the rich to the poor, and because we are losing homes. i just want to remind you that we need homes. we need both. let us work together and the both of them working together. maybe you might be here one day. supvervisor campos: thank you. >> i am with self-help for the elderly. self-help is a nonprofit social- service agency. we also fall under health care programs. i have not read all the changes. i am hoping that addresses them. i am a hospital administrator. when we talk about home care and hospice programs in the community, our residential care facilities, are all summer's day

care, we overall support this legislation. we provide services to the most needy. this is the pipeline hospital. we think by making sure those go through the pipeline projects, people can continue to be served, so thank you. supervisor campos: thank you. next speaker. >> good afternoon once again, supervisors, i want to thank all of you for your attention to this issue. i want to think supervisor camp os for meeting with us from the hospital community. i want to comment for people in the audience -- supervising has

moved forward. there is a house an ordinance in the city. hot off the press, we were, in order to do the expansion we want to do in the future -- we purchased a 22-unit housing complex which was old and decrepit. next month, we will be opening a brand new 22 unit housing complex in a block away from the original site. we spent $10 million replacing the building. just to clarify, there is a it replacing house meant ordnance in the city. none of us go into committees -- into communities and all those housing. if we do, we replace it. in order to address the ordinance today, i just want to reiterate what previous speaker ron smith said. we do support the consolidation of the appeals process, but in

addition to that, one of the things we want to make sure happens is all of us in the medical community, including kaiser permanente, would like to have a seat at the table as we go to this planning process. we are very much in support of the health care master planning and we think the concept is a good one. we think we have a lot to offer in the wake of our experts involved with planning. we would like to be at the table in pursuing the planning. the other thing i would like to address is the historical role our facilities have served. we have been in the same location for 60 years. we have invested millions of dollars in our property the exemption would not meet the needs of most of the improvements we need to do at our facility. thank you. >> good afternoon supervisors i am more and brown. i appreciate your willingness to

entertain amendments to make this into a better piece of legislation. we strongly support -- let me emphasize that -- health-care planning. the city can look forward to developing a health care master plan. we recognize how important it is the health-care planning at a local level recognize what is going on on the state and federal levels, particularly with federal health care reform. the supervisor earlier said we are under a legislative mandate from the state. we have to make sure that our hospitals are seismically compliant. we are under a time line with an uncertain deadline in order to achieve that. we really appreciate your willingness to entertain the amendment, to allow projects that are currently being considered to move forward expeditiously. i remind the supervisors that unfortunately we do not control the approval process.

it is possible the project currently in the pipeline will not actually be approved in time to be exempt from this ordinance. i think it is very important that the supervisor understand that any health-care master plan that delays our ability to rebuild is dangerous for the city. it is dangerous for citizens of the city, dangerous for the feasibility of our projects. it puts on hold the investment of billions of dollars, 1500 construction jobs, and 6500 planned jobs in health care. i think you need to take that into account. finally, we would encourage you to consider the ramifications and consequences of passing a politicized health care master plan that would derail or delay our project and the necessary rebuilding of health-care facilities. we think that would be an extraordinarily unfortunate consequence of not exempting projects that are currently in the pipeline. thank you. supervisor campos: a few more

names. nato green, linda schumacker, brian webster, linda chapman. >> my name is diane. i represent kindred health care. we are in the business of long- term care. we have 585 beds in san francisco. 350 of those patients are [unintelligible] one of my corporate concerns from our company is the delay. this would discourage companies that would want to come in and. it is hard enough to do business in san francisco. there is a lack of long-term care facilities. we are hesitating right now to purchase a couple that are on the market.

i am very active this ordinance. we need a master plan. but have you considered the delay it would cost for some of the long-term care facilities? that is all. thank you. supervisor campos: thank you. >> it is planning. it is saying we will know what we need. that is all we are doing here is trying to make sure we are planning for what we need. and if we find -- i think as our population ages -- what is the alternative? [laughter] we are going to need those places. i think our planning will show us that. instead of it being time delayed, it might be an approval process that is faster because

it is something we need. it is not that it is going to be the worst thing ever. i think you need to be careful how you frame your comments to us, because it -- just be careful how you frame it so it makes sense and it is not just if you don't we will fall off a cliff, because it just does not work that way. thank you. >> abbey yen, sts. francis hospital. i appreciate the opportunity to come into you one more time. i think god just locked us all in the room. we are all here, and we are all very interested in doing a plan. i think that is part of what this legislation has done, is made that clear we are very interested in a good health master plan for san francisco. i would ask on behalf of our facility that our rebuilds in the future as it relates to the legislation -- we have a 2013 deadline.

we are retrofitting our facilities at st. mary's and st. francis as we speak. they will pass the 2014 deadline, but we will be looking at a 2013 deadline. -- at a 2030 deadline. it requires an outlook and we are not there yet. the suggested amendment presents us with interesting challenges for how we could look beyond those years into 2030 and preserve -- for all of us, we recognize the mecca san francisco is for health care, and the great regional programs we provide. st. francis has an original burn center that has recently been able to demonstrate its fell you to the wider community, not just san francisco. -- its value to the wider community, not just san francisco. something we would ask for and continue to support in the health care master plan is to consider truncating the appeals process into an already existing

process and to consider how we can further clarify the historical role of the existing institutions within the city. thank you. supervisor campos: thank you. next speaker. >chairperson maxwell: i also wanted to think the hospitals. we cannot do this planning without them. we need their input. just like they came in with health the san francisco, -- healthy san francisco, we could not have gotten where we are. they are our partners in this and i want to thank them. >> i have been here 12 years and have been involved with the leadership of supervisor campos to develop policy tools. this is what i would like to emphasize. not just overstate this, because you have just eloquently stated, supervisor maxwell -- but these

tools are built on legislation and has been attempted before and lost. we are trying to come back with a 21st century version of doing rational health planning. it does not take away all the politics, but it does end up offering you two tools -- the master plan, which we have consensus, which will take about 12 months. in terms of the timeline, i think this whole compromise situation is important. secondly, the consistency determination, which is more politicized. i would ask you to sort out the false objections and falls enemies on this, including the narrow focus of some folks that i read in "the business times" who say this is a tilt against the business community and for the public sector. this is for public transparency and for rational planning that

is accountable. as you see now, the strategic plan at the department of public health, which i was a part of developing, is an internal document. this plan would be an external public document that you could use, rather than an internal document. i think the health commission understands that and the planning commission definitely understand it. that shows that. on the consistency determination, i really think it is an efficiency move. it is for planning that will take us out of the willy-nilly discussions, the super heroic events that led to the who blue ribbon commission, etc. supervisor campos: thank you very much. i want to thank the former commissioner for her invaluable feedback on this. thank you very much for her leadership. >> my name is alex mahana.

we are both from san francisco. we would like to thank supervisor campos for providing us with the window for our institution to provide a place to provide health care as well as for others to work. there is a lot of concern. as to our livelihood and job, for 18 months, we fought for a contract to provide us all with jobs at the institution, which was of great concern to us because we're concerned about -- we were very concerned about job security with everything having to be up to code and everything else. >> i am william custer.

i am a hospital worker. i want to thank you for amending -- our amendment. [laughter] anyway, i am 28 years old. i spoke to a city supervisor campos last week. i have two young children. we worked very hard on a contract, especially in these economic times. we just want to do our part on behalf of the contract to make sure our hospital is built on time so we can create a lot more jobs for us and make sure that we keep our pay, keep our seniority, keep everything. that is pretty much it. thank you. supervisor campos: i have a few more names. steve wu, emily lee, alex tom.

>> good afternoon, supervisors. thank you for having this hearing again. nato green california nurses association for planning. we have not had a position one way or another in terms of extension four pipeline projects. we are willing to defer to the wishes of the planning commission. you should be aware that, not to be overly concerned about the -- on the issue of the seismic deadline, the hospital industry has consistently lobbied for extensions to those same seismic deadlines, most recently through sb 289, which was narrowly targeted. to the extent that cmpc was recently willing to play fast and loose with seismic

exemptions. i would not be too rev. toward them. on the other issue, we would oppose defining in the master planning process what private sector entity should be part of the health care plan in process. of course, the provider should be involved, but should it be the hospital council? should it be the clinic? should it be unions representing the workers? should it be community advocates? everybody should be involved, and we do not want to start listing that in the legislation. finally, we have been through this legislation process. it is not specifically about c bmc. it is about health care with everyone. we are in disputes with kaiser and others about their proposed rebuilds and reductions in services to those communities that are part of those projects. we need good legislation to promote access to health care and give the city more tools to advocate for health for everybody. supervisor campos: thank you

very much. next speaker, please. >> good afternoon, supervisors. my name is eileen prendiville. california requires that each city and state adopt a general plan which requires statement mandates including open space, conservation, housing, etc. additional topics can be included. health care absolutely is included in part of this plan. as a registered nurse in san francisco for 33 years, i have seen many changes in health care, from the downsizing of registered nurses during managed care in the '90s and de-skilling of andersen's -- of nurses. we may still be endangering our patience today. but when we decrease services in low income often immigrant

communities and cut non profitable services like psychiatry and skilled nursing and dialysis services but open probable outpatient surgery centers and clinics, the goal first and foremost for them is to increase their profits, not to serve the needs of the community. for example, peninsula announced recently it would sell its skilled nursing community and its wheel dialysis centers, but is looking to purchase a surgical center which includes profitable ambulatory centers and include several units in san francisco. we all know cornering the market share of the business drives up costs for everyone. hospitals are one of those businesses. we need to hold health care businesses accountable to the community, where they benefit from the nonprofit status. i urge you to pass this legislation and lead the way for the community to do the same. supervisor campos: thank you very much. the speaker, please.

>> kevin, coalition for health planning san francisco. i am also a member of the bernal heights neighborhood association. thanks for your leadership in san francisco communities. it is effective public policy. how is planning bad? i do not understand that. having data in front of you and being able to make a consistency determination with that data, saying this project fits, only seems like a good public policy. ask yourself why the hospital industry is trying to kill this legislation. it is not profitable enough. it seems tough when we are putting profit ahead of good public policy. there is criticism this has been rushed. there have been seven months. multiple meetings have been had where amendments have been introduced by the hospital industry themselves. for them to come back to weeks ago and say it is too rushed seems like it is somewhat

laughable. also, look at the idea of concern with seismic deadlines. major grain just pointed out these guys just applied for a extension that had to be vetoed by republican governor. if that does not speak to you, i do not know what will. once again, we think that plenty of time has been given to look at this legislation. i urge you to pass it and give the planning commission and health commission the tools they have been clamoring for. give the community the tools they have been clamoring for. help us make good and effective decisions. supervisor campos: william ho, yoland salazar. >> my name is linda schumacher and i am the chief operating officer for chinese hospital. i come to thank you for your leadership in helping to provide the direction and planning for the health care

needs of san francisco. chinese hospital is a very unique community health care provider with a unique history. we have been in existence for 110 years. we are the only hospital dedicated to the care of chinese in the united states, and have been supported by the community extensively. in 1925, the community raised the funds to build the first official hospital at 835 jackson st.. we are -- we are governed by a voluntary board of trustees. 90% of our residents come from san francisco. more than 45% come from the communities in chinatown, north beach, and not hill. 98% are asian. 88% are over the age of 60. we serve a unique nation of residence in san francisco. -- we serve a unique niche of

restidents in san francisco. overtly -- over 90% of them speak chinese. originally, we were concerned that the language in the available public document would impact our ability in the pipeline to meet and go forward with our plans to build a new hospital. we thank you for that amendment. that allows the date to be changed. we look forward to working with you on the health care plan for san francisco. supervisor campos: thank you very much. next speaker, please. >> my name is wayne hu. chinese hospital is the institution -- an independent institution owned by the community. it responds to the community in the services it provides.

it is a pipeline project. it is an important pipeline project. i have been working on this project since 2003. we have submitted our documents for approvals to the office of statewide health and planning. that was submitted in 2007. we anticipate that we will have their approval for our projects next year. we have invested -- the hospital project is a $150 million project. the construction cost is about $100 million. we have invested approximately $18 million to bring this project to date, to get the project designed and apply for our entitlement and review. we are far along in the process. the concern that we had is that if we got the late -- if we got delayed, we have estimated that the escalation factor is 4% to

5% a year. right now, we have a small window of opportunity as construction costs are relatively flat. if we go beyond that, we anticipate it would cost us about $5 million a year added to the project. he realized the project is funded by bond financing of about $80 million, but the balance comes from donations. we are concerned that we need to proceed with this project to serve our community. i did have some questions. i think they have been answered with the revision to the legislation, but the concern is what happens in the interim process with the ordinance adopted prior to the health plan. thank you very much. supervisor campos: thank you very much. next speaker. >> mr. collins, with community action network. i want to put your attention -- it is not so much on the

hospitals, but the need of the community at large. i want to read briefly a statement here. the city has not identified services needed, the gap in care, or the ability to close the deficit. a few years ago, health care discussion was on how to keep the community healthy. what this looks like in the eastern neighborhood health care assessment committee meeting that i served on for 18 months, it looked out what makes a healthy neighborhood. it was not so much looking at the facilities themselves, but where the facilities are located. what is the transformation right to these facilities, and what pipeline project, with your amendments, would be affected? it is not clear which pipeline

projects would be affected on the east side of the city. there are many pipeline project around. would they be required to meet the 2013 deadline? how many of these projects are not part of the amendments? i like the policy altogether, but we also need to look at insulating san francisco from the eight other counties that make up the nine county region of the bay area. we need to make our city more acceptable to health care and those who will be brought into the communities that already exist. i need some clarity with the projects that are going to be acceptable. there are many health care projects and it is unclear. but we do need a health care master plan. supervisor campos: joseph spook,

faith kirkpatrick. next speaker, please. >> my name is brian webster. i am chief of staff at a community-based organization on 16th street here in san francisco, in the mission. we serve working poor people, about 8% spanish-speaking. -- about 80% spanish-speaking. we have been doing this for about 30 years in san francisco. i want to thank the supervisors for creating this opportunity, and supervisor campos for your efforts. i particularly want to thank him for his willingness to entertain amendments to master plan for health care services. we support master planning for health care. we support san francisco -- healthy san francisco and

universal public health care. we support the unionized health- care workers here in san francisco and we support the san francisco building and construction trades council and the construction trades workers unions here in san francisco. people know us. they know we are big supporters of green jobs and economic development here in san francisco, and the opportunities that is creating for all people here in san francisco. basically, we support business and labor working together, and things like the community benefits agreement between lenore, san francisco, bayview- based organizations, and the san francisco labor council. which support community benefits agreements like that for building benefits projects. we all support -- we also support the cpmc master building

planned and are against targeting legislation to slow down building projects already in the pipeline. we support the position of the san francisco building and construction trades council on this, and thank you for the opportunity. supervisor campos: next speaker. >> my name is steve we, from the tender line, representing the good neighbor coalition. we are made up of coalitions mostly from the tenderloin, but also citywide. most of you are aware of the current communities struggle going on between our community and cpmc and we think the legislation is a good idea. we are here to speak in support of it today. a lot of the concerns we have with cpmc could have been prevented by more oversight, more guidance, and more pl