https://almanacnews.com/square/print/2014/10/29/will-voters-weigh-in-on-future--------------------------------------of-sequoia-healthcare-district


Town Square

Will voters weigh in on future of Sequoia Healthcare District?

Original post made on Oct 29, 2014

One race in the Nov. 4 election has the potential to correct what some see as a miscarriage of the democratic process. But a correction would likely jeopardize grants for local healthcare-related activities, including food banks, drug-and-alcohol abuse programs, school nurse programs and K-5 physical fitness programs.

Read the full story here Web Link posted Wednesday, October 29, 2014, 12:00 AM

Comments

1 person likes this
Posted by Jack Hickey
a resident of Woodside: Emerald Hills
on Oct 29, 2014 at 10:37 am

After our many discussions, thank you, Dave, for your unbiased presentation of this complicated topic.


1 person likes this
Posted by neighbor
a resident of another community
on Oct 29, 2014 at 11:02 am

Mr. Hickey and this site have been using this site to campaign on this issue for months and are pushing the Libertarian line. Hence, I voted for Arthur Faro and Dr. Jerry Shefren. And, now will by comment be deleted??


Like this comment
Posted by John McDowell
a resident of another community
on Oct 29, 2014 at 11:04 am

I agree with Jack, this is a balanced article that includes all points of view. One minor correction, the SHD runs from southern Foster City through Portola Valley. The Peninsula Heathcare District covers San Bruno through northern Foster City.


Like this comment
Posted by Jack Hickey
a resident of Woodside: Emerald Hills
on Oct 29, 2014 at 11:15 am

Error of omission. East Palo Alto and the Belle Haven neighborhood of Menlo Park are not covered(not taxed). ADD "but, receive significant benefit from the district"


2 people like this
Posted by pogo
a resident of Woodside: other
on Oct 29, 2014 at 11:31 am

pogo is a registered user.

This is a very good article, thank you.

One notable part of the text: "Opposing the slate's agenda (Faro and Shefren) see an ongoing positive role for the district and say they look forward to improving outreach with innovative programs and more public contact."

Very nice and perhaps even praiseworthy. But this is FAR from the District's mission and rationale which voters approved which was the governance of Sequoia Hospital. If voters agree with the change, that is fine... but VOTERS SHOULD HAVE A VOICE IN THIS DECISION! For reasons that I fail to understand, Shefren and Faro want to DENY voters that opportunity and just have us fall in lockstep with their bureaucracy's whim.

I will be voting for HICKEY, DE PAULA and MCDOWELL and look forward to a future referendum!


3 people like this
Posted by Peter Carpenter
a resident of Atherton: Lindenwood
on Oct 29, 2014 at 11:59 am

Peter Carpenter is a registered user.

I have voted for HICKEY, DE PAULA and MCDOWELL and look forward to a future referendum!


3 people like this
Posted by Menlo Voter
a resident of Menlo Park: other
on Oct 29, 2014 at 12:44 pm

Menlo Voter is a registered user.

neighbor:

do you like having your taxes taken for a hospital and spent on everything but a hospital?

I'll vote the slate. Hopefully they will get elected and the voters will have a chance to decide if they want to keep giving money to a nonexistent hospital. If they decide they do, so be it. At least we will have had a chance to vote on it.


1 person likes this
Posted by Aaron
a resident of Menlo Park: Downtown
on Oct 29, 2014 at 4:29 pm

Aaron is a registered user.

A perhaps naive question: Why can't the voters vote on dissolution of the healthcare district and re-appropriation of those taxes to fund school nurses and other local healthcare-related efforts directly through the county government? I agree with the premise that perhaps we could achieve these local health-related targets, but I don't understand why this needs to be accomplished through electing a slate of candidates, some of whom seem to be complete newcomers to public health. Why not just petition for a ballot initiative to achieve these goals? Or has this already been done and failed?

I generally agree that the healthcare district should be disbanded and the responsibilities should be folded into the county government (and hopefully less susceptible to corruption and pet projects of staff). However, it's this bit that makes me nervous: "the slate candidates say they would suspend the district's grant-making and reduce property taxes". This tells me that this is not about reforming how we provide these health services in a more cost-efficient way, but instead it's just a vehicle for reducing taxes. This is further exemplified by the fact that the "slate" of candidates seems to have very little combined experience with health care, or public health, or public policy. I may agree with the reform sentiment, but I'm not going to trust a slate of candidates with little to no public health policy experience (other than defiance) to be caretakers of local public health initiatives.

With regard to the "slate's" comment about training nurses who then leave the area, this seems a bit ludicrous and petty. We educate countless students in our public schools, yet I don't see anybody asking why we're doing that when many of them also leave the area.

The healthcare district perhaps should be disbanded, or perhaps it should be reformed. But I am not convinced that the "slate" is the way to do this.


1 person likes this
Posted by Peter Carpenter
a resident of Atherton: Lindenwood
on Oct 29, 2014 at 4:35 pm

Peter Carpenter is a registered user.

"Why not just petition for a ballot initiative to achieve these goals? Or has this already been done and failed?"

In my OPINION such an initiative to abolish an agency and redistribute its revenues would not be permitted by the California initiative process.

Therefore electing candidates who will put the issues before the voters is the surest way to proceed.


1 person likes this
Posted by pogo
a resident of Woodside: other
on Oct 29, 2014 at 5:07 pm

pogo is a registered user.

Aaron -

You make very good points and I think we're on the same page. By the way, the training of nurses who may move to other areas is hardly the biggest concern. Nearly all of this district's good deeds are simply sending checks to non-profits and other agencies who perform the work. That could easily and more efficiently be done by San Mateo County officials.

But the biggest issue, at least for me, is that there is no longer a reason, much less a mandate, for this district to even exist since Sequoia Hospital was sold. This board cannot just decide on its own that they'll keep the tax dollars that were allocated for the hospital and spend them as they wish. That is OUTRAGEOUS.

Part of the reason that there has been no referendum is that this hospital board is controlled by Faro and Shefren and they have stubbornly refused to allow it. Jack Hickey, who has not only served on this board but received the largest number of votes in the prior election, has been relegated to the sidelines by this majority. They do not listen to him and his objections to their actions - including granting themselves compensation and benefits and allocating dollars to organizations employing their family members - have been ignored. The San Mateo County grand jury has slammed them several times for these actions.

The only way to have the referendum is to gain control of the district. I congratulate Jack for recruiting Mr. McDowell and Mr. De Paula to help him with this effort. The board doesn't practice medicine so their lack of MD degrees isn't such an important issue. I'm far more interested in their managerial skills and, in particular, their respect for voters and taxpayers.


2 people like this
Posted by Gunther Steinberg
a resident of Portola Valley: Ladera
on Oct 29, 2014 at 5:07 pm

Years ago, when Hickey was first elected to the Sequoia Board, I attended a number of board meetings. I was always impressed that the Board acted as if the hospital were still under their jurisdiction. They discussed to buy (bought ??) a proprietary program for medical record keeping for the hospital, when such programs were in use by the VA. Kaiser and likely available for licensing, instead of adapting a proven one for one hospital.
I have further been in disagreement with the existing board for the past 15 + years about their salaries to the executives, the money spent on administration - as if they still controlled the hospital which they sold off. This Board should have been dissolved when they hospital was sold to the then Catholic Hospitals West. Their continued activities were often self-serving, benefited Sequoia Hospital, no longer owned by the taxpayers and they distributed taxpayer funds to favored organizations in which they occasionally had a personal interest.

Dissolution of the District is long overdue, and Jack Hickey has led a solitary campaign for it for many years. Its functions could be handled through the Board of Supervisors or a delegated committee.
The incumbents should be voted out, since they have held on to their posts entirely too long and had some significant conflicts of interest.


Like this comment
Posted by SteveC
a resident of Menlo Park: Downtown
on Oct 29, 2014 at 5:24 pm

SteveC is a registered user.

and if you believe that...... standby. Jack and his group will not put the issue before voters. I do not trust any of them to do anything for the voters!


1 person likes this
Posted by pogo
a resident of Woodside: other
on Oct 29, 2014 at 6:13 pm

pogo is a registered user.

What an outrageous claim, Steve. Your charge is so patently false it is barely worthy of response... but I'll point out the facts to clarify.

Jack Hickey has been singlehandedly trying to get this issue before voters since he joined the board. Mr. Hickey has been so FOR a referendum and dissolution of the district that it is his raison d'etre. Unfortunately, Mr. Hickey has been thwarted by Shefren and Faro every single time.

Two things are for certain - Shefren and Faro have pledge not to allow the referendum (so we have zero chance with them!) and both Mr. McDowell and Mr. De Paula are running SPECIFICALLY to have the referendum.

I'll take their assurances over your truly absurd charge.

Vote for HICKEY, DE PAULA and MCDOWELL.


1 person likes this
Posted by pogo
a resident of Woodside: other
on Oct 29, 2014 at 6:59 pm

pogo is a registered user.

I just returned from my mailbox where I was greeted by a four page, color brochure from the Sequoia Healthcare District.

It's probably just a coincidence that they mail out their slick, bright, shiny "2014 Annual Report to the Community" EXACTLY ONE WEEK PRIOR TO THE ELECTION. A nice promotion piece for Shefren and Faro (although it does list Hickey as well - just farther down the page) without a single cent from their campaigns.

The District's fiscal year ends in June yet they deliver this report to us in late October. Pure coincidence, I'm sure.

When voters finally dissolve this long extinct District, please don't let the door hit you on the way out...


1 person likes this
Posted by Matt Grocott
a resident of another community
on Oct 29, 2014 at 10:07 pm

​“Nothing is so permanent as a temporary government program.” No truer words were ever spoken than when Dr. Milton Friedman said them and no better example ever existed than the Sequoia Healthcare District.

​Originally called the Sequoia Hospital District, it was approved by voters to fund the building and operation of Sequoia Hospital. The district's mission was over when it sold the hospital in 1996. A funny thing happened, however. The district continued collecting tax dollars and took on the practice of distributing money to favored non-profits and other government agencies.

According to the San Mateo Civil Grand Jury, the district, “Assumed a role similar to that of a philanthropic foundation…This is a function of the District that was never presented to voters…” Some have no qualms with this approach, as can be seen in some of the other comments. I beg to differ.

I would encourage voters to cast their ballot for Jack Hickey, Mark De Paula, and John McDowell for the Sequoia Healthcare District Board. A vote for these three now will give us a vote in the future on the fate of the district: either reform it or shut it down. It ought to be the people's choice to make and a vote for Hickey, DePaula and McDowell is the best opportunity we have to make that happen.


1 person likes this
Posted by Mark De Paula
a resident of another community
on Oct 30, 2014 at 10:12 am

Again the mission to build SEQUOIA HOSPITAL has been completed, and sold in 1996.
If DE PAULA, HICKEY and MC DOWELL get elected, the voters will have the choice to determine the future of continuing a charity base SPECIAL DISTRICT called SEQUOIA HEALTHCARE DISTRICT.


Like this comment
Posted by Mark De Paula
a resident of another community
on Oct 30, 2014 at 10:12 am

Again the mission to build SEQUOIA HOSPITAL has been completed, and sold in 1996.
If DE PAULA, HICKEY and MC DOWELL get elected, the voters will have the choice to determine the future of continuing a charity base SPECIAL DISTRICT called SEQUOIA HEALTHCARE DISTRICT.


1 person likes this
Posted by Voted for professionals
a resident of Menlo Park: other
on Oct 30, 2014 at 10:46 am

The shrill libertarian claims do not fall well upon the ears. One guy has "tried" for a decade to eliminate the board upon which he sat for that decade? Too often we've seen those promises, like Reagan and Billy Bennett promising to eliminate the Education Dept, only to see the budget for it doubled during Reagan's term.

I don't vote to elect the types who claim "all government is bad, so golly, so elect me."

I voted for Dr. Sheffren & Faro. Professionals, not shrill screamers.

(here comes the hate)


Like this comment
Posted by Menlo Voter
a resident of Menlo Park: other
on Oct 30, 2014 at 10:52 am

Menlo Voter is a registered user.

voted:

so you voted to maintain the status quo. Good for you. I guess you like having no say about where your tax money goes then, eh?


1 person likes this
Posted by pogo
a resident of Woodside: other
on Oct 30, 2014 at 1:28 pm

pogo is a registered user.

So you voted for professionals? No problem there at all.

But how about giving voters and taxpayers a chance to vote on the future of a hospital governing board that no longer has a hospital to govern? Unfortunately, the two people you voted for have pledged not to allow that referendum.

Fortunately, HICKEY, DE PAULA and MCDOWELL have pledged to hold the referendum and give us the same opportunity to vote that was so recently afforded to you.


Like this comment
Posted by 94403 or 94404?
a resident of another community
on Oct 30, 2014 at 2:24 pm

I agree with @Voted. The "shrill" libertarians that dominate these forums turn me off also. I have met one of them, and to have him as the leader of the pack is most surprising. When are the libertarians going to elect a candidate above the level of dog-catcher or special district board member? Any L state senators? Assembly? National office?

Just look at what one of the candidates provides to the league of women voters Web Link

From the Mercury: "DePaula, a San Mateo resident who unsuccessfully ran for county supervisor in June, said Hickey and others encouraged him to run..."

Does he even LIVE in the district? He lists his address on his website in San Mateo, and on Jack's website, with a 94403 zip code, while the district map lists only 94404. Web Link

from Jack's site: "DePaula for Director 2014 XXXX B(XXXXX) Drive San Mateo, CA 94403"


Is he a carpetbagger?

Jack Hickey can't find another libertarian from within the district?


Like this comment
Posted by Denmark
a resident of Menlo Park: Stanford Hills
on Oct 30, 2014 at 3:57 pm

Mr. DePaula - is your residence the one referred to on your website, and is it in the district?


Like this comment
Posted by Jack Hickey
a resident of Woodside: Emerald Hills
on Oct 30, 2014 at 4:37 pm

That address is Mark's residence, and it is in the district. Call Elections (312-5222) they will look it up for you. If you want a precinct list and map, ask for Hillary.

There are many people who do NOT live in the district but benefit from our free programs.


Like this comment
Posted by pogo
a resident of Woodside: other
on Oct 30, 2014 at 5:05 pm

pogo is a registered user.

Wow, and you guys call slate supporters "shrill?" Ironic.

94403 or 94404? - Yes, I suppose we can't all conveniently identify with either the D or R team. Not only are we are the only group that is growing, we are growing FAST. The discontent with the two major parties is palpable.

"California's fastest growing party is no party at all" Web Link


Like this comment
Posted by Palpable
a resident of Woodside: Woodside Glens
on Oct 30, 2014 at 9:50 pm

"California's fastest growing party is no party at all" Web Link

The discontent with the two major parties is palpable.

The Democratic Party went from 44 percent to 43 percent - palpable.
The Republican Party continues its epic fade, falling from 31 percent to 28 percent - palpable.
Libertarian party grows at breakneck speed, shattering all records because -
the discontent with the two major parties is palpable.

Libertarian party <1%

Palpable.


Like this comment
Posted by pogo
a resident of Woodside: other
on Oct 31, 2014 at 6:27 am

pogo is a registered user.

Palpable -

I can see how you might miss the key statement in the link. It was actually the OPENING SENTENCE.

"California Secretary of State Debra Bowen took the occasion of California Voter Registration Week this week to note THE CONTINUING DECLINE IN POPULARITY OF THE TWO MAJOR PARTIES IN THE GOLDEN STATE. AN ALL TIME HIGH OF 4 MILLION CALIFORNIA VOTERS — more than 23 percent — registered without stating a political party preference, up from 3.4 million or 20 percent in 2010."

For the mathematically challenged, going from 3.4 million to 4.0 million IS AN INCREASE OF 18%. At this rate, neither of our two major political parties will be the majority by the next election. One can only hope.

By the way, Libertarian isn't the only choice if you do not wish to identify as a D or R.


Like this comment
Posted by one sided battle
a resident of Menlo Park: Belle Haven
on Oct 31, 2014 at 7:39 am

Looks like the GOP gpt clobbered. Down ten percent. Democratics down 2 percent?


Like this comment
Posted by Edward
a resident of another community
on Oct 31, 2014 at 7:53 am

Republicans down 5.5%
Democrats down 2.5%

= 18% gain for a group representing 1/3 of the two major parties (4 million compared to 12.5 million)


Other "marginal" parties are a pittance.
None over 1% except API at 2.5%


"The Democratic Party remains California’s most popular, though registration has slipped from 7.7 million to 7.5 million, or 44 percent to 43 percent. The Republican Party continues its epic fade, falling from 5.3 million (31 percent) to 5 million (28 percent). The American Independent Party was the only other party to claim more than 1 percent of the electorate, and grew from 399,152 (2.4 percent) to 473,508 (2.7 percent). But most political analysts argue the AIP benefits from voter confusion over its name, thinking it means “no party preference.” Libertarian, Green, Peace and Freedom and other marginal parties account for less than one percent each of registered voters."

Yes, GOP is getting "clobbered".


Like this comment
Posted by Edward
a resident of another community
on Oct 31, 2014 at 7:55 am

btw: the 4 million DTS still vote for Democrats, and some Republicans; otherwise there would be Libertarians or Greens in office, somewhere.


Like this comment
Posted by pogo
a resident of Woodside: other
on Oct 31, 2014 at 8:00 am

pogo is a registered user.

Vote for HICKEY, MCDOWELL AND DE PAULA. Regardless of your affiliation.

Let's allow voters a chance to weigh in by referendum on our hospital district without a hospital.


1 person likes this
Posted by Edward
a resident of another community
on Oct 31, 2014 at 8:11 am

Sorry, I won't vote for Libertarians on principle, unless they meet a critical guideline (for me): when they deconstruct, they must have a "replacement" plan. Similar to the "Repeal and Replace" meme we've heard so much about for the last 4 years.

J Hickey's replacement plan is "we'll think about something else, maybe the county will do it, maybe someone else will step up, maybe"

From your above contributions, you obviously disagree. Good luck.


Like this comment
Posted by pogo
a resident of Woodside: other
on Oct 31, 2014 at 11:28 am

pogo is a registered user.

"Repeal and replace" is Republican, not Libertarian.

If you think Jack Hickey has not proposed a replacement idea, then you haven't been paying attention. No need to repeat it here.

Let's just hope voters are tired of sending tax dollars to a defunct hospital district - with no hospital to govern - just so the board insiders can donate the money to their favorite causes. Probably not what the founding father's envisioned for our government.

At least with HICKEY, DE PAULA and MCDOWELL, we can have a referendum and a voice. With the others, we have no say.


1 person likes this
Posted by numbers guy
a resident of Atherton: Lindenwood
on Oct 31, 2014 at 11:58 am

Hickey has floated an idea or two but never more than an idea. Over ten years and I've not seen an actual plan, or anything with numbers.


Like this comment
Posted by pogo
a resident of Woodside: other
on Oct 31, 2014 at 12:36 pm

pogo is a registered user.

Mr. Hickey's idea is to hold a voter referendum to abolish the district. If passed, our county officials will decide how to use this money.

Although this idea has widespread support, Mr. Hickey had to resort to the idea of a referendum because he was just one voice out of five on the board. Funny, Faro and Shefren have pledged NOT to give voters that chance. How democratic. How American.

It's really not such a difficult concept to embrace.


Like this comment
Posted by Jack Hickey
a resident of Woodside: Emerald Hills
on Nov 3, 2014 at 12:04 pm

What would happen if the Peninsula and Sequoia Healthcare Districts didn't exist?

Take a look at this site:
Web Link

Particularly note the County staff supporting this effort.
"Get Healthy is supported by staff at San Mateo County Health System’s Health Policy and Planning Division."


Like this comment
Posted by Richard Li
a resident of Menlo Park: Sharon Heights
on Nov 3, 2014 at 12:20 pm


I cribbed some copy from my own posting on Nextdoor.com

...with regard to the good work possible because of the dollars distributed by SHD. I would offer however, that a larger portion of the district's dollars go toward administration and executive pay than if the dollars were simply added to the County's medical services budget. I would ask the the question, can we get the same good work done with those SHD dollars at a higher level of service? Does the SHD do work that the County cannot do?

A good friend of mine served on a grand jury that investigated the work of the District. While that person had plenty of sympathy for the beneficiaries of the SHD funds, he/she was aghast at the insider's pay and perks. They recommended that the SHD submit to the voters. Per California law, that can only happen if the board puts it before the voters. I, for one would very much vote that my portion of the tax continue to be spent on county medical services for the poor. For me, it's not charity, it's a vital mission in public health, i.e. everybody's health. It's just that I would like to make sure that as much as possible, the appropriated dollars go directly to the programs and as little of it as possible to feeding a bureaucracy. I would also support the proposal to consolidate several existing healthcare districts to eliminate duplicate administration and serve a greater portion of the county, including portions of the county currently taxed by not served.

I direct you to the SHD budget for 2014-2015. The district projects income of of $12.25 million dollars. It allocates $6.381 million in grants and $3.118 million in "programs". Administration is allocated at $857,000 and pensions at $2.6 million. Yes, that figure is right and believe it or not down from $2.8 million in 2013-2014.
BTW, the current fiscal budget is revenue short by $845,000 and thus will have to draw down reserves. I believe that in addition to the five member SHD board, there is a executive and a full time assistant. Not exactly sure how over two and a half million in pension is distributed.

I received my SHD brochure a week before the election. If the SHD board believes in its mission, and believes that the good people of the county would support the programs funded, then submit it to the voters. Fundamentally, we who believe in the community's future will vote in the manner that the support the health of its citizens.


Like this comment
Posted by Richard Li
a resident of Menlo Park: Sharon Heights
on Nov 3, 2014 at 12:57 pm


look, for all the complaining about whether we should fund entities like SHD, there's enough reporting out there that some of the relevant facts should be posted here to share. Democrat, Repubs, Libertarians, these are just labels and distractions in philosophy talk. Please use GOOGLE and find out for yourself. United Way, spends about 17 cents per dollar in admin and fundraising. SHD has no fundraising but current budget spends 22 cents per dollar. Is that vastly higher? No, but given the context of collecting its share of taxes directly from the county revenue office, it sure seems inefficient. And I am truly flabberghasted at $2.5 to $2.8 million in pension costs in the last four budgets. Really?!? for two employees? Does anyone else think this is featherbedding?

SHD is not the worst in questionable practices in special healthcare districts. For that, try the entity behind Washington Hospital in Fremont. That exec, Farber, is paid north of $950,000 per year! Her husband went from a volunteer in a non-profit they fund to a multiple hundred thousand per year consultant/exec. Once again, my heart bleeds blue and I have voted as an staunch Democrat my entire life. But these dollars sucked out by overpaid staff are dollars denied to the primary intended recipients. Worse, this type of corruption leads to an erosion in the will of the public to fund all good causes and charities, whether by public or private means. How can we not become cynical?

I actually don't want my ad valorem back if it will be spent efficiently on public health and related causes. For all the knock we have for government bureaucrats and their relatively fat pensions, these 'special districts' have by and large escaped the oversight that government departments and agencies receive. There are too many of them, they write their own rules, they are never forced to compete with other worthy purposes for funding, they perpetuate themselves beyond their original writ, etc. etc.

Mr. Hickey, I applaud you, I thank you, I upvote you. Your lonely campaign to address this issue finally has a chance with the voters. Vote Hickey, McDowell and De Paula


Like this comment
Posted by Jack Hickey
a resident of Woodside: Emerald Hills
on Nov 3, 2014 at 5:20 pm

I have to clear up a misunderstanding which Mr. Li has regarding the pension. He said; "And I am truly flabberghasted at $2.5 to $2.8 million in pension costs in the last four budgets. Really?!? for two employees? Does anyone else think this is featherbedding?"

The pension in question, is for employees of Sequoia Hospital prior to its sale in 1996. Dignity Health has assumed responsibility for funding that obligation. It shows up as a pass-thru item in the district's budget.
However, one of its beneficiaries is current Boardmember and candidate Art Faro, former hospital CEO, who collects more than $70,000/year.


Like this comment
Posted by pogo
a resident of Woodside: other
on Nov 3, 2014 at 6:20 pm

pogo is a registered user.

Nicely written, Richard.

Except for the clarification from Mr. Hickey about the pension pass through, it is difficult to disagree with you facts.

And thank you to Jack for the clarification. It's that kind of refreshing honesty that has been missing.

Please vote for HICKEY, DE PAULA and MCDOWELL!


Like this comment
Posted by Richard Li
a resident of Menlo Park: Sharon Heights
on Nov 3, 2014 at 7:38 pm



Okay, so let's get this right, the SHD is still on the hook for employees from 18 years ago, when the hospital was sold in 1996! That's incredible. I admit I don't know how they do accounting in the public sector, but in the private sector pension costs are expensed in current income statements. There is some wiggle room with regard to funding accrued benefits but generally that is the case. But here eighteen years after the last hospital employee to have worked for SHD, they are still treated as if they still work there. How can that be? Was this part of the deal with Dignity? Do we subsidize just the legacy employees from 1996 or all employees, even new hires? After 18 years, there must be more than a few retirements, we should be seeing a significant decline in costs if that is the deal. WTF is this? Here, I point to my earlier post, when we discover stuff like this, it will just make it that much harder when support future "good causes". It would seem that good intentions inevitably lead to unhappy, inefficient, and costly results.


Like this comment
Posted by Menlo Voter
a resident of Menlo Park: other
on Nov 3, 2014 at 7:51 pm

Menlo Voter is a registered user.

"It would seem that good intentions inevitably lead to unhappy, inefficient, and costly results. "

Bingo


Like this comment
Posted by merge?
a resident of Atherton: other
on Nov 3, 2014 at 8:14 pm

Who's running in the other health care district?


Like this comment
Posted by selfish about a couple bucks in taxes
a resident of Menlo Park: South of Seminary/Vintage Oaks
on Nov 4, 2014 at 8:19 am

despite the talk of merging districts, those calling for abolishing SHD don't really care about the one in the north


Like this comment
Posted by Jack Hickey
a resident of Woodside: Emerald Hills
on Nov 4, 2014 at 8:25 am

I contributed $500 toward Doug Radtke's candidate statement for the Peninsula Healthcare District.


1 person likes this
Posted by Not PCMV
a resident of Menlo Park: other
on Nov 4, 2014 at 8:30 am

I am not a member of the Politically Correct Motivated Voter party (PCMV .. the initials of Peter Carpenter and Menlo Voter are purely coincidental).

I voted to keep the SHD and Yes on M.


Like this comment
Posted by selfish about a couple bucks in taxes
a resident of Menlo Park: South of Seminary/Vintage Oaks
on Nov 4, 2014 at 8:40 am

thanks Jack, I'll call my friend in San Mateo and warn him about Doug

500 clams, eh? Interesting.


Like this comment
Posted by Jack Hickey
a resident of Woodside: Emerald Hills
on Nov 4, 2014 at 9:06 am

Doug forced an election. The incumbents would have gotten a free ride.


Like this comment
Posted by Jack Hickey
a resident of Woodside: Emerald Hills
on Nov 4, 2014 at 3:58 pm

More info on SHD pension unfunded liability.
Web Link


Like this comment
Posted by Jack Hickey
a resident of Woodside: Emerald Hills
on Sep 3, 2016 at 10:00 am

Jack Hickey is a registered user.

This is an excellent thread, which deserves an update. The game is the same, but the name of the players has changed.

Two incumbents, Katie Kane and Kim Griffin, are running against Harland Harrison and Lois Garcia (both sponsored by Minority Director Jack Hickey) See: Web Link


Like this comment
Posted by Jack Hickey
a resident of Woodside: Emerald Hills
on Sep 3, 2016 at 10:28 am

Jack Hickey is a registered user.

The Sequoia Healthcare District Budget for FY2017 shows total revenue of $15,005,748.
$3,800,000 is a reimbursement by Dignity Health, owner/operator of Sequoia Hospital, for the District's servicing of the unfunded pension liability left over when the hospital was sold in 1996. This has a direct impact on the profit sharing revenue from Dignity Health, which is budgeted at $0 for this year. Property tax revenue is budgeted at $11,000,000 but is expected to rise several percent due to growth in assessed value. See: Web Link

I expect CEO total compensation to rise to more than $250,000/year when his raise is retro-actively approved at the October meeting. This, for managing 1 full time and 2 part time employees.


Like this comment
Posted by Jack Hickey
a resident of Woodside: Emerald Hills
on Sep 3, 2016 at 10:54 am

Jack Hickey is a registered user.

Some notable changes:
Children's Health Initiative - a county run program is no longer funded by the District. Funded at $1,350,000 since 2003, this program benefited the entire county. I estimate that more than $7,000,000 benefited non-residents of the district.

SFSU Nursing Program - Final year Funding $613,000. This program was funded at $1,000,000/year for more than 10 years. Less than half of the graduate nurses services benefited District residents. I estimate that more than $5,000,000 benefited non-residents of the district.

CEO Lee Michelson discusses the budget - Web Link
New programs:
Learn to swim safety program
Web Link


Like this comment
Posted by Jack Hickey
a resident of Woodside: Emerald Hills
on Sep 3, 2016 at 11:20 am

Jack Hickey is a registered user.

Sequoia Healthcare District ride subsidy for seniors.

Web Link


Like this comment
Posted by Jack Hickey
a resident of Woodside: Emerald Hills
on Sep 3, 2016 at 11:49 am

Jack Hickey is a registered user.

Pogo said: "I just returned from my mailbox where I was greeted by a four page, color brochure from the Sequoia Healthcare District.

It's probably just a coincidence that they mail out their slick, bright, shiny "2014 Annual Report to the Community" EXACTLY ONE WEEK PRIOR TO THE ELECTION."

Expect the same this election.

CEO Michelson's response to my e-mail inquiry below, not cc'd to other board members as I had done, was "Same time as always"


From: Jack HickeySHD
Sent: Thursday, July 28, 2016 10:23 AM
To: Lee Michelson
Cc: Art Faro; Jerry Shefren; 'Kathleen Kane'; Kim Griffin
Subject: Annual report

Lee, when do you plan to mail this years Annual Report?

Web Link

Jack Hickey, elected director