Protests, appeals of pending hospital closure continue in Braddock

Thursday, January 21, 2010

By Moriah Balingit, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

 

Even as the closure of UPMC Braddock nears, protesters' cries for it to remain open have not waned, with public officials and residents vowing not to go down without a fight.

More than 100 residents, public officials and activists gathered outside the hospital on Friday, the last day the hospital would be admitting patients.

On Monday, about 120 protesters marched from a nearby church to the hospital's parking lot then to the hospital's entrance but were stopped by a security guard from entering.

Throughout the past three months, the group Save Our Community Hospital has organized protests and demonstrations at UPMC headquarters in Downtown Pittsburgh, at the University of Pittsburgh campus and in front of UPMC Braddock.

UPMC announced in mid-October that it would shutter the hospital at the end of January and, so far, despite vocal protests from public officials and residents, has not budged from that closure date.

In the meantime, Braddock Council President Jesse Brown has filed a complaint with the U.S. Department of Justice, alleging that the closure of the hospital in the poor, predominantly black community constitutes discrimination.

He's asking for an injunction to keep the hospital open while an investigation is conducted. He's hoping that would buy the community more time to figure out how to find a tenant for the massive structure.

"We're not asking them to stay open indefinitely," he said. "We just need some time."

On Friday, as protesters gathered down the street, Mr. Brown was on a conference call with his attorney and staff from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, discussing the complaint.

That department is handling the matter because it is hospital-related.

Mr. Brown would not comment on what was discussed or how the complaint was progressing, saying only that things "looked good."

On a separate legal front, about a dozen residents and County Council member Charles P. McCullough have sued to block a bond issue to UPMC that the county's Hospital Authority Board approved last month.

Read original

 

Comment closedTrackbackEdit

Can someone please explain why UPMC would close Braddock hospital, located in an area that is medically underserved, while borrowing ("Critics Aside, UPMC Gets Bond Issue," Jan. 15) to help build an unneeded, multimillion-dollar new hospital in Monroeville, an area that is already very well served by Forbes? Who made this OK?

DIANE A. DE PAOLIS, DMD
O'Hara

Read more:http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/10019/1029196-110.stm#ixzz0d4YCYs6n

 

Also in the January 19th Post-Gazette:

UPMC shows what's wrong with our system

I am growing more and more disturbed as I drive around Pittsburgh and the surrounding region. Everywhere I look there are signs, billboards and advertisements with the letters UPMC. It makes me wonder if in fact our city fathers have finally found a way to finance their funding needs by selling out the city of Pittsburgh's name to UPMC. I am waiting for the large "Welcome to UPMCburgh" signs to appear as you drive into the city limits.

My second theory is that UPMC has done a very sophisticated, and probably costly market study that has identified a new constituent group to serve, the signage industry. This might be its way to help bolster our national economy by selecting one industry and investing millions of dollars into that one industry. The bottom line, in my view, is that its priority is not on the health care of our region but on some sort of self-aggrandizement campaign.

Case in point: Why is it that our commonwealth is helping this behemoth system to build a new hospital east of the city (through approval of a billion-dollar bond issue) when we already have a very fine hospital there ("Critics Aside, UPMC Gets Bond Issue," Jan. 15)? Maybe our public officials are in the signage industry. I wonder how much the money for all the signs and a new and unnecessary hospital adds up to?

All the federal health-care legislation enacted in Washington, D.C., is not going to improve our healthcare when hospital systems like this recklessly spend money and aggressively limit our access to good health care. It's time for responsible citizens to speak up against this misuse of our health-care resources, and it's time to reclaim our landscape for Pittsburgh.

THOMAS J. PAPPALARDO
McCandless

Read more:http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/10019/1029196-110.stm#ixzz0d4YNdAjB
Comments(1)TrackbackEdit

Give us more time, UPMC: Let us find someone else to run a hospital in Braddock

Tuesday, January 19, 2010

By Jesse Brown and John Fetterman

 

At first we pleaded with UPMC to preserve the core of our community. Keep UPMC Braddock open, we implored CEO Jeffrey A. Romoff.

Smacked down on that request, we're now seeking something simpler -- time. Really, we're begging UPMC to give us 18 months to find someone else to operate Braddock Hospital.

Hospital officials shocked Braddock's elected officers with phone calls Oct. 15 telling us that UPMC would close the facility on Jan. 31. UPMC had never approached us and asked for our help in increasing the hospital's census or resolving financial problems. UPMC didn't mention any difficulties just a year earlier when it took a $3 million grant from the state to renovate the hospital.

It jumped us all with this bad news. Mr. Romoff gave us a total of 108 days to persuade him to change his mind or to find a buyer to keep the hospital open.

It just was not enough time.

We tried to explain to Mr. Romoff that the hospital is our everything. It's not just an emergency room and physicians' offices and 123 beds in a century-old facility that Mon Valley steelworkers helped construct on Braddock's main street. The building also contains the town's YMCA, its only restaurant, its only ATM machine. With 600 employees, it's the town's largest employer -- by far.

It helps to define Braddock. It is the town's essence. UPMC, a nonprofit institution, did not seem to understand or care about the magnitude of killing this community center, not even the significance of committing the act in the dead of winter.

Mr. Romoff informed us there was no turning back for UPMC Braddock, which had lost $7.5 million in 2009. That's out of the hospital network's budget of $8 billion, one that pays Mr. Romoff $3 million a year and approximately $6.7 million to lease two jets for travel to UPMC facilities in Qatar, Italy, Ireland and England.

But, Mr. Romoff told us, if Braddock or Allegheny County or some other institution would like to take the hospital off UPMC's hands, he'd gladly unload it for the sum of one buck.

That is our goal now. We are searching for a new administrator for our community hospital. We've got the help of the county's economic development office and two students from Duquesne University who are investigating potential partners. They've found 15 so far. But there's a lot of work to do. Each must be recruited to consider Braddock. They'll want to research our community's potential, the hospital's condition and whether we're a good fit for their objectives.

We've got the support of officials from 14 surrounding towns -- including Wilkinsburg, Braddock Hills, Forest Hills, Munhall, Duquesne, Edgewood and Turtle Creek -- who have passed resolutions opposing the closing and are actively working with us toward saving the facility they consider their hospital as well.

We just need time. If the hospital closes Jan. 31, a new operator found later would have to go through the long, costly and arduous process of getting the facility re-licensed. If it remains open, that would not be necessary.

Frankly, we don't think that's too much to ask of UPMC. This institution claims to be a nonprofit, a status that qualifies it for exemptions from property and other taxes paid by corporations that own big buildings like Braddock hospital. The title of the state law granting tax-exempt status to nonprofits is telling: "The Institutions of Purely Public Charity Act."

Nonprofits, such as UPMC, "benefit substantially from local government services," the law notes. Without paying a cent, they receive, for example, police and fire protection. In exchange, the nonprofit is supposed to donate charitable services. This is what the act says: "The institution must donate or render gratuitously a substantial portion of its services."

We are asking UPMC, as part of its nonprofit obligation, to donate services to Braddock for 18 months. We don't think that is too much to ask. The amount of its potential losses, we believe, is insubstantial compared to its budget, the million-dollar salaries of its executives and its jet leases. And we are willing to work with UPMC to increase its profitability in Braddock.

In UPMC's mission, values and ethics statement, nowhere does it mention its charitable obligation. It talks about "development of new businesses" and about developing "comprehensive policies that support its business values and principles."

To prove that it's not a predatory corporation, closing a hospital in a community that desperately needs it while constructing a hospital in Monroeville, which already has one, UPMC must grant Braddock time. If UPMC really is a nonprofit, complying with the "Purely Public Charity Act," it must, at the least, give Braddock officials time to save our community hospital, the soul of our borough.

Jesse Brown is president of Braddock Borough Council and John Fetterman is the mayor of Braddock. This article also was signed by borough council members Mildred Devich, Milan Devich, Tina Doose, Matthew Thomas and William Zachery.

Read original

 

Comments(1)TrackbackEdit

More than 100 march to stop closure of UPMC Braddock

Monday, January 18, 2010

By Moriah Balingit, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

 

About 120 people marched from the basement of Emmanuel Baptist Church in Braddock to the UPMC Braddock parking lot to protest its closure, eventually making their way to the hospital's entrance where they were stopped by a UPMC Braddock security guard.

Carrying signs and vigil candles, participants sang "We Shall Overcome" and chanted as they made their way up Fifth Avenue and down Holland Street. They evoked the civil rights movement and Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. in their protest, with several people holding signs bearing one of his quotes: "Of all the injustices of inequality, injustice in health care is the most shocking and inhumane."

For a half hour, as the sun set and the temperature dropped into the 30s, public officials, residents and representatives of various community groups lambasted UPMC. Several alluded to Dr. King in their speeches.

The hospital is slated to close Jan. 31 and stopped admitting patients Friday. UPMC shows no sign of reversing its decision or delaying the closure, in spite continuing protests from residents and public officials who say they need more time to figure out what to do with the structure and, if possible, to court another health system to take over the sprawling facility.

Read Original article

Comment closedTrackbackEdit

UPMC Braddock Hospital closure may spark U.S. probe

By Brad Bumsted

TRIBUNE-REVIEW

Friday, January 15, 2010

 

HARRISBURG -- Federal authorities plan to investigate whether the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center is violating civil rights laws by closing its hospital in the predominantly black community of Braddock, according to information presented to a state board.

"I have been informed by representatives of the Office for Civil Rights of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services that it will be initiating a formal investigation of this matter pursuant to our complaint," attorney M. Lawrence Shields III, who represents Braddock Council President Jesse Brown, said in a letter to the Pennsylvania Higher Education Facilities Authority.

On Thursday, the state board heard about the investigation from another lawyer, Allegheny County Councilman Charles P. McCullough, before approving $1.1 billion in tax-exempt bond financing for UPMC, despite pleas from Braddock activists not to do so.

UPMC officials who took part in the board meeting by teleconference said the hospital would close even if the authority didn't approve the bond issue. UPMC has said the hospital is underused.

"We believe it is the intention of the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center to utilize at least a substantial portion of the funds, which it would receive as a result of the bond issue for which it has applied to your agency, in connection with the construction of a planned new hospital in Monroeville," Shields wrote.

UPMC officials would not return calls for comment on the civil rights complaint. Michael Robinson, a spokesman for Health and Human Services, declined to comment.

Shields claims in his letter that closing UPMC Braddock and opening a hospital in the more affluent and predominantly white Monroeville violates the Civil Rights Act. He said Brown filed a complaint with the Department of Justice.

McCullough is part of a group that this week sued Allegheny County to challenge its approval of the same bond finance package through the county Hospital Development Authority. He told the state board he's awaiting documents to determine whether "there's a collateral pledge" involving the Braddock facility as part of the bond transaction.

"The Department of Health and Human Services found enough to it to launch an investigation for violation of civil rights," McCullough said. "Does this board want to be in a position of authorizing a $1 billion bond issue when there is an investigation?"

The Braddock activists asked the state board to delay action on the bond issue to give supporters an opportunity to save the hospital, which will close by the end of the month.

"We're trying to buy some time," said activist Tony Buba.

One member of the nine-member board voted against the deal, a staffer serving as proxy for state Rep. Bryan Lentz, who cited concern about the civil rights matter.

The closure has "an obvious impact on the minority community," said Bishop Baldwin of Braddock, one of the plaintiffs in McCullough's lawsuit. "We've been shut out of any kind of discussion."

 

Comment closedTrackbackEdit