]
Tom Butt Header E-Forum
 
  E-Mail Forum – 2014  
  < RETURN  
  DMC Versus Promise Program - Poll Results
October 20, 2014
 
 

As of 9:30 PM tonight, I have a total of 113 responses to my question how $10 million from the Chevron Refinery Modernization Project Environmental and Community Investment Agreement could best be used, 400 college scholarships or six months of DMC operation?

The results were:

78        Promise Program
20        DMC
15        Can’t Decide

All responses are included, unedited, except for removing names of respondents.

In all fairness, I recognize that:

  1. This is not a scientific poll. The respondents are self-selected, and they probably don’t represent the people who are most in need of DMC, who probably do not have computers, email and do not subscribe to the E-FORUM.
  2. The respondents were probably not aware of the evolving three-year plan.

Nevertheless, it provides, along with the comments, all of which I have copied in the table below, a useful cross section of how the community feels about trading scholarships for a partial contribution towards saving DMC.

This is not an advocacy effort on my part, only an effort to collect information and share it.

There will be a report and discussion of the City’s role in DMC at tomorrow night’s City Council meeting.

 

 

Scholarships

Saving DMC

Can’t Decide

  1.  

I would vote for 400 college scholarships. Thanks for asking!

While I firmly believe in quality education for all, I also believe that keeping DMC open is very important. If DMC closes, West County will not have a local emergency facility other than Kaiser, which only has 15 emergency beds. It would be a disaster if Chevron's refinery had another major explosion and fire. It also can mean the difference between life and death if someone is having a heart attack.

No matter which option is decided on, neither can take place until the Planning Commission agrees on the go ahead and who knows when that will happen? So Richmond stop spending MONEY  you don't have and making promises you can not keep during campaign/election or maybe after the election.  I am sure about one think CHERVON do not care how Richmond says it will spend the money once they receive the go ahead fully including law suits,ETC.

So I say the question is not HOW to spend the money, but is WHEN will Planning Commission sign off on the issue so CHERVON can start releasing the money

  1.  

As much as we need the hospital, I do not think the 6-7 months the diversion of the money from Promise is a good decision.  Promise is long term.  DMC is short term with no prospect of permanency.  

DMC

As much as we need to keep DMC open, their business plan is not sustainable and any funds sent their way right now just prolongs their inevitable closure.  This may give them time to work out a solution to their problem but even that seems like a stretch.

Until they can get the various government entities to pay them fair market value for the services they provide and as long as their client bas is largely uninsured, they'll continue to lose money.  If this were a mom and pop bodega they might be able to absorb some of those losses but because their business is health care, the costs are staggering so the losses are equally staggering.

I don't have the answer to the question about which provides a greater value to our community: DMC for a few more months or some of these programs.

Since the Chevron money will not materialize until after the expected closure date of DMC, this might require floating some sort of bond to front DMC money until the Chevron money arrives.  Even when that money arrives, how much will be available in the first year to draw from?  If DMC eventually closes, how much of their debt will Richmond be obligated to pay?  DMC serves all of West County but the people of Richmond seem to make up the largest part of their client base.  Nonetheless, are the non-Richmond residents of West County stepping up at all to help?  Would it be appropriate to put a caveat on our help so it can only be sued for Richmond residents?

While I appreciate anything that will help educate our young people, the Richmond Promise is not the program being touted by several members of the Council.  If we go only by the language in the supplemental agreement passed by the Council, we have no idea what the terms of this program will be.  If you listen to Councilmembers Butt, Rogers and Myrick then we actually have three different programs with the program paying for varying parts of an education.  In spite of the dearth of details in the approved language, members of the Council are promising everything from tuition to full rides at schools varying from local public schools to all schools anywhere. Those candidates using this program to enhance their street cred as the election approaches are touting promises that this program may not be able to deliver on.

Tapping any of these funds will diminish and reduce the amount of financial aid to the students of this area but determining whether this program will be of greater benefit than access to short term medical services is a difficult call with a damned if you do—damned if you don't final outcome.

  1.  

Keep the Richmond Promise allocation at $35 million.

The idea that tuition for 4 year college is a HUGE motivator for kids to perform in high school.  The money obstacle is goal and teachers can motivate kids to go to college, something not financially viable to many in Richmond. Education has been the key in my life, and want that for others.  

While DMC is important to the community, squandering $10 million for a short term fix is irresponsible.  Analogy of buying a fancy car vs a house.  The scholarships are an investment in Richmond's future.  If you spend the $10 on DMC, will only have this same problem come back in a short time.  While inconvenient, medical care can be had in the East Bay and by holding the line, other solutions will come up.

Spending $10 million on DMC is short-sighted and only can be considered if part of a larger solution.  If $10 million, along with other funds, would guarantee it stay open in the long tern, I agree.  But that is not the case.  

Seems like money flushed down the toilet.  

 

The question for me is what is in the best interests of the residents of Richmond as we look to the future.

I feel strongly that the primary care health care needs of our City residents need to be addressed on a current funding basis, as one would budget on going expenses.

To me the Promise Program is an investment in the future and should be endowed at the "get-go" and contributed to annually to be sustainable for the long term. The process is called "funding depreciation" in budgetary terms.

I cannot answer your question directly as you are asking me to compare "apples to oranges" (see above).

However, can you see a way to earmark an amount of the $10 million for a specific use by DMC to assure that the funds would be spent on a specific effort to turn the hospital around financially? 

In my former life as a Hospital Administrator I was aware of the Hunter Group which had a track record of success in turning around Hospitals in financial trouble, see www.upenn.edu/almanac/v46/h03/hunter.html (I imagine the DMC leadership has considered this option.) 

However, the Council's offer could push DMC leadership to move in the direction of addressing the community's primary care health care needs and settle on a financially viable and sustainable model to accomplish this goal. 

  1.  

I vote for the scholarships. 

You could use the scholarships as an argument against spending lots of money.  A bike path for one million vs 40 scholarships to a California State University, for instance.  Losing this hospital will guarantee a Ferguson like situation in West County.  Did you know that there is a life span difference of 17 years between adjoining zip codes in the greater St. Louis area primarily due to access to quality health care. We are guaranteeing a similar result.    Richmond's help may not do the trick, 6 or 7 months more service, but there are a significant group of dedicated people, some doctors, some intelligent citizens, who are struggling to find funding sources.  Giving them more time may well be beneficial to that effort.  Lots of people, including the 52% who voted in favor of the last parcel tax that failed, now realize that this hospital plays a key role in the healthcare of the neediest population in the county.  But just like we see in many wealthy communities, no one wants to take on that responsibility.  The old, "I've got mine, who cares about you" attitude works as well here as it does in St. Louis.  I would think that Richmond, Chevron, Berkeley, and the smaller West County communities would be demanding the County step up and maintain it's care of all the county's patients, rather than those conveniently living near Martinez.  Thanks for asking.   

Wow. Which child should I save? The DMC money would not be a long term plan. There needs to be a piece meal solution of county absorption of DMC into their system including higher levels of reimbursement, loan forgiveness, guilt money from Kaiser and Sutter so we don't crowd their EDs, and lots of other things that aren't happening. IF we can come up with a viable plan the $10 million stopgap would be worthwhile. I do not trust William Walker, Zell, Gideon. They are not bad people but are ready to throw in the towel so others would have to lead at this time. I don't envy you having to vote.

  1.  

Scholarships.  The benefits will last far longer than short term funding for a hospital that can't manage the funds it's already received. 

DMC, please.

The question can’t be answered without more info with regard to DMC. It wouldn’t make sense to pour $10 million into DMC for only six or seven months of operation followed by a shutdown, but it could make sense if $10 million from the City was part of a package deal with other funding commitments for long term operation of DMC on a useful basis.. As to the college scholarships, the benefits to the City of Richmond are entirely speculative, especially since most graduates probably would not return to live here.

  1.  

I am not in favor of directing these resources to DMC for a short term fix.

We need a county hospital on the west side. I am amazed at all the new houses being offered for sale in the remote eastern towns of Contra Costa county. The congestion I witness on the freeway, and the increase activity on the bayside, When is the county going to wake up that a hospital so near that highway and the bay is needed? I can’t say yes or no.

I have lived in Richmond Heights since 1950. I visited friends at that hospital that had been in accidents. When my husband had an emergency he was take to Doctor’s Hospital instead of Kaiser, because it was closer. Currently multiple units are being built in El Cerrito; the aged  residents are being replaced by younger families, so the population is increasing too. We NEED a county hospital on the west side!!!!!!

the better students should be able to get scholarships elsewhere, and some others might be able to tap family funding sources, so it shouldn’t be thought of in terms of kids not being able to get a college education without Chevron $$. How many lives would be saved or physical disabilities avoided with DMC open? In the final analysis, I think that you need to decide on this issues based on info you have or will have on the long term prospects for DMC, rather than be guided by an overly simplistic vote on six or seven months of DMC vs. 400 scholarships.

  1.  

I always look at a question like this as a question of "what will have the greatest impact in our community?"  It is unfortunate that we have to choose between our hospital and our children, but in the end, at least for me, the children would win out.  The impact on Richmond students will be immeasurable.   I have spoken to other Promise programs across the country, and the benefits they are seeing go beyond just the students.  The cities are becoming reborn - industry and businesses are locating in the community in greater numbers because of the renewed promise of an educated workforce.  In addition, families are moving to the cities in greater numbers, this has created increased improvement in local schools as parents become more engaged.  In response to new families, cities have rebuilt parks and other community  assets, use of which is improving public safety.  There are other examples of impact of the Promise programs across the country (there are now 27 Promise programs across the country).

This is not an easy choice but being a retired nurse makes me favor keeping DMC open as long as possible in the hopes that funding will arise elsewhere as well. DMC provides a vital service to the community.

My opinion is that CC should have followed the Planning Commission’s recommendations to actually lower the toxic emissions in Richmond. We had a chance for meaningful change and lost it.  I’m not opposed to having good hospitals and health care, we need them both. But one huge reason that our health care system is crisis is that we refuse to recognize and address the root causes of chronic disease and illness. 

If our local and national leaders would insist on addressing root causes, our health care picture could look very different.  The data is there if we would only look at it: chronic disease clusters around industry and agriculture. 

I hope you will consider, investigate and act.

  1.  

No contest. College scholarships will have long term positive effects on many lives. 10 million spent on DMC is money down the drain unless there is a long term solution in place BEFORE it is spent. I do think DMC is important for the community but unless there is a long term solution that money can be better spent elsewhere.

Tough call but I would apply to DMC to cushion until reorganized.

I'm glad you asked.  I think the citizens of Richmond should have been asked how all the money should be spent.  I am not happy about the pet projects that were selected to receive funds.

I think we really need a local hospital but are we just prolonging the closure.  The council should be trying to find a permanent funding for the hospital.

Without more detail (1 yr scholarships, who administers etc.) on the scholarship program I am unable to make a choice.

  1.  

I would support the scholarships over DMC. In 6 months the hospital will be in the same position and will eventually have to close it doors. The future is in education of our youth. Without this, we may as well just keep building more prisons.

  Doctor's Hospital-spend the money. There has to be a way to keep this hospital open. Where is George Miller on this?

!   I am seriously conflicted by this DMC issue!   We need it, but not in its current 'money-suckiing' format.   It is an earthquake tragedy ready to happen when the Hayward finally takes its big slip and fall, (not too distant future).  Whose fault will that be?   I heard that San Pablo Casino wanted the property.  Any truth to that?   Here is what I propose:   
  1. Spend the Chevron money on scholarships.   2.  Negotiate an agreement with San Pablo Casino to purchase DMC, or take possession of it, in exchange for funding and building a small modern 10-20 bed modern facility with an ICU and trauma center in state of the art fashion.  3.  Reduce the staff at DMC to fit the smaller size.   4.  When patients are stabilized and ready for longer term care, have them transferred to Martinez or into rehab centers.  5.  The new center can be adjacent to the current DMC on different, or the same property, and San Pablo Casino can raze the current hospital building or refurbish it into some modern casino/hotel.
I say all of this while keeping my fingers crossed that I don't need emergency care to save my life during the transition

  1.  

400 Scholarships.

DMC

I have Verrrry mixed emotions.  I have never used Bookside or DMC and have helped  pay the freight (however small) without complaining, butttttttttt is there an end in sight

  1.  

Pouring more money into DMC without structural changes is good money after bad.  The expert hospital group of Sutter, Kaiser,John Muir has come up with a long term stable solution that requires a reorganization.   

At DMC you have 900 employees making an average salary of $140K annually with generous pensions.  I don't even have one employee that near that much.  And we can't afford pensions.

This is another case of organized labor stiring the political pot to extract obscene wages out of the tired taxpayers.  By opposing the reorganization, CNA is effectively holding the West County health care hostage to their outrageous demands.  

Who does the CNA really care about?

400 scholarships for college students has a clear long term benefit.
I'm sorry to say that I think DMC is doomed in the long run, and I would rather see the money go for scholarships. Susan

I tend to think it's a good idea to put $10,000 of the funds towards DMC.  Both DMC and the Richmond Promise program will have to find additional funding streams in the future in order to remain sustainable, and they're both important to the community.

The Richmond Promise program will have to work out a lot if important details before it is fully implemented, such as:

--will the scholarships cover only tuition/fees for public, in-state colleges and universities?
--what about students who choose to go to other schools?  What about room and board?
--for how many years can they keep getting the scholarships, and how long of a break, if any, can they take during their college education?
--how soon after high school graduation would they need to enroll in college?
--will scholarships be given only to Richmond residents who attend high schools located in Richmond?  
--will scholarships be given to all Richmond graduates, or are there other requirements they need to fulfill while still in high school?
--how many students per year is this program anticipated to cover, at what average cost per student?
--what happens when the money from this particular CBA component runs out?  In other words what's the message to parents whose children are in kindergarten now--will Richmond Promise still be around when their kids reach college age?

Looking forward to further discussion on this--

Split. 5mil to College and 5 mil to DMC

  1.  

The long term advantages of the College Promise Program far outweighs saving DMC for me.
Thank you for asking,

6 month DMC operation--it is so vital to limited income fails in Richmond!!

 

Do you knw how many students graduate from Richmond high schools each year?  And how many go on to colleges that would be eligible for these scholarships?

Does anyone have any plausible plan to continue funding beyond 6-7 months if these $10 million were shifted to DMC?

These details would help me weigh the pros and cons.

  1.  

Wow, that is a tough one.  The feel good answer is I think 400 scholarships. 

Will all these kids be "bought" then by Chevron? Plus their families etc? Or is this a minor payment to the lifetime of health consequences by having grown up in the shadow of the pollution? 

The people have already spoken and will not support the hospital via property taxes. 

I suspect everyone will need to see the pains first hand without the hospital for bit before it can reopen by a community that is willing to invest in it and support it.  

Yet that really isn't the right ethical solution as people will die without the hospital available.  
Who knows if the hospital can reopen too?  

Obviously the smarter community leaders seem to be trying their best to ignore the shortsighted residents and keep it open anyways possible. 

Rare to see such a dilemma so obviously stated. 
Thanks for asking, 

I think the Council made the best decision by far.

If it were simply a question of Richmond bearing the burden of keeping the hospital home another few months using funds from the scholarship program it might be debatable.  But the funds we are talking about are being used to jump-start a community effort to save the hospital.  By showing Richmond's commitment we have a more powerful case for demanding the County do its part, that area hospitals contribute, and corporations which bear some responsibility for the health of the area residents also kick-in.

$10,000,000.00 for college, 400 chances to succeed.  Doctors hospital needs a new building and they are not looking at designs until they get there.  All of the communities that benefit from the hospital should pitch in not just Chevron.  They need a balanced budget and if that means only an emergency department and an urgent care department with no O.R. or patient bed hospital that reduces the budget.

  1.  

I strongly disagree with the redirection of Promise Program funds to DMC. I feel the city is out of their league supporting a hospital and should let it play out so that a permanent solution is finally found

unless we have oversight so that the money is used wisely and new people are running doctor's hospital, i would worry that so much money would be spent in such little time for naught.

so, my first choice is doctor's, with the caveat and my 2nd choice would be the scholarships.

I only favor the city putting money toward DMC if the county is ready to step up with a feasible plan. They are the entity responsible for the health safety net, they should be burdened with figuring out how to ensure access to services in this half of the county. Richmond putting in should be conditioned upon the county stepping up. 

  1.  

I think the Promise Program college scholarships monies from Chevron should be kept intact!  As much as I support the hanging on to DMC, putting more money into it is just buying time for its inevitable closure.  Putting money into college scholarships is a long term investment with great long-lasting returns for our city. Putting dollars into DMC at this point is just buying a few months of time, whereas scholarship funding promises a a lifetime of rewards for both students and the City of Richmond.

I believe it is more important to support the DMC so poor patients can receive medical care.

This is a "Sophie's Choice,"  whether to help children in their education or save lives at a local hospital?  If the $10 million goes to DMC, what is the prospect of finding funds after the 6 to 7 months to continue its operation?  That is key for me.  If the projected financial situation there  is "terminal" after the $10 M is gone, then I would vote for helping the scholarship fund instead.

  1.  

I also feel the Promise Program is an excellent idea and we should not diminish the benefits of it before it even starts.  

I think it is vital to have a community hospital for the good of all the medically under served residents of West Contra Costa and especially Richmond.  I also place a high value on the plan to send the graduates to college.  It seems that educational plan will benefit about 1400 graduates based on your numbers.  It's a hard choice but   I have to go with the hospital.

 

  1.  

Scholarships.

I would like to see the money reallocated from the scholarship fund to DMC. Who knows how much of the funds set aside for scholarships would be used or how effectively. But, with respect to DMC, I am VERY tired of seeing "much of the $18 million deficit is due to low Medicare and Medicaid reimbursement fees." What are the other problems with DMC, other than "low reimbursement," which doesn't seem to be killing any other hospitals. If DMC can't be fixed, I'd change my opinion about the reallocation. Why prolong a dead horse another six months?

 

  1.  

With great regret, I have to say it needs to go to the 400 students.  There has got to be another way to keep DMC open, other than taking money for a whole six month period after which the same problem will still exist, from 400 needy Richmond high school graduates to get a college education.  

My vote is a vociferous NO to DMC.  As I said, with great regret.

I am a Richmond resident and we need a hospital in our area.
10 million for 6 months of DMC operation.
The COUNCIL should not allow DMC to shut down.

 

  1.  

No to more money to DMC for it is an open money pit, 10million is  just another band aid, and doesn't offer a permanent solution. You have to win this election. Thanks for all, wayne tarr

I am for the $10 million going to DMC.  While the thought of helping fund college education is nice, it would have been better to support vocational education.  As a person with a Masters having a hard time finding a job, I wonder how many people we need with college degrees when we seem to have a hard time keeping kids in school to finish basic education.

 

  1.  

Scholarships. DMC  a lost cause. Cut losses, invest in future; health care prevention and access will improve accordingly. 

I am for 10 million for 6 more months of DMC Operation

 

  1.  

Please use the money for scholarships which will change the lives of 400 young people and their families. DMC is important to the community but this is another band aid for the hospital, long term solutions for the hospital need to be found.

 

 

  1.  

Scholarships first!
DMC not from Richmond without matching money from surrounding cities.

 

 

  1.  

My opinion is that the funding for Richmond Promise was the absolutely best thing about the CBA and that not a dime of it should go to a solution for DMC. Everything else in the CBA should be considered ahead of Richmond Promise. The best place to take $10 million would be from the Easy Go program. The city should have demanded more from Chevron in terms of actual pollution reduction, but anyone who thinks Easy Go is more valuable to Richmond than Richmond Promise needs to have his head examined. Does Mr Rogers acknowledge this? Why can't we just do this? Even if it is a more complicated change in terms of the contract.

 

 

  1.  

Two in our household vote for the students

 

 

  1.  

400 college scholarships

 

 

  1.  

Hands down – scholarships with a requirement to maintain 3.0 or better grades.  Include emphasis on community college tuition as affordable gateways to four-year institutions. 

I will be paying $10 a month in property tax for the rest of my life for DMC bonds used to bail out mismanaged facility operations, twice. 

I feel very strongly that the current board and executive management are made of individuals who provided poor fiscal/fiduciary leadership, similar to leadership that sent the City of Richmond into near bankruptcy a decade ago.

After two DMC bond measures, nothing has changed that gives any evidence the money won’t be squandered again.  That is the reason the latest bond issue did not pass.  Funding source makes no difference – property tax or Chevron handout – both are forms of taxation.  

I want the hospital to be available for emergency services and also want it to be successful, but the odds of a fiscally sound medical center are slim to none given the current board and management.  It would take a complete house-cleaning at the Board and executive level before I would support another dollar to DMC, even with the threat of closure.

Few investments have more long term benefit and return than college education. 

 

 

  1.  

I would support the scholarships for Richmond students!  

A more long term solution needs to be found for DMC or another emergency medical facility in Richmond.

 

 

  1.  

I do not think that anymore money should be given to Doctors' Hospital to keep it going for 6-12 months or so.  From what I have read, the Hospital has not managed its funds well for years and does not have a plan for reorganization.  Why prolong the inevitable by penalizing our young people's education?

 

 

  1.  

I would vote for the scholarships.  DMC would be in the same boat a year from now, unfortunately, without some long-term structural financial changes.

One question:  Wasn’t the DMC sort of emergency-room clinic issue something that Obamacare was supposed to mitigate?   

 

 

  1.  

DMC has been costing taxpayers hundreds of dollars each year through various bond measures & they have been unable to get their finances together.  It is not the City of Richmond's responsibility to keep this hospital open - many other communities (in better financial shape than Richmond) are also served by DMC.

I believe it would be a tragedy for the 400+ youth of Richmond who will not get college tuition funding should 10M$ be reallocated from the Promised Program funds.  No one wants to loose DMC but I'd bet no one wants to decide which 400+ students wont go to college.

 

 

  1.  

Do not spend it on DMC!! 

 

 

  1.  

That's a hard one in some ways, Tom. But given the life-changing scope of the scholarships for such a significant number of our youth and the brevity of the impact on DMC, I "vote" for NOT redirecting $ from the Promise Program to DMC.

I look forward to hearing how others "vote."

 

 

  1.  

The scholarship program is a better long-term investment

 

 

  1.  

To re-direct scholarship money to DMC might best be considered under the medical term triage:
"the assignment of degrees of urgency to wounds or illnesses to decide the order of treatment of a large number of patients or casualties."

To redirect this money is to place a bandaid on a dying patient and deprive so many healthy ones of thriving. There may be ways to revive DMC, but this is absolutely not one of them. I highly encourage the Council to vote no on this proposal.

 

 

  1.  

The way you phrased the question, no one would vote for DMC

 

 

  1.  

This should definitely be used for the scholarship fund it was originally intended for. 

 

 

  1.  

Scholarships.
West County needs a DMC solution, but it's not going to come from this source.

 

 

  1.  

I would not put more money into DMC, it will just be wasted. The hospital is not sustainable. After they spend the $15 million, then what?

 

 

  1.  

I sent you my opinion last week. I see redirecting Promise funds as short-sighted and fruitless—doing more harm (to the future) than good. I hope some opposed to the redirection of funds to DMC show up to speak at tomorrow’s meeting.

 

 

  1.  

I would prefer the money be used to fund the 400 college scholarships rather than  going to DMC.

 

 

  1.  

Thanks for providing the opportunity for feedback on this issue.  In my opinion, diverting critical funds from a unique and meaningful program like the Richmond Promise scholarship program to a failing hospital not even in Richmond would be a critical mistake in judgment and fiduciary duties.  I haven't heard one COR employee agree with this idea, especially in light of the fact that the hospital has an operating budget deficit and the fact that the building is obsolete and needs to be replaced in 4 years.  

Lastly, the City of San Pablo doesn't appear to value the hospital the same way that surrounding jurisdictions do because they are going to change the Zoning Designation from Public/Civic to Mixed-Use to facilitate a higher and better use at the site such as a hotel with retail and commercial amenities.  In fact, they have already completed an Initial Study/MND (Project Page).

Diverting funds that the City of Richmond doesn't even have yet would be a massive waste of money and would pull the rug from under the students who were planning on using the scholarships and from prospective parents who were considering sending their kids to a West Contra Costa County High School in Richmond.

 

 

  1.  

Scholarships. Absolutely.
 
What a great thing to offer our youth.
 
Please don't take a DIME away from the scholarships.

 

 

  1.  

1.  Low income and minority students have access to grants in aid for college enrollment--these are grants, not loans requiring repayment.  Remember, California residents pay fees, NOT tuition.  Costs will include outrageous textbook costs; transportation; living expenses.  Therefore, covering fees does not cover all costs and I wonder if Promise Program will do what it is thought to do.  The Promise Program could supplement grants (although possibility of grants being reduced due to Promise Program awards is possible).  Might want to run this past Financial Aid Officer at a UC and/or State University. Promise Program is a "feel good" effort but I doubt it was well thought-out.  Sounded more like a Myrick campaign effort.
2.  The DMC issue is frustrating.  With two major universities (Stanford/UC) why this hospital cannot find expert advice/direction to resolve its problems is puzzling.  Giving DMC City of Richmond money is just a finger in the dyke--also note that this hospital is in San Pablo and serves a larger area than just City of Richmond.  Let DMC figure out how to resolve its own problem.
    Therefore, NO City of Richmond funds to DMC.  RETHINK Promise Program so that it will be truly helpful to our students--therefore, I suppose, keep the money in the program. 

 

 

  1.  

I think it is highly disingenuous to re-allocate GHG reduction funds to a hospital.

I support keeping Doctors open, but I don't think this is the right strategy.

 

 

  1.  

scholarships. Absolutely. This is where our future is.
The DMC has no future, sorry, but that's the truth.

 

 

  1.  

Tom, as a public school teacher I find it appalling that we even are considering this.  Our students are in my opinion WAY more important.  The Richmond Promise program needs to be fully funded FIRST.  Then and only then should we consider anything else

 

 

  1.  

My opinion on the $10 million redirect is to keep Promise Funds exactly as they were originally  intended.

How demoralizing would it be to tell Richmond kids that their dreams have been dashed for a few short months of operating Dr. Hospital?

Stick to the plan, please.

 

 

  1.  

Apply the funds to the scholarship program.  Keeping DMC open for a few months makes no sense.  I have yet to hear of a viable long-term financing plan for the hospital.

 

 

  1.  

Keeping DNC open without a long range plan is money down the drain. Students are an investment for the future.

 

 

  1.  

Definitely use the money for the Promise program!  DMC is not viable  under any circumstances. Please do not throw the money away by giving it to DMC!

 

 

  1.  

Unless there is a solid, workable plan to fund Doctors Hospital in the long-term, I vote for the kids.

 

 

  1.  

Scholarships. 

I feel that it is important to do everything possible to keep DMC open but $10MM of academic advancement could do wonders for the City and its residents.  Unfortunately there is no guarantee that those students will come back to Richmond and use their knowledge to contribute toward improving the city but it is a worthy risk.

 

 

  1.  

No more throwing good money after bad - Do NOT fund DMC.

 

 

  1.  

No more throwing good money after bad - Do NOT fund DMC.

 

 

  1.  

Absent a real, feasible plan to keep Doctors Medical Center viable, don't waste money on it.

 

 

  1.  

thanks for the oppty to comment on this. I feel that the DMC issue needs to be solved on a broader basis than Chevron. Further, infusing money to DMC is pointless without a long-term plan for it which includes rebuilding it. If the other cities in the health care district are going to make ONGOING contributions to the district then of course Richmond should too. There seems to be a lot of magical thinking surrounding DMC -- if we keep tossing it lifelines to allow time to find a solution, then one will appear. But this has been going on for years and none has appeared.
Anyway, my vote is to keep the money in the scholarship fund.

 

 

  1.  

After mulling it over all morning (on my day off) I've finally come to the notion that -- if we allow the hospital's situation to fester a bit longer -- its rehabilitation is so obviously and critically needed that the answer will emerge from somewhere other than the Chevron fund.  (Okay, so that's pretty iffy.)  I still think I'd cast my vote for Richmond of the Future by educating our young people through to whatever their educational goals might be.  Their opportunities have been deferred for far too long, and there will always be something to rise as an impediment to prevent their opportunities from being realized.  This may be their only chance to break the cycle of need.

(... and anytime in the next ten minutes my mind may change!)

I'm glad this decision doesn't depend on me.

 

 

  1.  

Much as I agree that we need to do whatever we can to keep Doctor's Hospital open, I'm not interested in doing it in 6 month intervals.  We need to find a permanent, long term fix if there is any hope of keeping it open.  And besides, WHY is it the responsibility of Richmond?  What about the residents of San Pablo (where it is located), Pinole, El Cerrito, Hercules, El Sobrante - don't they use the hospital, too?  Why is it on the shoulders of Richmond to pay to keep it open so everyone can use it?

We need a hospital in this area that serves all residents of West County.  But it should be funded by either the state, or all the residents, not just us.

 

 

  1.  

I would say to apply the $10 million toward scholarships simply because going toward DMC might just be money down the drain if additional long-term funding is not secured.

 

 

  1.  

It seems trading 6 months survival for Doctors for what might be a lifetime of change for 400 students is not a wise decision.  If the 6 months extension on the life of the hospital would somehow lead to its overall survival into the future, then it might be worth it.  It should not be, of course, one or the other choices.  Easy to say. 

 

 

  1.  

400 scholarships.
No funds to DMC unless its directors' and staff's compensation and the scope of feasible services is totally restructured to balance its budget.

 

 

  1.  

Fund the Promise

 

 

  1.  

As much as I would like to see Dmc survive, I am so tired of paying and paying over the years and they just suck up whatever we give them and ALWAYS come back and say we need more...  If we could stipulate that Dmc is totally NON-PROFIT (which will never happen!) then I would be more amiable to funding them.  It just irks me that they take their profit of the top and then everything else gets funded - maybe....
We would get more milage out of the college scholarships!!

 

 

  1.  

In my opinion, 400 college scholarships would be a better and more effective use of the funds.

 

 

  1.  

Keep the scholarships.

 

 

  1.  

Please do not spend $10M on the DMC. The DMC needs to find a sustainable way to stay open, & not depend on one-time fixes with public monies.

 

 

  1.  

As a resident of Richmond, I feel it is the responsibility  of the City (San Pablo) in which the hospital resides to take primary responsibility for hospital.  The City of San Pablo gets funds from Casino San Pablo.  Why can’t they be redirected to the hospital?  Additionally, the county has ultimate responsibility for the hospital and should be tasked with finding the money to keep it open.

It makes no sense to deny 400 youth the ability to go to college to keep a hospital open for only six or seven months.  I cannot see the logic.  There needs to be a long-term sustainable solution to keeping DMC open or every year it will be the same problem Not Enough Money to keep operations going.

It’s a noble idea but not practical, sustainable and ultimately not Richmond’s problem to solve.

 

 

  1.  

 I would rather know that 400 of Richmond''s young people are going to be educated over the next four years, than realize that a $10,000 investment in DMA would result in no continuing benefit to the health of our community.

 

 

  1.  

I havent studied the affects of dmc closing (loss of life due to er farther?)

But unless this a guaranteed bridge to dmc being saved,  I say scholarships.

 

 

  1.  

Hands down: college scholarships are the much better investment.

 

 

  1.  

Scholarships because they benefit Richmond residents directly. DMC is a county-wide issue and needs to be resolved as such.

 

 

  1.  

I like the 400 hundred for Promise scholarships.

Those poor patients that had to go to DMC can now go somewhere else thanks to the ACA and we won't have to pay for them locally anymore.

 

 

  1.  

the original plan for the money should stay.  Give 400 scholarships to Richmond High School students!

 

 

  1.  

Please, please do not reduce the Promise program!

I think there's a good chance that Chevron will wiggle out of at least some of it, as it is.

DMC is vital to a lot more people than are in Richmond so I think the County should see to its support. The County should remember that we are voters.

 

 

  1.  

As much as we need the hospital, I like the idea of 400 scholarships as opposed to 6-7 months.

 

 

  1.  

As much as we need the hospital, 6 months isn’t long enough time to lose the investment in our future that the scholarships can be.

 

 

  1.  

I very much appreciate your asking this question.  I have been concerned ever since I first heard about the Council's stated intention to redirect money from the Promise Program to Doctor's Medical Center.  I am COMPLETELY AGAINST doing this.  DMC is a failed business enterprise.....no matter how it is packaged, it is nothing more than that.  So why in the world would we want to pour more money (to the tune of several million dollars) down the drain, when we could instead be helping over 400 of our young citizens with their college education?  The voting citizens made it clear when the last tax measure was voted down, so why is this battle still being fought?  In my estimation it comes down to this:  putting money into a failed business model versus investing in our future.  The choice is clear to me.  We owe our young people more than this.

 

 

  1.  

It seems like the DMC is like a boat....a hole in the water into which you pour money!  Even though a hospital is vital, it seems like the scholarships would return more dividend in the long run in many areas.

 

 

 

 
  < RETURN