Get SF Weekly Newsletters
Pin It

Unspun 

Wednesday, Sep 24 1997
Comments
Merger in the Dark
San Francisco state Sen. John Burton has just completed an amazingly cynical bait-and-switch performance with the passage of his legislation on public access to the newly merged UCSF and Stanford medical centers. That merger, consummated Friday, shifts $400 million of taxpayer-owned UCSF assets into private control. Thanks to Burton's bill, how those assets are run will remain almost completely out of the public eye. Thanks to laziness by our daily press, Burton has been able to maintain the fiction that he's a champion of the public's right to know.

Last March, Burton started raising questions about the UCSF-Stanford merger on the grounds that it would remove a substantial public asset, the UCSF Medical Center, from public scrutiny. Burton reasoned that, because UCSF appointees would make up less than half the governing board of the new private entity, the entity could be exempt from California's public records and open meetings laws, even though half its assets were once part of a public university.

With the possibility of unwarranted secrecy as justification, Burton introduced SB 1350 in March. In its initial form, the bill said that the merged, private medical center would be subject to public access rules similar to the public records and open meetings laws that apply to all governmental entities. And, the bill said, everyone connected with its operation would be subject to conflict-of-interest and self-dealing constraints of the Political Reform Act of 1974, which is designed to prevent private individuals from profiting wrongfully from the public till.

Burton, that pit bull for openness in government, held hearings in which he grilled UC officials about the public's seeming lack of control over the new entity. Stanford officials let it be known they opposed SB 1350 strongly, and the San Francisco Chronicle and Examiner duly reported that the merger could be derailed as a result.

By the time SB 1350 passed both the Assembly and the Senate earlier this month, however, it had undergone quite a transformation. (Wilson's signature is reportedly imminent.) As it's now written, the bill is a virtual anti-public records and anti-open meetings law. The bill lists sweeping exemptions to public access requirements, capped by a provision that grants UCSF-Stanford Health Care (USHC) virtually absolute power to determine what it chooses to make public. The bill also removes those who will run USHC from the jurisdiction of the Political Reform Act.

Both the Chron and the Ex described SB 1350 as Burton's victory on behalf of public access advocates -- a description that is exactly, completely false. The Chron's editorial page of Aug. 28 commended the legislation as a reasonable compromise between the public's right to know and the need to protect proprietary information in the private sector.

And a Chron news story quoted Burton self-approvingly declaring, "The public's right to know basically prevailed."

What a whopper.
Under this bill, USHC will be able to hold secret meetings on the following: labor negotiations, sales of property above a certain value, pending litigation, appointments to the board of directors, the terms of health care contracts, grants of any type, securities bought or sold by the medical center, audits, accreditation reports, quality-of-care reviews, complaints lodged by patients, and -- not to leave anything to chance -- any matters to do with national security.

For shielding records, the authority is even broader-reaching.
Protected from disclosure requirements are: all contracts and financial information whose disclosure the corporation determines would interfere with its mission; all records relating to health care contracts, audits, and quality assurance reviews; estimates and appraisals used to arrive at contracts (which the state public records act makes available after a certain period of time); records of the purchase and sale of investments; records of grants; and, in the final all-encompassing exclusion, any records whose release the corporation determines could interfere with the achievement of its goals -- which, no doubt, are strictly confidential.

Just in case any doors were left open, the bill is both retroactive and prospective: Records created or obtained at any date before the law's passage are covered, as are meetings that might occur before the bill takes effect.

Bermudez Triangle
San Francisco Frontlines, the 6-month-old monthly tabloid that calls itself "A Newspaper for a New Progressive Majority," makes no pretense of objectivity. The paper's managing editor and leading force, Carlos Petroni, not only endorsed a candidate (city treasurer candidate Lucrecia Bermœdez) he wrote about, but admits that he helps coordinate Bermudez's campaign.

But there's a line separating partisanship from plain loopiness, and September's cover story "expose" of Supervisor Susan Leal, Bermudez's leading opponent this November, veers into loopy-land.

The story, by contributor Sebastian Robles, has a faux-investigative veneer,
citing -- wrongly, in a couple of cases -- financial records Leal filed as part of her candidacy for treasurer. (The forms he cites show that Leal actually divested herself of two holdings Robles says are evidence of her business dealings with evil.)

But it is Robles' conspiracy-spinning that is most entertaining. This story is simply hysterical, in both senses of the word.

Here's the scoop from Frontlines-land: You may have thought Leal was a moderately pro-business Latina lesbian member of the S.F. Board of Supervisors. But, Frontlines insists, Leal is an AIDS profiteer with links to international right-wing thugs, including Israeli hawks who want to sabotage the Middle East peace talks and the extremely late dictator of Spain, Generalissimo Francisco Franco.

And how does Robles make those connections? It's simple, in both senses of the word.

Leal, Robles says, owns stock in some Spanish banks and an investment fund that Franco and his family were heavily invested in and is, therefore, in the thrall of the evil generalissimo. Unfortunately for Robles, there are a few holes in this story. First, Leal has divested herself of one of the stocks at issue; Robles seems to have missed the sale. The scope of the second hole in this conspiracy web is suggested by the following fact: Franco died in 1975, 22 years ago.

And how does the hawkish arm of the Zionist lobby have Leal in its control?
Leal took a $2,000 trip to Israel last November, compliments of the San Francisco Jewish Community Relations Council, and listed in her public filings. An umbrella group for 80-odd Bay Area synagogues and Jewish organizations, the council is funded in part by the mainstream Jewish Community Federation; it is hardly a rabid, Zionist outpost.

If going on the trip makes Leal guilty of cozying up to Israeli hawks, then literally dozens of Bay Area civic leaders are equally guilty. Among those traveling with Leal last November were the head of the city's Human Rights Commission, a high-ranking official of the United Way, and Josie Mooney, San Francisco Labor Council president and deputy director of Local 790 of the Service Employees International Union, who is surely a "progressive" in Frontlines parlance.

Frontlines is a welcome presence. San Francisco journalism has far too few bomb-throwers. But too many off-the-wall attacks like this one will quickly reduce the paper to a laughingstock.

Phyllis Orrick can be reached at SF Weekly, Attn: Unspun, 185 Berry, Lobby 4, Suite 3800, San Francisco, CA 94107; phone: 536-8139; e-mail: porrick@sfweekly.com.

About The Author

Phyllis Orrick

Comments

Subscribe to this thread:

Add a comment

Popular Stories

  1. Most Popular Stories
  2. Stories You Missed
  1. Most Popular