revenues and reserves.
The 2004-2005 Grand Jury questioned whether SHD continued to represent the health care interests of its residents. The Grand Jury recommended that SHD develop an investment plan for its reserves and pursue a merger with the Peninsula Health Care District.
The 2008-2009 Grand Jury evaluated whether SHD had complied with the 2004-2005 Grand Jury recommendations. The Grand Jury recommended that SHD create an annual mailer to its residents, decline a share of its property tax revenue, proactively identify pressing health care needs of its residents, explore ways to support services outside the district that impact its
residents, and enhance community input and involvement.
With previous Grand Juries reaching a variety of conclusions, the Grand Jury decided to investigate SHD again, but focus on where SHD's tax dollars are spent as opposed to whether SHD should exist. Specifically, this investigation focused on how SHD identifies, funds, and evaluates the programs and initiatives it supports, and the transparency of its operations.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by James
a resident of Portola Valley: Los Trancos Woods/Vista Verde
on May 8, 2014 at 3:40 pm

Sounds like apples and oranges, Jack.

Are we talking about the district or Faro's management of the hospital prior to the sale? "Sequoia lost more than $29 million in its most recent fiscal year, after Faro had pegged its losses at around $5 million."

This is why not a lot of folks seek to follow you on your quest for windmills.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Jack Hickey
a resident of Woodside: Emerald Hills
on May 8, 2014 at 4:18 pm

The original topic is "Kim Griffin attacks Hickey and Stogner". Art Faro has launched similar attacks in the past. The credibility of these Directors, particularly after their refusal to pay back the $1,800, is questionable. And, Katie Kane and Art Faro, who both sit on the Sequoia Hospital Board, have a conflict of interest. The hospital is owned by Dignity Health yet continues to receive grants from the District.
Re: "Sequoia lost more than $29 million in its most recent fiscal year" that was "...Faro's mismanagement of the hospital prior to the sale."


Don't miss out on the discussion!
Sign up to be notified of new comments on this topic.

Email:


Post a comment

Posting an item on Town Square is simple and requires no registration. Just complete this form and hit "submit" and your topic will appear online. Please be respectful and truthful in your postings so Town Square will continue to be a thoughtful gathering place for sharing community information and opinion. All postings are subject to our TERMS OF USE, and may be deleted if deemed inappropriate by our staff.

We prefer that you use your real name, but you may use any "member" name you wish.

Name: *

Select your neighborhood or school community: * Not sure?

Comment: *

Verification code: *
Enter the verification code exactly as shown, using capital and lowercase letters, in the multi-colored box.

*Required Fields

Mixx, Scott's Seafood replacement, opens in Mountain View
By Elena Kadvany | 14 comments | 3,665 views

To Cambodia With Love
By Laura Stec | 4 comments | 3,136 views

Life in fast forward
By Jessica T | 3 comments | 1,519 views

Medical
By Chandrama Anderson | 0 comments | 1,399 views

Itís Not About The Officer Or The MomóItís About All Of Us
By Erin Glanville | 9 comments | 794 views