Health Care

New Orleans is in the midst of a troubling public health crisis. Charity Hospital has historically served New Orleans' most vulnerable citizens and its continued closure further jeopardizes the city's uninsured population, stretches limited government services to the their breaking point, and puts unnecessary strain on the region's private hospitals and care providers. The current LSU/VA plan condemns the residents of New Orleans to years of inadequate medical resources while their proposed facility is built. Since Charity Hospital can be renovated at least four and a half years faster than the LSU/VA proposal for a new medical complex, the work of attracting top flight medical personnel to provide critical public health services can begin sooner by rebuilding Charity.

Below you will find a collection of articles pertaining to the preservation issue:

State awarded $475 million, yet still cannot proceed with new hospital

The federal arbitration process to determine how much FEMA will reimburse the state of Louisiana for the replacement of Charity Hospital has come back with a decision. The state will receive $475 million -- great news for the city -- and removes one of the roadblocks for returning healthcare services to New Orleans.

This money should be used to rebuild, not to destroy. It should be spent now. LSU proposes to sit on this money for years as they try to find some way to finance their costly and destructive Lower Mid-City proposal.

We now have enough funding to gut and rebuild Charity Hospital.

Read More

Editorial boards take notice: Charity a State issue with National consequences

Well isn't this interesting...

As we enter a week of closed-door hearings that will decide how much money the State will receive from FEMA for hurricane-related damage done to Charity Hospital, two surprising editorials are condemning the lack of transparency and highlighting the far-reaching consequences of this flawed process.

Times-Picayune editorial, entitled "Pull the curtain on Charity Hospital hearings" decries the lack of transparency in the binding arbitration process, stating "New Orleanians and taxpayers across the nation are being kept out " of the decision-making process.

Read More

Charity Hearing Behind Closed Doors

  In a process that continues to be marked by its lack of transparency and public participation, the dispute over how much FEMA owes Louisiana for damage done to Charity Hospital during Hurricane Katrina will go to binding arbitration on Monday, before a completely secret closed-door panel.

 A front-page Times-Picayune story reports that the three-judge arbitration panel will have a week-long hearing and then have 60 days or more to make their binding decision.

In a dispute that has yet to see a public hearing of any kind, it is outrageous that this hearing be conducted in secret.

Read More

Support Save Charity Hospital – Buy our T-Shirt

 We cannot continue this work without your support.

Luckily, there's a way you can support SaveCharityHospital.com and look good doing it!

Our friends at DEFEND NEW ORLEANS have designed a "Save Charity Hospital"
T-shirt, with the proceeds going directly to this website.

$25

Please support the cause -- and us -- by buying one of our T-Shirts.

 

Wear them loud and proud around town!

Thank you for supporting us!

 

Bookmark and Share 

BREAKING: Streamlining Commission Orders Independent Analysis!

On Tuesday, November 17th – by a 7-3 vote – the Commission on Streamlining Government passed a motion ordering an independent study weighing all possible alternatives to, and the efficacy of, the proposed $1.2 billion LSU medical complex. The study will represent the first ever independent analysis in the ongoing controversy over the abandonment of Charity Hospital and new plans to expropriate and demolish private property in Lower Mid-City to make way for a sprawling new medical center campus. The vote is an enormous victory for advocates of Charity Hospital and Lower Mid-City residents and business owners.

Read More

Get Involved with SaveCharityHospital.com

Here are 4 easy ways you can help the fight to Save Charity Hospital:

  • Sign up for our Mailing List to receive important action updates.
     
  • Sign up to receive your FREE yard sign and bumper sticker.
     
  • Volunteer to help us at upcoming events and to deliver bumper stickers.
     
  • Donate to SaveCharityHospital.com to help us continue our advocacy work.

 

 

Bookmark and Share

BREAKING NEWS: HOSPITAL APPEARS CLEAN AFTER THE STORM

Photos obtained by SaveCharityHospital.com suggest that Charity Hospital was in better condition than LSU and state officials have claimed. The photos, marked with the dates "SEP 25 2005" and "FEB 9 2006", show the state of Charity Hospital after a group of doctors, nurses volunteers and soldiers from the 82nd Airborne cleaned up the hospital in the weeks following Hurricane Katrina. Shortly after, officials from LSU declared the hospital destroyed and unsafe, closing its doors.

Read More

Hate to say it

But we told you so.

Did you happen to catch Bill Barrow's latest article in the Times-Picayune about the skyrocketing estimated costs that the proposed LSU Taj Mahospital will force taxpayers to foot each year?

 

The planned state teaching hospital in New Orleans will need at least $70 million in annual state general fund support through 2016 and could top $100 million in subsequent years, according to an analysis prepared for Louisiana Health Secretary Alan Levine. 

That's a lot of money for operations and still doesn't address the $500 million shortfall preventing LSU from even beginning construction. 

And that's also why we sought a compromise in which LSU and the VA would have swapped plots in Lower Mid-City. Not only would this have allowed the VA to begin construction on the best piece of land but it would have allowed the controversy around LSU's proposed hospital to be resolved without demolishing the most populous part of the Lower Mid-City community. Instead, it looks increasingly like the number one reason given for the entire LSU/VA complex - biomedical corridor synergy - is at risk. The residents of Lower Mid-City will have been kicked out of their houses for a VA hospital that, instead of being adjacent to a state-of-the-art teaching facility, will be completely isolated from the medical district for years.

If the politicians who have systematically enshrined the LSU/VA complex knew in 2006 or even in 2008 what we now know in 2010, would they have been so enthusiastic about skirting the hearing process?

If they knew that instead of a cost-efficient joint LSU/VA facility co-located on a site between Claiborne and Galvez, they'd get two totally separate sprawling hospitals on a larger site between Cliaborne and N. Rocheblave, would they have still supported the LSU/VA?

If they knew that healthcare reform would render LSU's financing plan inoperable?

If they knew how high site preparation costs would rise on New Orleans taxpayers?

If they knew home values would be artificially supressed to cheat Lower Mid-City residents out of just compensation?

If they knew that New Orleans would be without hospitals for nearly a decade after Katrina?

They should have known all these things because these are exactly the things that we have warned about.  And to say nothing of the cheaper, faster, and less destructive plan we begged politicians to consider.

This latest disclosure about the operating costs that taxpayers will have to subsidize year after year must surely create some heartburn for Governor Bobby Jindal, who demanded strict fiscal restraint on all fronts. How will he justify such a large annual obligation? After all, the governor refused federal money to build high speed rail in Louisiana because it could have required $18 million in annual maintenance costs. The LSU/VA, which was chosen without consideration of alternatives, will cost taxpayers several times that each year.

So while LSU slowly reveals the true cost of their development and the amount of time during which state of the art medical care will continue to be denied, what are New Orleans state pols worried about?

Whether or not they'll have influence over board appointments.

Heaven forbid they show some compassion for Lower Mid-City residents being squeezed for every penny by appraisal and salvage contractors.

Low Expectations

Yesterday, the City Council voted for an ordinance to close the streets of Lower Mid-City. They limited debate to a paltry 15 minutes, shutting out numerous Lower Mid-City residents. However, they also changed the street closure ordinance and passed an additional motion designed to give the Council more information about how poorly homeowners are being treated and compensated. It's a sad day when Council won't even let people who are going to be forcibly evicted from their houses a few minutes to explain how they've been treated. Their unrelenting empathy for those who will most directly suffer the consequences of a decision to build the misguided LSU/VA in Lower Mid-City that they were, despite their protestations otherwise, very much a part of.

This was, in fact, the first time that Council has ever held a meeting on the issue of the proposed LSU/VA Hospital and demolition of Lower Mid-City.

Someone at yesterday's meeting brought up an earlier hearing of the Housing and Human Needs Committee, from September 29th, 2008, at which several City Councilmembers cut debate short after hearing the passionate testimony of Lower Mid-City neighbors and their allies because it was simply too important to not be discussed at a larger, evening public hearing. We have a transcript of that hearing:

 

Councilmember Stacy Head:

I think -- I think that your point is well made. I had actually hoped that there were going to be two more members of the City Council here today.  They’re not, but it may give us an opportunity to have a meeting at night.  That way we can invite more people that are working during the day to a meeting.  This was actually -- several members of the council on the dais right now want to be sure that we have the missing members who aren’t on the committee.  You know. They’re not absent.  They’re just aren’t on this committee, be here.  So if we can try to -- night time is not a problem scheduling the council chambers. If we can schedule that, but I want to make sure that it is going to be an even-handed opportunity to speak, pros and cons, because your points are very well made, but as you know as I’ve articulated to you, on those same -- there is – there’s also negatives at least that have been expressed to choosing the Lindy Boggs site, and the question is cost-benefit. Is the cost of ...the cost of going to the Lindy Boggs site, worth it?  That’s the real key, and if – if creating a synergy downtown will be lost, then we need to acknowledge that, and we need to decide whether or not, you know, that is critical and important and whether that is even true. So you know, I would like to have -- if someone from LSU or GNOBED – GNOBED want to speak briefly, otherwise we can just defer this entirely, whichever you prefer -- to bring this entirely to a meeting in the next week, week and a half in the evening at the Council Chambers, maybe starting at six o’clock.  That way we don’t have any scheduling problems.

 

Councilmember Felkow:

And if I could – if I could comment in there, I think – I think that’s a very wise move.  This is an extremely important project for this community that is going to have effects for not only years, but generations.  I do think that we need an opportunity to have a full blown hearing in front of this council so that we can – we can hear both perspectives.  We’ve heard them privately.  Okay.  There has been private meetings where we’ve received on both sides the pros and cons of this, but I would hope at that meeting that all of the stakeholders on both sides will – will speak to the issues.  The Regional Planning Commission, obviously the district itself, the VA, the LSU. I would like to hear on that side of it discussion of the effect both on the healthcare situation in New Orleans and also the effect of the economic development in New Orleans because both of those have been indicated or part of the equation, and I think they both need to be addressed.  On the – on the other side, I would hope that we would have leadership in a very respectful way, a voice the opinion from the community both business and residential as to the – the effects of – of this development.  The VA is – is moving.  Okay.  We’re -- we’re – you know, we -- they’re going to come down with a decision relatively soon.  So I think it’s really important here that to protect the – you know, the best interest of this community that we get that done within the next couple of weeks, but again, have both sides represented. I attended a public meeting a couple of weeks ago that I thought was very productive, you know, but quite frankly, other than one representative who would be on the con side that was it.  There was nobody else there.  So the request was made at that time by Dr. – Dr. Ikemire.  I’m pronouncing it right I hope or close enough – Ikemire, that we go to a public hearing in front of the Council.  I think you’re hearing the – the will of this Council to want to do that, and I hope we can get it done in the next couple of weeks.

 

Councilmember Clarkson:

Thank you. Before Ms. Willard-Lewis speaks, Jim, to both sides and the crowd, Thursday at our City Council Meeting, it will be announced as to when the public meeting, public hearing will be, time, place, and all the arrangements, and then we’ll put it on the website.  We’ll make sure each of you – each of you specifically are contacted.  Thank you.  You will be noticed.  Put it properly. Yeah.  Thank you.

 

Councilmember Willard-Lewis:

I just wanted to thank you-all for being here, and I heard the pain, and I want to acknowledge that and honor that because three years ago, my entire district was under assault, and I was having flashbacks of a discussion about green space and shrinking footprint and taking people’s homes, and no dialogue or voice of the people included in the creation of public policy that somehow got shaped in the middle of the dark, in a board room or a back room or some room, but the people weren’t  in the room.  So it changed, but we’re still struggling, and one of the things we are struggling with is adequate healthcare, and thank you, Madam President, for always being there supportive of our desire to bring back Methodist Hospital in Eastern New Orleans.  So whenever we talk about healthcare, and I see our Lady Diana in the room, we always talk about New Orleans East as well as the central core of the City, and we understand that the medical industry is an economic development component, not simply healthcare. So I share that with you because as Arnie indicated, we’ve all been briefed, and we’ve all heard you, Mary, and ma’am, you just articulated with such passion the real heart of the individual being affected, and so I’m very grateful for that sensibility and  sensitizing to what this movement is actually doing, and I’m very glad that Stacy, the recommendation was put forward as a hardworking district council person to just have a evening meeting where everybody can come out and be there, and I also think it’s very important that our recovery office, Troy, is there, so that it’s not a singular discussion of proponents and opponents, but there is a whole plan that talks about the recovery of New Orleans as well as the dollars that are being used to do this because cost feasibility, impact on neighborhoods, displacement, emotional trauma, all of that have dollar values also.  So it becomes the whole experience of rebuilding all of New Orleans, which is very important in our medical infrastructure but also our great families. So I will be there, and I’m sure we’ll probably have families from New Orleans East there as well, because whenever you talk about one hospital, you should be talking about both hospitals, and so I say that, and we look forward to this, and again and I thank you for being here and for forging this new step where we can have that opportunity for a fuller conversation with everyone involved.

 

 
The evening hearing they promised was never delivered. They refused to consider the site selection preferences handed down to them by LSU and the RPC. In other words, the first time they determined it was appropriate to take action was yesterday, when they rubber-stamped the closure of the streets in Lower Mid-City.
 
We're thankful, we suppose, that the Council is concerned about the struggles that homeowners currently face now that compensation appears to be subpar. But it's hard to be anything other than disappointed that this is, apparently, what passes for empathetic leadership in New Orleans.
 
It's pathetic.
 
Every neighborhood in the city can learn an important lesson here about the lengths some officials will go to paper over peoples' rights. It isn't just City Council. At every step of the way when someone - the Legislature, the City Planning Commission, the Mayor, the Governor - could have stepped in to do the right thing, to try to work out a compromise, no one had the courage.
 
This city deserves so much better.
 
 
 

City lied about cost of demolishing Lower Mid-City

The Lens noticed a stunning admission from last week's City Council meeting:

A new financial commitment for the proposed medical district in Mid-City will leave a $25 million hole in a revolving loan fund given to the city from the state to jump start recovery.

The appropriation was described by one of Mayor Ray Nagin’s top lieutenants, Chief Technology Officer Harrison Boyd, during a City Council budget committee hearing Thursday. It took council members by surprise and raised questions about the decision to fund new hospitals for Louisiana State University and the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs with the $200 million revolver fund. That fund was created as a cushion to let the city start recovery projects without having to wait on FEMA payments.

--

Boyd said the Nagin administration chose to use the revolver “early on” knowing that the $25 million would not be reimbursed. He did not offer any clues on the logic behind the decision. He added that the decision was well within the rights of the city, even though the state made it clear that the $200 million revolver pot was meant to be steadily replenished by incoming FEMA payments so it would last until the city completed its more than 600 recovery projects

The $25 million comes on top of a previous appropriation of $75 million in disaster grants for the 70-acre hospital district.

 

When Boyd says that the revolver was chosen "early on," he wasn't lying. Apparently, way back in late 2007, the city and state got together and passed an amendment (see it or download it here) that Boyd says allows the city to tap the state revolver fund to pay for expenses related to the delivery of Lower Mid-City to the Department of Veterans Affairs. That means that way back in 2007, the city anticipated that the cost of acquiring and demolishing Lower Mid-City would exceed the $75 million in HUD DCDBG funds and $4 million in UDAG grants that have always been represented by officials as the entire cost of handing the VA a 'construction-ready' parcel.

During city budget hearings late last year, it became clear that the city was obligated to provide for site preparation costs related to the proposed LSU/VA that would exceed the amount that had already been appropriated in city disaster money for the project but city officials declined to enumerate the additional costs or own up to budget line items that appeared to obligate additional monies. Now, it seems that the city had always known that the site they offered to the VA would cost more to acquire and demolish than they had told the public, and perhaps, the VA itself.

With bulldozers looming over the lives of Lower Mid-City residents it is outrageous that the full cost of this project continues to be hidden from public view. At what point will our elected leaders realize that they have been conned into supporting a project that was not only inferior to proposed alternatives but far more deleterious to our ability to fund other crucial recovery and development projects throughout the city than anyone (except city officials, it appears) ever realized? At what point will our elected leaders realize that LSU is not currently capable of delivering on their half of the proposed hospital complex? At what point will our elected leaders stand up for Lower Mid-City residents and stand up against this boondoggle of a project?

On Thursday afternoon, City Council will decide whether or not it is time to arrange for the closure of streets in Lower Mid-City. It represents the first time Council has ever had a public hearing on anything related to the LSU/VA. Perhaps they will use the opportunity to determine what the full cost of this project actually is. Or perhaps they will close their eyes and leap without caring whether they're on a curb or a cliff.

 

Syndicate content