Supervisor Mitchoff calls Mt Diablo Healthcare District action outrageous

District 4 Contra Costa County Supervisor Karen Mitchoff said on Friday she is disturbed by the recent actions of the Mt. Diablo Health Care District. “I was very concerned by the contract between Mt. Diablo Health Care District and their attorney Ralph Ferguson,” said Supervisor Mitchoff.  “And this new contract for an Executive Director is outrageous.  I am deeply disturbed by the continued depletion of taxpayer resources, especially while a decision by LAFCO is pending as to whether to dissolve the district.”The actions of the District are currently being reviewed at the Contra Costa Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO), which is considering whether the health care district should be dissolved LAFCO is scheduled to release its report on this matter this month.

On a 4-1 vote, board members voted to hire the District’s Executive Director.  Board members agreed to a salary of $10,000 per month, including all expenses relative to mileage, airfare, hotel, meals and entertainment.

“The Health Care District was created with the intent to serve the public health needs of our community,” said Mitchoff.  “However, it appears that the board does not share this priority and is more concerned about preserving itself.”  The District includes the communities of Concord, Pleasant Hill, Pacheco, Martinez and a portion of Lafayette.

Share the joy
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  

Comments

  1. Wendy Lack says

    Supervisor Mitchoff spoke at today’s LAFCO meeting, in support of the District’s dissolution per the special study’s recommendations. The Commissioners decided to schedule the public hearing on its January 11, 2012 meeting agenda, so the process is moving forward.

    Here’s the Contra Costa Times story about today’s meeting:
    http://www.contracostatimes.com/ci_19549608?IADID=Search-www.contracostatimes.com-www.contracostatimes.com

    Meanwhile, the grants committee of the Mt. Diablo Health Care District is scheduled to meet on Thursday, December 15th to consider a $12,000 grant to provide Concord senior citizens with transportation. It’s unconscionable that the District would continue spending down its reserves, with its possible dissolution imminent and without regard for its accumulated liabilities.

    If the District is dissolved next year, it may very well leave behind nothing but an empty bank account and a pile of debt . . . and the taxpayers will be left holding the bag, as usual.

    It’s unfortunate, indeed, that the dissolution process cannot go more quickly. Due to the many procedural steps involved, if LAFCO proceeds with dissolution it may not be final until next summer.

    The State of California sure doesn’t make it easy to dismantle a special district! However, if the dissolution process is completed in Contra Costa, the MDHCD case study will likely pave the way for other heretofore reluctant LAFCOs to dissolve districts throughout California’s 58 counties . . . which would be a huge WIN for taxpayers.

  2. Richard S. Colman says

    I would like to hear Supervisor Karen Mitchoff’s views on the 60% pay raise the Board of Supervisors of Contra Cotsa County voted to give itself in December 2006.

    Richard Colman
    Orinda, CA
    Dec, 5, 2011

    • Oh No says

      Come on Richard, you know that according to Supervisor Mary Piepho they were under paid and the raise was justified. What I don’t understand is the ” Big 3% they gave back ” out of the overpaid 60% they took due to the recession.
      Do you think maybe they are learning from gas prices?

      Either way the current Supervisors are not doing enough to avoid a crash collision with bankruptcy and unfunded liabilities.
      We should replace any incumbent Supervisor in the next election.

    • Say it ain't so oh no says

      Sorry “Oh No” but you got it wrong again. moving through this blogs comments section

      The following info is right from the Contra Costa Grand Jury report that you are so fond of quoting;

      FEBRUARY 2007 CONTRA COSTA GRAND JURY REPORT ON SUPERVISOR SALARIES FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS:

      (http://contra.napanet.net/depart/sc/grandjury/0708/0801rpt.pdf)

      “As of December 2006, Contra Costa Supervisors received…$59,916 annually…”

      “As elected County officials, Supervisors receive a salary that is paid without regard to hours worked. Given the commitments of the many boards, committees and authorities, most Supervisors work 50-70 hours per week.”

      “The County has a history of maintaining competitive compensation for the workforce. This has been demonstrated in past years by salary increases and COLA’s for union and non-union employees. The Supervisors have not followed this practice for their own positions.”

      “When comparing the compensation of Supervisors with counties of similar population and annual budgets, Contra Costa County Supervisor compensation is inequitable.”

      GRAND JURY RECOMMENDATION:

      “Supervisors’ compensation as of December 2006 should be increased by 51%..”

      So “oh no”, I really love the talking points, but that “overpaid” increase that you speak of still leaves them at the bottom of the pay scale. Maybe it is time for you to find another issue that doesn’t make you look so foolish.

      9 Bay Area Supervisor Salaries by comparison;

      COUNTY SALARY
      Alameda $143,040
      Santa Clara $143,031
      Sonoma $133,640
      San Mateo $117,156
      San Francisco $98,092
      Marin $97,739
      Contra Costa $94,807
      Solano $94,758
      Napa $84,198

    • says

      It is immaterial and irrelevant to cite outlandish supervisor salaries in alameda and napa counties. It’s no excuse for Supervisors…or FIREFIGHTERS or other PUBLIC EMPLOYEES to use these bloated salaries from bad deals made by failed, big-spending Supes to justify unaffordable salary, health and pension benefits in any other county including Contra Costa..

      This is how we got 3 at 50 statewide (“we deserve it cause they got it”) drummed up by the likes of State Senator DeSaulnier and others willing to grab ankles for public employee unions.

    • Oh No says

      Say it has a point, I wonder if someone jumped off a bridge our Sups would follow. Playing the we/they thing to use as an excuse to give yourself a 60% pay raise is total greed. This is exactly how we got right where we are. BGR is correct. We need to Vote out these types of politicians.

    • says

      Chief finding is that over past decade MDCHD spent only 26% of its funding on health-related services. 76% for overhead is not acceptable, indeed criminal. ANy non-profit that spends more than 20% (which is high) on overhead is not fulfilling its mission. At 76% for overhead obviously the MDCHD mission is not to serve health interests in our community but only itself.

      Personally, with 7 years as an appointed member of Concord’s Community Services District, and 3 as a member of the County’s EOC, both of which vetted proposals for a wide range of social and health related programs to actually benefit our community, I find MDHCD spending 76% on itself is beyond disgusting, foolish, and misguided.

  3. Kris Hunt, CoCoTAX says

    The district does not take in enough money to make it a useful vehicle for distributing the tax dollars. Ellis and Leone (mostly Leone because Ellis is old) for the lifetime health care benefits. This is a legal obligation of the district unless waived by the recipients. If the district had actually had to pay to hold elections when the positions open up that would have been a further drain on its resources. It is not cost effective. Ellis has squandered over $600,000 in legal fees over the years for law suits the district lost. That is indeed a shame and a waste. Time to end the district and let the tax dollars be used more effectively.

  4. Doing the work says

    The Mt. Diablo Health Care (MDHC) District could be a viable and an asset to the community. The current MDHC District Board is a group of people who are self-important and greedy, and want to maintain the status quo for their own benefit. Paying $10,000 a month for an Executive Director is ridiculous, stupid, and self-serving.

    I think it is heinous that this fund is paying for health insurance for two of its board members. I agree with Supervisor Mitchoff that the Health Care District has lost what its priority should be. The priority should be to use those funds raised for the public health needs of the community.

    The Health Care District board members pat themselves on on the back for the CPR classes in the schools. But they do these actions without coordinating and networking with the organizations, both public and private, who are at the forefront of providing health services to these communities.

    All these Board member need to go. This has become Grace Ellis’ private kingdom, and those on the board are always part of her inner circle. It is a joke and the revenue generated is being wasted on bureaucracy. I say let’s take the money raised by the Health Care District and put it into the Community Fund that is overseen by John Muir Hospital or make it a fund overseen by the District IV Supervisor with a committee that oversees the award of these funds.

    No one administering these funds should receive any compensation in any form. Board or committee members should serve because they want to help provide a public service. For anyone who thinks there are not public health needs that need to be addressed in your community, then you need to get out of your comfort zone and come spend a day with a Public Health Nurse. This small amount of money could be matched with Federal Funds if used appropriately.

    We have such limited resources to assure public health safety. It is time that we stop this waste of precious public funds. I provide services to these communities and I am a taxpayer and long time resident of District IV. I want these funds used to make the biggest impact possible on the health of our community, and I want to see evidence based results of the impact of these funds.

    I want to see what my hard earned money that I have provided to the MDHC District has accomplished. I ask you all, how do you get rid of the people on the MDHC District Board and start using this revenue for what it was really intended for?

  5. Wendy Lack says

    Under the totality of circumstances, it will be quite surprising if Mr. Doss follows through and signs the offer the District Board authorized this week.

    One wonders why anyone would want to get tangled in this District’s messy business, even at the $10K/mo exorbitant rate for a part-time moonlighting gig. It just doesn’t seem worth it.

    In any event, it’s good to see that Supervisor Mitchoff is as aghast as the rest of us are — including four grand juries and legion other residents who have watched this District waste taxpayer dollars year after year after year.

    We’ll be looking for Mitchoff’s support for dissolution, when it comes time for the Commissioners on LAFCO to decide the District’s fate.