My Word: Keep San Leandro Hospital open

By Deborah Burger
Hayward Daily Review
May 22, 2009

THERE IS A very real public health care crisis on the horizon if Sutter Health has its way in Alameda County. A May 12 Daily Review article ("Go-ahead for new Sutter hospital delayed") stated: —... some speakers said — incorrectly — that the closure of San Leandro Hospital would be a direct result of the environmental study being approved "... ." This is just plain wrong. The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires that broader socioeconomic effects as well as physical effects be considered in the approval process of a new project.

San Leandro's closure and the rebuilding of a smaller capacity Eden hospital represents a physical change in the community that will have significant socioeconomic impacts on the community and whose cumulative impact must be addressed.

More than 27,000 patients are seen in the San Leandro ER every year, with more than 50 percent emergent or critical diagnoses. Even if half of them go to Highland Hospital, that leaves more than 13,000 people who will have to go to a smaller Eden hospital.

The loss of services will be all the more worrisome given the cumulative effect of Sutter's plans for its Oakland facilities. Closing the Herrick campus of Alta Bates Summit Medical Center, losing at minimum 36 psychiatric beds, and rebuilding Summit Medical Center focused on higher-end services, including all-private patient rooms, will increase taxpayers' subsidies through higher Medicare and Medi-Cal reimbursements.

The experience of San Francisco is case in point. When Sutter tried to shut down St. Luke's in the Mission District, the supervisors successfully used the environmental impact report and health impact ordinances to protect the public health interest related to a hospital closure. Our supervisors should follow suit.

Deborah Burger is a registered nurse and co-president of the California Nurses Association.