SAVE SAN LEANDRO HOSPITAL
SAN LEANDRO | Feb. 10, 2012 | A representative for nurses at San Leandro Hospital urged the Eden Township Healthcare District Wednesday night to include the union in negotiations between them and Sutter Health over the future of the facility.
Carol Barazi, a nurse at San Leandro Hospital, speaking from a statement from a labor representative for the California Nurses Association (CNA) said the hospital has been rife with rumors of negotiations and a settlement between Sutter and the District. In the statement, Mike Brannan of CNA, called for open negotiations while pledging support for the District’s efforts.
“The last time this happened several years ago there were a lot of negotiations held behind closed doors,” said the statement. “After some pushing by unions, meetings were held, but it was obvious a decision was already made. We are asking you to be as transparent as possible, if indeed, anything is going on.”
As reported earlier this week in The Citizen, negotiations have been on-going in recent weeks. Last Monday, San Leandro Councilman Michael Gregory spoke of the existence of a settlement during a meeting of the City Council. He added the District had hoped to have news of the final settlement before last Wednesday’s heavily-attended public meeting at the San Leandro Senior Community Center, but was unable to finalize the terms.
“There is no settlement and to my knowledge no discussion,” said Stacey Wells, a spokesperson for Sutter Health. “And if there were, they would be legal in nature because the District continues to keep this issue tied up in court.”
Carole Rogers, the chair of the District board of directors, also denied a settlement was near, nor has she seen a proposal from Sutter.
According to sources, the deal would mirror Sutter’s demand from, as far back as 2009, to hand over title of the hospital. Sutter would then lease the building to the Alameda County Medical Center and run the facility as an acute rehabilitation center. In exchange, the District would not be liable for potentially millions in damages due to Sutter from two unsuccessful court decisions that challenged Sutter’s right to the title.
“The District would be crazy not to take this deal,” said a county official, with knowledge of the potential deal, who chose not to be identified.
Steven I believe you are right, if you have nothing to hide why close these sessions, it justs makes one wonder who or what is on the up and up, and since it involves so many, why should only a certain group be allowed to see and hear the discussion, there should be some way that some of the people involved should be picked to attend these meeting, this could cut down on the rumors that are flying all around and also let you know who is on whose side and why. and the reply from the 12th at 7:43pm you say BEHIND CLOSED DOORS is the way it is, well that does not make it right, I have seen so many things that people once thought well thats the way it is, and then someone said but why, so lets change it and they did, and today we have the Constitution, so to say or think ” WELL THATS THE WAY IT IS ” is to have a blank mind and that is not the way we feel. John Kalafatich ( PAPA JOHN )
So what do you recommend? Anyone on an elected board has legal instructions about what can be discussed in closed session. Any infraction is a misdemeanour.
I wouldn't ever accept a government body telling you information should be discussed in closed session. It's the way it is because you allow it to be. Closed session is a tool used by local government to hide. It's a struggle I deal with all the time and a threat used on officials to keep them quiet under the threat of prosecution. It's all BS. All of it.
Negotiations on a law suit is – by definition -is in closed session. The only peoples allowed in closed session are board members and their attorney. Someone correct me? “behind closed doors” is the way it is. Labor, staff, or your sister are not allowed.
Mike Brannan is a snake. Sutter — hold tough and get every dime you can from the district.
Labor at the table ? How silly. They've had Carole Rogers at the table all along.
they would be cowards to except that deal.
That is not negotiating, it's bullying.