Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 05082001 - C.12 C.12 THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA Adopted this Order on May 8, 2001, by the following vote: AYES: Supervisors Gioia, Gerber, Glover and Uilkema NOES: None ABSENT: Supervisor DeSaulnier ABSTAIN: None ACCEPTED Grand Jury Report No. 0 10 1, "Mt. Diablo Health Care District," and REFERRED to the County Administrator. I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. Attested: May 8. 2001 John Sweeten, Clerk of the Board of Supervisors and County Administrator Deputy Clerk GYa n d Jury � 725 Court Street Contra 1. le9s P.O.Box 911 Costa Martinez, CA 94553-0091 County - -j.._�. RECEIVED April 24, 2001 ""i' APR 2 4 2001 rrCOUNT CLERK BOARD OF SUPERVISORS CONTRA COSTA CO. Board of Supervisors 651 Pine Street, 1 st Floor Martinez, CA 94553 Dear Board of Supervisors: Attached is a copy of Grand Jury Report No. 0101, "Mt. Diablo Health Care District" prepared by the 2000-2001 Contra Costa Grand Jury, for your information prior to its public release. In accordance with California Penal Code Section 933.05, this report is being provided to you at least two working days before it is released publicly. Section 933.5(a) of the California Government Code requires that (the responding person or entity shall report one of the following actions) in respect to each finding: (1) "The respondent agrees with the finding." (2) "The respondent disagrees with the finding." (3) "The respondent partially disagrees with the finding." In the cases of both (2) and (3) above, the respondent shall specify the portion of the finding that is disputed, and shall include an explanation of the reasons therefor. In addition, Section 933.05(b) requires that the respondent reply to each recommendation by stating one of the following actions: 1. The recommendation has been implemented, with a summary describing the implemented action. 2. The recommendation has not yet been implemented, but will be implemented in the future, with a time frame for implementation. 3. The recommendation requires further analysis. This response should explain the scope and parameters of the analysis or study, and a time frame for the matter to be prepared for discussion. This time frame shall not exceed six months from the date of the publication of the Grand Jury Report. Board of Supervisors April 24, 2001 Page 2 4. The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted or is not reasonable, with an explanation thereof. Please be reminded that Section 933.05 specifies that no officer, agency, department or governing body of a public agency shall disclose any contents of the report prior to its public release. Please insure that your response to the above noted Grand Jury report includes the mandated items. We will expect your response, using the form described by the quoted Government Code, no later than July 23, 2001. To aid you in responding to this report, we have attached a copy of "Guidelines for Responding to a Grand Jury Report." Failure to conform to these requirements could result in your having to resubmit your response. You are also advised that your response becomes a public record upon receipt by the Presiding Judge of the Superior Court. Sincerely, CAROL THEWS, Foreman 2000-01 Contra Costa County Civil Grand Jury cc: Mt. Diablo Health Care District LAFCO Annamaria Perrella Executive Director R7SER AP A REPORT BY CLERK BOCO THE 2000-01 CONTRA COSTA COUNTY GRAND JURY 725 Court Street Martinez, California 94553 Report No. 0 10 1 , MT. DIABLO HEALTH CARE DISTRICT APPROVED BY THE GRAND JURY: Date: CAROL T WS GRAND JURY FOREMAN ACCEPTED FOR FILING: Date: 2 0 MICHAEL R. COLEMAN JUDGE OF THE SUPERIOR COURT CONTRA COSTA COUNTY GRAND JURY REPORT NO. 0101 Mt. Diablo Health Care District BACKGROUND Mt. Diablo Health Care District (District), previously called Mt. Diablo Hospital District, was chartered November 26, 1948, by the California State Legislature. It operated under the powers granted in the California Health and Safety Code §32121. The District purchased a hospital built from a home on East Street in Concord in 1952. In 1960, the District constructed Concord Community Hospital. This hospital was expanded in 1980 and the name changed to Mt. Diablo Medical Center. A Community Benefit Agreement dated August 6, 1996, was jointly drawn between Mt. Diablo Health Care District and John Muir Medical Center, a private non-profit organization. Subject to the approval of the voters, the parties agreed to merge the facilities of Mt. Diablo Medical Center with those of John Muir Medical Center to form John Muir-Mt. Diablo Health System (System). A referendum election was held November 5, 1996, on Measure MM to approve the merger. It was approved by the voters. Assets and liabilities of Mt. Diablo Medical Center were transferred to the System in January 1997. The agreement is subject to renewal in 2049. As a part of the Community Benefit Agreement, John Muir-Mt. Diablo Community Health Benefit Corporation (Corporation) was founded. The Corporation is funded by John Muir-Mt. Diablo Health System with $1,000,000 per year for grants and up to $200,000 for administrative costs. The Corporation is a private, non-profit institution and not a public agency. The general objective of the Corporation is to address unmet health needs, within the meaning of SB697, for the area served by the System. Mt. Diablo Health Care District does not direct the Corporation's functions nor financially contribute to it. FINDINGS 1. Currently, Mt. Diablo Health Care District does not operate any health care facility nor provide assistance in the operation of health facilities nor any other medical services to its constituents. 2. In the Community Benefit Agreement, Mt. Diablo Health Care District has limited identified duties. These are: a. To perpetuate itself as the body to reclaim the assets the District transferred in the merger, should that merger fail. b. To approve payments from two small pension funds to former District employees even though the merged System processes requests and payments. y c. To nominate five members to the board of the John Muir-Mt. Diablo Community Health Benefit Corporation. With only one exception, the District Board has nominated its own members. d. To accept or reject, but not nominate, half of the sixteen John Muir-Mt. Diablo Health System Directors; the eight required to reside or have their principal place of business within the District boundaries. No rejections have been exercised to date. 3. Mt. Diablo Health Care District Board members are compensated with a $100 stipend for each Board or Committee meeting they attend up to a maximum of $500 each month. Board member stipend compensation in 1999 averaged $3160 per member. 4. After 12 years of service on the Mt. Diablo Health Care District Board, the Directors become entitled to lifetime post retirement benefits: medical, dental and life insurance funded out of the District's tax revenues. As of this writing, all current Board members will qualify for these lifetime benefits which had an annual cost of$70,205 ( 1999 audit report). 5. The following financial statistics were included in the Mt. Diablo Health Care District's calendar year 1999 audit report performed by Brokstein & Rosen, Certified Public Accountants, Walnut Creek, CA. Income 1999 $137,910 From property taxes 11,838 Interest on reserves 25,000 Annual subsidy from the John Muir-Mt. Diablo Health System. $174,748 Total income Distribution of Funds 1999 $112,509 Board Operating Expense 10,000 Community Support 142 Miscellaneous $122,651 Total Expenditures 52,097 Cash and Reserves $174,748 Total Distribution 6. Board elections are held every two years and the District is responsible for the associated costs. There was no election in 1999 and, therefore, no election costs. In 1998, election costs were $53,474. In 1999, even without election costs, money 2 spent to maintain Mt. Diablo Health Care District Board of Directors was 91.7% of the.total expenditures. Expenditures made to maintain the Board include office expense, professional fees, stipends, travel, health and life insurance, and retirement. 7. At year end 1999, the financial assets of Mt. Diablo Health Care District were $437,568 of which $199,396 were reserves for Board members' post retirement benefits. 8. Mt. Diablo Health Care District Board has established contact with Los Medanos Community Hospital District and West County Health Care District. A Joint Powers Agreement"to develop regional health education and planning programs" has been discussed. No conclusive actions on this initiative have been taken. 9. According to Government Code, dissolution of the Mt. Diablo Health Care District is subject to approval of the Local Agency Formation Commission of Contra Costa County (LAFCO). Application for LAFCO approval can be made either by a resolution adopted by an affected agency, which would include the County, or by a petition signed by a requisite number of residents of the District. 10. California Government Code §§57450 and 57451 address the effects of the dissolution of a special district such as Mt. Diablo Health Care District. Upon dissolution, the successor agency would be the city in the affected area whose assessed valuation is the greatest. Based on Fiscal Year 2000 Assessors rolls, the City of Concord would become that agency and would assume all the dutiesand contractual obligations of the District. LAFCO could impose conditions. Dissolution will require an election to get the approval of the constituents of the District. 11. When the Mt. Diablo Health Care District is dissolved, taxes would not necessarily be reduced. That portion of tax revenues allocated to the District would be distributed over the County ad valorem expenditures. CONCLUSIONS 1. The Mt. Diablo Health Care District receives property taxes which are largely used to support the expense of the District Directors and their current and retirement benefits. 2. With little success, Mt. Diablo Health Care District Directors have been searching since the merger for some tangible health related activity to perform. The community health services they are considering are already being provided by other organizations,such as: The John Muir-Mt. Diablo Community Health Benefit Corporation, The John Muir-Mt. Diablo Health Network and the Community Health Institute. 3 3. The original purpose of Mt. Diablo Health Care District of providing and operating a hospital is no longer justification for continuation of the District. 4. Substantial financial resources intended for health related activities are not being utilized for these activities. RECOMMENDATIONS The 2000-2001 Contra Costa County Grand Jury recommends that: 1. Mt. Diablo Health Care District be dissolved. 2. Dissolution of Mt. Diablo Health Care District be initiated by each of the following: Board of Directors of the Mt. Diablo Health Care District, Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors, and Local Agency Formation Commission of Contra Costa County. 4 GUIDELINES FOR RESPONDING TO A GRAND JURY REPORT Penal Code section 933.05 governs how to respond to a Grand Jury Report. Any response not in compliance with section 933.05 will be returned by the Grand Jury for revision. To help you avoid having to revise your response to comply with.section 933.05, the Grand Jury provides the following guidelines. Grand Jury reports include Findings and the Recommendations. Penal Code section 933.05 requires you to respond to each Finding and each Recoinniendation. 1. You are required to respond to each FINDING in one of the following three ways: 1) Agree with the finding. No further explanation is required. 2) Wholly disagree with the finding. The reasons for your dispute must be explained. 3) Partially disagree with the finding. The portion disputed must be specified. The reasons for your dispute must be explained. Note the following examples of acceptable responses: Example 1: Finding: The [agency] employs 208 workers and has offices in three areas of Contra Costa County. Response: Agree. Example 2: Finding: The [agency] owns the building and the surrounding land. Response: Wholly disagree. The [agency] leases the building and the surrounding land. [Another entity] owns the building and surrounding land. Example 3: Finding: All employees are required to attend training seminars every year to keep current on. changing laws. Response. Partially disagree. All employees but supervisors are required to attend training seminars every year. Supervisors are required to attend training seminars once every two years. 2. You are required to respond to each RECOMMENDATION in one of the following four ways: 1) The recommendation has been implemented. A summary of the implemented action must be stated. 2) The recommendation has not yet been implemented, but will be implemented in the future. A time frame for implementation must be stated. 3) The recommendation requires further analysis. An explanation, the scope, and the parameters of the future analysis or study must be set forth. The time frame for preparation of the matter for discussion (including by applicable governing bodies) must be stated. The time frame may not exceed six months from the date of the publication of the Grand Jury report. 4. The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted and/or not reasonable. The reasons for not implementing the recommendation must be explained. Note the following examples of acceptable responses: Example 1: Recommendation: Yearly training should be made mandatory for all employees. Response: The recommendation has been implemented. Last month, this [agency] adopted and distributed new written policy requiring yearly training for all employees. Example 2: Recommendation: The [agency] should hire additional bilingual employees. Response: The recommendation has not yet been implemented, but will be implemented. The [agency] is currently interviewing employment applicants who are bilingual. We expect to extend employment offers to two such applicants by the end of the current month. Assuming the employment offers will be accepted, this will bring the total of bilingual employees to seven. Example 3: Recommendation: The [agency] should implement security measures for the protection of staff and clients during nighttime hours. Response: The recommendation requires further analysis. The [agency] has begun a study of the feasibility of providing nighttime security. The study is analyzing our security needs, the use of security guards versus security systems, the costs involved, and the potential sources of funding. We will complete the study by the end of this month and it will be discussed and acted upon by the end of next month. Example 4: Recommendation: The [agency] should acquire the property north of the current parking lot to provide additional parking for staff and clients. Response: The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted or reasonable. The property north of the current parking lot is not for sale. The property is owned by [another agency] that plans to begin construction of an office building on the site in the next two months. However, we are currently negotiating our purchase of the property east of the current parking lot to provide additional parking for staff and clients.