On August 31, 2015, Councilman Tom Bullock made the following comment concerning the charter amendment:
"This would so terribly handcuff the hospital that it couldn’t right size to a smaller version of itself; it couldn’t adjust to changes in the marketplace; it couldn’t do anything except stay exactly as it is now and continue losing a million dollars a month.”
This is an intellectually dishonest comment by Bullock who has been an LHA Trustee for years:
1. Bullock does not want to “right size” the hospital, he never made any attempt to “right size” the hospital, and as an LHA trustee he voted to close it entirely.
2. Bullock claims that the hospital can’t adjust to the marketplace now—If that was true, it is Bullock, Madigan, Summers and the LHA trustees who have failed to adjust hospital policies and are preventing the hospital from adjusting to the marketplace--- But through Bullock’s hypocritical comment he alleges that the charter amendment will somehow do what he is actually already doing himself.
3. Bullock voted for the LOI that directly caused the hospital to lose money—he has shown no leadership at LHA or on Council to stop those losses---but he now complains that a charter amendment will somehow protract losses he is accountable for.
All that the charter amendment really does is to require voter approval of a Council ordinance to trying to close the hospital.
Bullock's bull was one of the reasons citizens resorted to that amendment.
Bullock Full of Bull on Charter Amendment
Moderator: Jim O'Bryan
-
Brian Essi
- Posts: 2421
- Joined: Thu May 07, 2015 11:46 am
Bullock Full of Bull on Charter Amendment
David Anderson has no legitimate answers
-
cameron karslake
- Posts: 646
- Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2015 8:35 am
Re: Bullock Full of Bull on Charter Amendment
It always amazes me when people accuse others of doing the very thing they themselves are doing.
Bullock, talk about a self righteous hypocrite!
Bullock, talk about a self righteous hypocrite!
-
Jim Kenny
- Posts: 126
- Joined: Tue Jan 23, 2007 9:30 am
Re: Bullock Full of Bull on Charter Amendment
I agree Bullock's delivery of his message could have been more polished; however, a more eloquent speaker in those same chambers on Sept. 8 echoed his concerns.
In a statement made to Council by Jay Carson, Lakewood resident and North Coast Health Secretary/ Executive Committee Member, when supporting of the Cleveland Clinic/LHA proposal. In it, he addresses how the proposed facility and resulting foundation will best support those in need and why the proposed Charter Amendment is well-intentioned but fatally flawed. Here it is:
"Madame Chair, Members of Council; As most of you know, North Coast Health is a faith-based charitable clinic in Lakewood, which has provided primary health care services to the uninsured, underinsured, and the medically-underserved community for nearly thirty years. Last year alone, North Coast Health served 2,331 patients, 36% of them from Lakewood. North Coast Health provided 5,351 onsite primary care visits, 213 offsite primary care visits, and 4,348 additional services, including prescription assistance, medication pick-up, nurse visits and lab testing.
North Coast has met the rigorous requirements to obtain certification as a patient centered medical home. And of the approximately 1,200 free or charitable clinics across the country, North Coast Health is proud to be one of the 12 that received a four-star rating from Charity Navigator, an organization that evaluates charities based on their efficiency, transparency, and the results they deliver to those they serve.
When this discussion began, North Coast Health, like all Lakewood residents, was saddened. We, like everyone here, wished that Lakewood Hospital was able to continue to operate as it had, as a full-service inpatient hospital.
Yet as a primary care practice, North Coast Health has experienced first-hand—and in fact championed—the movement towards population health, with its focus on prevention and chronic disease management, and the resulting decline in inpatient admissions.
These changes, by and large, represent positive developments in reducing costs and improving outcomes. But all change brings disruption, and these changes have made the old model of delivering care unsustainable.
Like many in Lakewood, North Coast Health has recognized for years that these trends meant that Lakewood Hospital would eventually have to change, and that the most responsible course of action was to guide that change to maintain the services that were most vital—like an emergency department—while shedding costly, and in many cases, redundant inpatient services. For those reasons, as our director, Lee Elmore, told Council early in the process, North Coast Health endorsed and continues to support the plan outlined in the Cleveland Clinic Foundation’s letter of intent.
In light of recent developments, North Coast’s Board and Executive Committee has asked me to reaffirm and amplify North Coast Health’s support of the proposal outlined in the letter of intent, and to speak to a few issues where North Coast’s experience may add value to the debate.
First, some voices in the community have raised fears that the proposed transformation will adversely and disproportionately affect the poor. If this were the case, it would be of tremendous concern to North Coast Health. Nearly half of North Coast Health’s patients have annual household incomes of less than $10,000. Our average patient has an annual household income of less than $12,000.
Indeed, North Coast Health was founded on the belief that all people are created in God’s image, and that our faith obligates us to provide care to the most vulnerable members of our community. Our mission can be summed up by Jesus’s words in Mathew 25:40: “Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me.”
Fortunately, the facts do not support the claims that the proposed transformation for Lakewood Hospital would adversely affect lower income residents. A study conducted by Harvard Cardiologist and advisor to the Department of Health and Human Services, Dr. Karen Joynt, from 2003 through 2011 found that hospital closures had no discernible impact on community mortality rates.
Other studies have shown that to the extent that closures have any effect on health results, this occurs in rural areas where there is simply no other care available, or in situations where emergency departments have been closed. In our case, however, we are blessed—overly blessed, in fact—with other hospital facilities. No one in our community will go without care for lack of facilities.
And most importantly, one of the keystones of the LOI—something that North Coast would consider a sine qua non in any proposal—is the construction of new 24/7/365 state of the art emergency department.
North Coast Health cannot speak—and does not claim to speak— for all lower income or medically underserved residents. But having served the medical needs of our most vulnerable for three decades, North Coast Health believes that the proposed transformation would, in fact, be of tremendous benefit to the patients we treat.
Over 80% of our patients are treated for chronic conditions such as diabetes and hypertension. Approximately 50% have multiple chronic conditions. These patients do not need more inpatient hospital beds. They need greater access to the primary and outpatient care which will allow them to manage their conditions. Indeed, the primary metric by which North Coast Health measures its success is how many ER visits and inpatient admissions it is able to prevent.
Second, Council has discussed what impact the proposed $32 million community foundation will have on community health—whether it will “move the needle” on health outcomes in Lakewood. In the interest of full disclosure, should the foundation be created, North Coast Health will seek funding from it, because it is entirely consistent with our mission and would allow us to provide more care to more patients. But regardless of whether North Coast Health is a direct beneficiary, the types of intervention, education, and prevention programs it could fund will make a tremendous difference to the patient base that we serve.
North Coast Health’s experience—borne out by reams of medical literature—is that money spent in disease management and prevention yields a significant return on investment, both in terms of better health outcomes and lower costs. A few hundred dollars spent on smoking cessation or weight management programs today can prevent tens of thousands of dollars spent treating acute heart conditions ten years from now.
The return on investment is not just anecdotal; it is quantifiable. Last year, North Coast Health, in conjunction with Dr. Stephen Zyanski of Case Western Reserve University med-school, conducted a study based on a random sample of 74 new patients to test North Coast’s impact on hospital utilization. The study found a reduction in cost of $319,000 for the combined 74 patients studied, for an average of $4,311 savings to the health care system.
If these savings are extrapolated to North Coast Health’s entire patient population, the result is a savings of $10,454,732 in health care costs—costs which would have been borne by the hospital system as charitable write-offs, or by the taxpayers, and private insurers. I don’t have the study results to conclusively tell you for sure whether an ounce of prevention is actually worth a pound of cure, but it’s pretty close.
We want Council and the community to understand that the proposed foundation will create real results by fund these type of education, prevention, and management programs that will pay tremendous return on investment—in the form of better health, greater productivity, and all around lower costs for our patient base and the community at large.
Finally, the proposed Charter Amendment has imposed a new urgency that requires North Coast to speak up for its patients. The proposed amendment may have been well-intentioned, but its practical effect will be to lock Lakewood Hospital into its current spiral of mounting losses and eventual closure. It will waste the valuable community resources that would be available for a foundation. As the Huron report showed, while the hospital might be able to survive for a little while on its investment portfolio, once that money is gone, it’s gone.
Worse still, the passage of the Charter Amendment will doom Lakewood Hospital by preventing any type of adaption or new partnerships. And without a qualified partner to run it, Lakewood Hospital will not survive in any form.
North Coast Health understands the desire to save the hospital. We applaud and take inspiration from those citizens, who, in good faith, are seeking to save it. Lakewood Hospital has been a valuable partner throughout North Coast Health’s existence and we feel this loss as keenly as anyone. But health care delivery has changed, and will continue to change, regardless of how we feel about it.
Those changes necessarily bring some sadness, but they also bring opportunity. North Coast Health urges Council, and the residents of Lakewood, to seize this opportunity to retain and improve the services that are most needed, and to invest in a healthier future.
These remarks should not misconstrued to say that the City should simply accept whatever is offered. Negotiate with the Clinic—in consultation with the public—over the details and the most needed services. Drive a hard bargain. But move forward. Losing the hospital, as we have known, it is sad. But losing this opportunity will be tragic."
In a statement made to Council by Jay Carson, Lakewood resident and North Coast Health Secretary/ Executive Committee Member, when supporting of the Cleveland Clinic/LHA proposal. In it, he addresses how the proposed facility and resulting foundation will best support those in need and why the proposed Charter Amendment is well-intentioned but fatally flawed. Here it is:
"Madame Chair, Members of Council; As most of you know, North Coast Health is a faith-based charitable clinic in Lakewood, which has provided primary health care services to the uninsured, underinsured, and the medically-underserved community for nearly thirty years. Last year alone, North Coast Health served 2,331 patients, 36% of them from Lakewood. North Coast Health provided 5,351 onsite primary care visits, 213 offsite primary care visits, and 4,348 additional services, including prescription assistance, medication pick-up, nurse visits and lab testing.
North Coast has met the rigorous requirements to obtain certification as a patient centered medical home. And of the approximately 1,200 free or charitable clinics across the country, North Coast Health is proud to be one of the 12 that received a four-star rating from Charity Navigator, an organization that evaluates charities based on their efficiency, transparency, and the results they deliver to those they serve.
When this discussion began, North Coast Health, like all Lakewood residents, was saddened. We, like everyone here, wished that Lakewood Hospital was able to continue to operate as it had, as a full-service inpatient hospital.
Yet as a primary care practice, North Coast Health has experienced first-hand—and in fact championed—the movement towards population health, with its focus on prevention and chronic disease management, and the resulting decline in inpatient admissions.
These changes, by and large, represent positive developments in reducing costs and improving outcomes. But all change brings disruption, and these changes have made the old model of delivering care unsustainable.
Like many in Lakewood, North Coast Health has recognized for years that these trends meant that Lakewood Hospital would eventually have to change, and that the most responsible course of action was to guide that change to maintain the services that were most vital—like an emergency department—while shedding costly, and in many cases, redundant inpatient services. For those reasons, as our director, Lee Elmore, told Council early in the process, North Coast Health endorsed and continues to support the plan outlined in the Cleveland Clinic Foundation’s letter of intent.
In light of recent developments, North Coast’s Board and Executive Committee has asked me to reaffirm and amplify North Coast Health’s support of the proposal outlined in the letter of intent, and to speak to a few issues where North Coast’s experience may add value to the debate.
First, some voices in the community have raised fears that the proposed transformation will adversely and disproportionately affect the poor. If this were the case, it would be of tremendous concern to North Coast Health. Nearly half of North Coast Health’s patients have annual household incomes of less than $10,000. Our average patient has an annual household income of less than $12,000.
Indeed, North Coast Health was founded on the belief that all people are created in God’s image, and that our faith obligates us to provide care to the most vulnerable members of our community. Our mission can be summed up by Jesus’s words in Mathew 25:40: “Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me.”
Fortunately, the facts do not support the claims that the proposed transformation for Lakewood Hospital would adversely affect lower income residents. A study conducted by Harvard Cardiologist and advisor to the Department of Health and Human Services, Dr. Karen Joynt, from 2003 through 2011 found that hospital closures had no discernible impact on community mortality rates.
Other studies have shown that to the extent that closures have any effect on health results, this occurs in rural areas where there is simply no other care available, or in situations where emergency departments have been closed. In our case, however, we are blessed—overly blessed, in fact—with other hospital facilities. No one in our community will go without care for lack of facilities.
And most importantly, one of the keystones of the LOI—something that North Coast would consider a sine qua non in any proposal—is the construction of new 24/7/365 state of the art emergency department.
North Coast Health cannot speak—and does not claim to speak— for all lower income or medically underserved residents. But having served the medical needs of our most vulnerable for three decades, North Coast Health believes that the proposed transformation would, in fact, be of tremendous benefit to the patients we treat.
Over 80% of our patients are treated for chronic conditions such as diabetes and hypertension. Approximately 50% have multiple chronic conditions. These patients do not need more inpatient hospital beds. They need greater access to the primary and outpatient care which will allow them to manage their conditions. Indeed, the primary metric by which North Coast Health measures its success is how many ER visits and inpatient admissions it is able to prevent.
Second, Council has discussed what impact the proposed $32 million community foundation will have on community health—whether it will “move the needle” on health outcomes in Lakewood. In the interest of full disclosure, should the foundation be created, North Coast Health will seek funding from it, because it is entirely consistent with our mission and would allow us to provide more care to more patients. But regardless of whether North Coast Health is a direct beneficiary, the types of intervention, education, and prevention programs it could fund will make a tremendous difference to the patient base that we serve.
North Coast Health’s experience—borne out by reams of medical literature—is that money spent in disease management and prevention yields a significant return on investment, both in terms of better health outcomes and lower costs. A few hundred dollars spent on smoking cessation or weight management programs today can prevent tens of thousands of dollars spent treating acute heart conditions ten years from now.
The return on investment is not just anecdotal; it is quantifiable. Last year, North Coast Health, in conjunction with Dr. Stephen Zyanski of Case Western Reserve University med-school, conducted a study based on a random sample of 74 new patients to test North Coast’s impact on hospital utilization. The study found a reduction in cost of $319,000 for the combined 74 patients studied, for an average of $4,311 savings to the health care system.
If these savings are extrapolated to North Coast Health’s entire patient population, the result is a savings of $10,454,732 in health care costs—costs which would have been borne by the hospital system as charitable write-offs, or by the taxpayers, and private insurers. I don’t have the study results to conclusively tell you for sure whether an ounce of prevention is actually worth a pound of cure, but it’s pretty close.
We want Council and the community to understand that the proposed foundation will create real results by fund these type of education, prevention, and management programs that will pay tremendous return on investment—in the form of better health, greater productivity, and all around lower costs for our patient base and the community at large.
Finally, the proposed Charter Amendment has imposed a new urgency that requires North Coast to speak up for its patients. The proposed amendment may have been well-intentioned, but its practical effect will be to lock Lakewood Hospital into its current spiral of mounting losses and eventual closure. It will waste the valuable community resources that would be available for a foundation. As the Huron report showed, while the hospital might be able to survive for a little while on its investment portfolio, once that money is gone, it’s gone.
Worse still, the passage of the Charter Amendment will doom Lakewood Hospital by preventing any type of adaption or new partnerships. And without a qualified partner to run it, Lakewood Hospital will not survive in any form.
North Coast Health understands the desire to save the hospital. We applaud and take inspiration from those citizens, who, in good faith, are seeking to save it. Lakewood Hospital has been a valuable partner throughout North Coast Health’s existence and we feel this loss as keenly as anyone. But health care delivery has changed, and will continue to change, regardless of how we feel about it.
Those changes necessarily bring some sadness, but they also bring opportunity. North Coast Health urges Council, and the residents of Lakewood, to seize this opportunity to retain and improve the services that are most needed, and to invest in a healthier future.
These remarks should not misconstrued to say that the City should simply accept whatever is offered. Negotiate with the Clinic—in consultation with the public—over the details and the most needed services. Drive a hard bargain. But move forward. Losing the hospital, as we have known, it is sad. But losing this opportunity will be tragic."
-
Bill Call
- Posts: 3319
- Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2005 1:10 pm
Re: Bullock Full of Bull on Charter Amendment
Jim Kenny wrote:I agree Bullock's delivery of his message could have been more polished; however, a more eloquent speaker in those same chambers on Sept. 8 echoed his concerns.
In a statement made to Council by Jay Carson, Lakewood resident and North Coast Health Secretary/ Executive Committee Member, when supporting of the Cleveland Clinic/LHA proposal. In it, he addresses how the proposed facility and resulting foundation will best support those in need and why the proposed Charter Amendment is well-intentioned but fatally flawed. Here it is:
Just going from memory:
Lakewood Hospital provided about $5 million in charity care last year. When the hospital closes all of that care disappears.
One of the most important aspects of the original LOI was the transfer$35 million of Lakewood Hospital Foundation money and assets to a new foundation under the control of the Cleveland Clinic. While Mayor Summers was promising portions of that money to local non-profits if they "got on board" the bulk of the money was to be use to provide charity care to people in Lakewood and neighboring communities.
The Clinic provides about $100 million in charity care on $6 billion in sales. Their long term goal is to eliminate all charity care. The transfer of Lakewood Hospital Foundation assets to the new Foundation is part of that plan.
Of course North Coast Health is "on board". They have been promised gushers of money from the Lakewood Hospital Foundation. The question is:
WHY SHOULD THE PEOPLE OF LAKEWOOD GET STUCK WITH THE BILL?
A better question:
Why do we even need a North Coast Health when we provide the Clinic with hundreds of millions in taxpayer subsidies because it is a charitable institution? Can it be charity if it provides practically no charity care?
-
Amy Martin
- Posts: 549
- Joined: Tue Jun 10, 2014 9:30 am
Re: Bullock Full of Bull on Charter Amendment
This is such B.S. Why is it that the Heath care model is changing everywhere but AVON??
Yes, North Coast Health is in on the grab. They are prostituting themselves like crack whores.
Again, if the model of Health Care in America is changing, then why does AVON NEED A BRAND NEW IN-PATIENT HOSPITAL??
We are not as stupid as they'd like us to think.
Remember, in Ward 3, a vote for Mark Schneider is a vote for keeping Lakewood Hospital.
Yes, North Coast Health is in on the grab. They are prostituting themselves like crack whores.
Again, if the model of Health Care in America is changing, then why does AVON NEED A BRAND NEW IN-PATIENT HOSPITAL??
We are not as stupid as they'd like us to think.
Remember, in Ward 3, a vote for Mark Schneider is a vote for keeping Lakewood Hospital.
-
Bridget Conant
- Posts: 2896
- Joined: Wed Jul 26, 2006 4:22 pm
Re: Bullock Full of Bull on Charter Amendment
That's right, Amy. We are being fed a crock. Healthcare is changing is code for "the Cleveland Clinic thinks it owns this market and they will do as they please," leaving people vulnerable in its wake.
Which hospital is next to close? Could it be Euclid?
http://www.news-herald.com/general-news/20150331/cleveland-clinic-begins-clearing-mentor-land
While they feed us the line that healthcare is changing to outpatient facilities, and Jennifer Pae is all over social media saying this area is "over bedded," Cleveland Clinic continues to add beds - I guess there just aren't needed HERE.
Mentor officials and CC are pretty mum, but there WILL be a hospital, WITH INPATIENT BEDS, in Mentor.
Which hospital is next to close? Could it be Euclid?
http://www.news-herald.com/general-news/20150331/cleveland-clinic-begins-clearing-mentor-land
While they feed us the line that healthcare is changing to outpatient facilities, and Jennifer Pae is all over social media saying this area is "over bedded," Cleveland Clinic continues to add beds - I guess there just aren't needed HERE.
Mentor officials and CC are pretty mum, but there WILL be a hospital, WITH INPATIENT BEDS, in Mentor.
-
Brian Essi
- Posts: 2421
- Joined: Thu May 07, 2015 11:46 am
Re: Bullock Full of Bull on Charter Amendment
Jim Kenny wrote:I agree Bullock's delivery of his message could have been more polished.
Hi Jim,
Welcome back.
It is not a matter of polish---Bullock took positions contrary to the way he has voted and his prior statements on the matter.
I liked many parts of Jay Carson's speech, and I understand the desire of Team Summers and BL to spread that narrow message. However, on the issue of this thread, Jay's and Bullock's messages are both mistaken.
Given the direction that Council may go, it seems likely that there would be a referendum organized by the opposition under the existing charter provisions anyway.
Under the proposed amendment to the charter, that referendum would be automatic and may occur sooner.
In either event there is no impact on third party suitors.
I am told that many cities with community hospitals have similar automatic referendum and there has never been a problem with changing of the guards.
There is no need for hysteria and the "yellow fever" to send panic through the ranks of Team Summers Build Lakewood folks.
Was there "yellow fever" and panic because of the existing charter giving the people the right to vote? No
So why all the fuss and misinformation about the basic democratic right to vote on something so important to all?
David Anderson has no legitimate answers