Louisiana Justice Institute FIGHTS AGAINST BILOXI FEMA TRAILER ORDINANCE

By Shaena J. Johnson

LJI Organizer

In a blatant attempt to increase marginalization and victimization of low-income and less fortunate Hurricane Katrina and Rita victims in Mississippi, elected officials, along with the Biloxi Office of Community Development proposed an ordinance that would further displace these victims from their homes. The proposed Ordinance to amend Section 23-11-17(b) of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Biloxi, MS, provided (1) FEMA trailers do not meet building code specifications – making them susceptible to destruction by hurricane force winds; and (2) there has been “ample time” for individuals displaced Hurricane Katrina to make arrangements for securing permanent housing. City of Biloxi officials thus demanded residents with FEMA trailers apply for a Temporary Use Permit (30 days), which would still require that they vacate their homes within 30 days.

What the Office of Community Development and other Biloxi elected officials failed to fully comprehend was that fact not all Biloxi residents have recovered fully from the disasters. Residents like Chuck Rodgers (see below) live in front of their houses to protect their property and rebuilding supplies, and to rekindle some sense of normality after the destruction of their way of life.

Jerry Creel, Director of the Office of Community Development, was in strong support of the ordinance, stating that the trailers “could become projectiles in hurricane-like situations.” He also asserted that the residents in the trailers are doing nothing to recover, and that nobody was being kicked out of their homes. Although Creel does make a valid point about the lack of safety that the FEMA trailers provide, his statements are specious. While it is true that trailers could become projectiles, the same is true for patio furniture, trees, automobiles, and even humans.

Trinh Le, Community Empowerment Coordinator of the Hope Community Development Agency, is the social justice activist and community leader of the movement that opposed this weak ordinance. She coordinated many civil and human rights advocates, including Louisiana Justice Institute (LJI), to speak out against the issue, raising awareness of the injustices against our constituents. Further, Le coordinated a press conference before the Biloxi City Council meeting to vote on the ordinance, inviting members of each organization to the June 16^th meeting, and asking them to speak to the city council in opposition of the proposed ordinance.

Le’s endeavors were a success. After the press conference, LJI, along with other organizations spoke on behalf of the residents in FEMA trailers, asking the council to disregard the ordinance. There were so many supporters of the FEMA trailer residents, that there was only standing room left in the council chambers. The council voted 7-0 on the ordinance, amending it so that residents would have 6 months, instead of 30 days to find permanent housing. The council also stated that all families in FEMA trailers must have a Case Management Worker and sign up with the Office of Community Development (that venue should be changed because of the stated condescending view of these residents by the director).

While the Gulf Coast advocates were successful with this effort, it is also apparent there were unfair obstacles placed in the way of poor and often elderly residents in restoring their lives with dignity and respect. In this case, government officials played “fast and loose” with calendar scheduling to try and thwart the efforts of advocates working to support these residents. The Biloxi council placed the ordinance on the meeting agenda at the last minute, after weeks of rescheduling, and then moved the item last for hearing, notwithstanding the fact it was objectively the most important measure on the calendar. But justice was not delayed by obfuscation. Advocates stayed the course, for the entire meeting.

We have learned many lessons from the situation in Biloxi. People need to realize that no one entity can possible give anyone a timeline for full recovery from a disaster. We cannot tell a family that their home will be taken away from them, unless we have a plausible solution or alternative. Revolving deadlines and eviction notices do nothing but hurt the families involved. Instead of “barking out orders,” organizations and companies must provide solutions and alternatives, before notifying a family of eviction or relocation.

Geneva Crenshaw's Musings In Full Effect

Leon, Leon, Leon. What will we do with Leon?

My frustration with New Orleans District Attorney Leon Cannizzaro led me to write this letter to Professor Derrick Bell, renowned legal scholar and professor at New York University School of Law. Is the Racial Preference Licensing Act the answer for NOLA? Food for thought...

Professor Bell:

We’ve never met, but I have been a fan of yours for many years. After Hurricane Katrina and deciding to return to New Orleans – with the not-so-gentle nudging of Bill Quigley – I began a full time civil rights practice. I was reminded this weekend of your writings in Faces at the Bottom of the Well, and thought I’d share with you a bit of 2009 New Orleans.

Last year, on the evening of February 5, 2008, several off duty employees of the New Orleans Regional Transit Authority (RTA) were assaulted and beaten by off-duty New Orleans police officers assigned to the Special Operations Division of the New Orleans Police Department. Before the assault began, the victims, who are all African American, were subjected to racial slurs and epithets. Just after the RTA employees decided to leave the Beach Corner Bar and Grill, the police officers then beat and kicked the RTA employees. On duty New Orleans police officers arrived on the scene to investigate; because the off duty officers responsible for the assault were actively interfering with the investigation, the investigating officers had to remove the victims from the scene of the crime and take them to the Third District station to interview them. Police officers searched the vehicles of the victims without probable cause and after claiming to find a firearm, charged one of the victims with carrying a concealed weapon, charges that were later dismissed. The current Orleans Parish District Attorney, Leon Cannizzaro, has confirmed the allegedly concealed firearm was ‘planted’ by one of the off-duty police officers. At least three of the victims required medical attention. Among the witnesses to the violent assault were Capt. Jeff Winn, who at the time was the commander of the Special Operations Division of the New Orleans Police Department, and the supervisor of the police officers responsible for the assault. Also present at the time of the racially motivated assault was Laura Cannizzaro, an Assistant Orleans Parish District Attorney, and the daughter of the current Orleans Parish District Attorney, Leon Cannizzaro, and Ms. Cannizzaro’s boyfriend, also a NOPD Officer. Neither the New Orleans Police Department nor the Orleans Parish District Attorney charged any of the officers responsible for the assault with any crime. The Public Integrity Division of the New Orleans Police Department conducted a separate investigation which more than fourteen months after the incident resulted in the termination of one of the officers responsible for the assault, Joey Lapene. Just two months ago, D.A. Cannizzaro hired Joey Lapene to serve as one of his Lead Investigators, to canvass New Orleans’ cold case files, interview witnesses (in this 65% African-American populated city), and ride along with the police at crime scenes.

My father and I were discussing this incident yesterday, and I indicated to him that on today, LJI would write to Attorney General Eric Holder and request his office to intervene and investigate. The current U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Louisiana, in his six year tenure, has not yet ‘found’ a civil rights violation in his 10 parish jurisdiction, and he has refused to investigate this incident.

My dad (age 71) just chuckled. He said to me, at least in the 50s you knew where you could go. “For the sake of my grandson, maybe these devils could just start posting signs,” he said. “Blacks Not Welcomed.”

Fifty years later, and what was old is new again. Racial Preference Licensing Act, indeed!

I sent the letter to Mr. Holder, but I’m wondering whether a 10% tax (adjusted for inflation from Ms. Crenshaw’s suggested 3%) might just be better.

The New Cover for Racism

This entry was written by guest blogger Percy Marchand, an entrepreneur and a member of the next generation of New Orleans' leaders.

The new cover for racism is trying to make bringing up "race" or "racism" as a part of anything be racist/reverse discrimination/etc. I don't know why people believe the racism that has been institutionalized just up and disappeared.

I realized the extent of racism twice when I ran for office...the first and most important question I got from every white and black leader I met with was the question of demographics (how many white voters/ how many blacks specifically). The unwritten rule is that overwhelmingly whites vote white and blacks vote for the best candidate. Yes there are plenty of whites who vote for the best candidate (whether black or white) and plenty of blacks who vote "black", but the statistics show that it is much easier for a white candidate to get the black vote than a black candidate to get a significant white vote. You may be one of those who don't fit that rule, but majority is what majority is.

It just so happens that when a Black leader messes up - it's noted and noted and noted and noted and he or she is continuously ridiculed. When leaders who happen to be white make missteps, they are 1 day stories and excused --- "well it's not as bad as...";"everyone is human...";etc.etc. Do some statistics on the number of black leaders vs. the number of white leaders who have been indicted and convicted. I already have and the majority are not Black (African-American or whatever term you want to use) - yet the stigma is that all these Black leaders are ruining our city.

It's amazing when most of our city's elected officials happened to be white none of these questions were being asked. When an overwhelming number of black leaders were elected and some (rightly or wrongly) continued doing the same thing their predecessors were doing it became the ethical witch hunt. Now that whites are gaining more positions back - the fight for their privacy and lack of transparency begins (even though they are the same ones who demanded strong ethics and transparency).

With that said, I don't think Midura or Head are "racists". The problem isn't race issues for them; it is their inability to act professionally. Ask any person who works for a professional corporation about their company emails/computer files...they are the property of the company and policies dictate that they be used solely for company business...in this case the company consists of the citizens of New Orleans. It is inexcusable that these personal/political/ inappropriate emails were sent over city email via city computers that are owned by the citizens of New Orleans.

The other problems with Head and Midura (as evidenced in the emails) are their motives and methods of operations. The tone and words they use behind the scenes and at meetings are inappropriate. They do not speak to those being questioned with respect or with any attempt to understand or reach amicable solutions...they question/raise points to make those they are addressing look stupid/powerless (twisting balls) while attempting to make themselves look like infallible popes.

Also, let's not get into the whole "well they did it first thing" i.e. Veronica White. If VW acts inappropriately, be the professional/grown up you should be and respond appropriately...don't stoop to whatever level you claim they are on - if you do, it just makes you the only one definitely guilty of being disrespectful/lowly as you have consciously made a distinct decision to do so.

If you think Jerome Smith or Tracie Washington are out to get you...win the battle by ignoring the petty games you claim they are playing ... if you are doing what you are supposed to - there is nothing outsiders can do unless you give them that power.

Lots of people say they were embarrassed by Nagin's Chocolate City comment; I was embarrassed to see my council lady blowing kisses and taunting constituents. I sent an email to her regarding this and still haven't gotten a response. Maybe if I were talking about how she made Tracie Washington look like she slapped her on the back of the neck . . . I would have received a response.

The reality is that all sides have done their share...the sad thing is we are wrapped in all this garbage instead of rebuilding our city. This isn't about black or white - that's sheep's clothing on the wolf...this is about power and comfort. The people in power are scared to lose it, especially to anyone with whom they aren't comfortable...the people without power want to gain it and only share it with those they are comfortable with. You can figure out who's who.

The other sad thing is that our leaders are who our leaders are, but we haven't accepted this. When's the last time a recall worked for any side? What is the point of trying to highlight our leaders' incompetency rather than trying to build them up? What is the point of our leaders thinking that anytime someone voices concerns that they have to jump defensive as if the world is out to get them?

Why would anyone help us rebuild if we're constantly sending out the message that all of our leaders are incompetent crooks?

If this is the "new" New Orleans . . . it won't last much longer.

Percy Marchand

LJI Prevails in Standoff

Pursuant to the City Charter of the City of New Orleans, the City Council, the Mayor, the City Attorney, and a host of other senior appointed officials are required by law to complete the City of New Orleans Financial Disclosure Form by July 31st of each year. Moreover, upon taking the oath of office, newly elected officials are required to file the Financial Disclosure Form within sixty (60) days.

LJI made its public records request for these documents on March 24, 2009. The City Attorney is required to maintain and disclose these records immediately upon request.
Instead, on Monday, March 30th Penya Moses-Fields refused to release the records of the City Council members because Council Attorney Steven Lane insisted he be allowed to redact information from the forms, or completely withhold the counsel records.

"Not everyone who attends law school should practice law," stated frustrated LJI Managing Director Tracie Washington. "The law is clear, and plain enough for a second grader to understand. Lane was prohibited by law from obstructing these disclosures. So what happens when the normal ‘Joe' or ‘Jane' asks for these records? Will Lane continue to block good-government, transparency efforts?"

LJI has embarked on Project Transparency (www.NolaPublicRecords.org). "We started this project so our community will have complete, unfettered access to the records they pay for and are entitled to by law," states LJI Co-Director Jacques Morial.

We invite the public to review these disclosures, and make comment on LJI's blog, www.JusticeRoars.org. The documents produced are the only ones presently maintained by the City Attorney. You will note, several disclosure forms are missing, and Mayor Nagin 2007 disclosure form was not executed until March 30, 2009.

LJI Resists Government Intrusion

In the case of The Council of the City of New Orleans vs. Tracie Washington and the Louisiana Justice Institute, the city council failed to confiscate LJI's computers, hardware, and network for examination.

The Honorable Judge Lloyd Medley Jr. heard arguments from LJI's counsel, Clarence Roby, and the City Council's attorney as well as the City Attorney in his courtroom this morning. Attorneys from the opposition requested that the court order LJI to relinquish possession of LJI's computers, emails, and server. In addition, the opposition also requested that the court order LJI to turn over any and all information obtained as a result of LJI's legal and valid public records request filed on December 3, 2008.

Judge Medley ruled that LJI is not responsible for turning over any information to the City Council. In turn, Judge Medley ruled that the information received via the public records request be turned over to him in camera for his team of legal clerks to determine if any of the information could be deemed privileged.

Rebuffed, opposing counsel made a final attempt to discredit the integrity of LJI by requesting that the court bar our organization from altering any metadata pertaining to the information that was received. Judge Medley declined to do so, saying that LJI and its counsel had complied to each of the court's requests and he has no reason to believe that LJI would not continue to act in good faith.

From the entire LJI family, we thank our local, state, and national network of advocates and friends who have offered their support via telephone messages, emails, and who appeared in court this morning en masse. Our friends and allies packed the courtroom and spilled out into the adjoining hall.

This is not LJI's fight alone. It is a battle over free and open access to our government and our ability to hold elected officials accountable. The City Council and the City of New Orleans attempted to stifle our voices. So far, they have failed. This fight is far from over. LJI will continue to resist the government's attempt to raid our offices and our computers to examine our work product and, more importantly, the files of our clients and partners.

Stay tuned as we continue to update you on the progress of these proceedings.

Yours in the struggle,

The LJI Family

Fight against LSU-VA medical complex in lower Mid-City continues
by Bill Barrow, The Times-Picayune
Friday February 13, 2009, 9:23 AM

Despite insistence from Louisiana State University System officials that they have made a final decision to build a new academic medical complex in lower Mid-City, opponents of the plan continue to lobby for an audience with Gov. Bobby Jindal and his administration's top health care executive.

Their hope is to convince the governor and Department of Health and Hospitals Secretary Alan Levine that gutting and rebuilding Charity Hospital from within represents a better option for taxpayers, future medical students and patients.

"We're considered obstructionists, but we're offering a better plan, " Sandra Stokes of the Foundation for Historical Louisiana said in a recent interview, explaining that she wants Jindal and Levine to hear it directly, something neither has done to date.

Levine said he is willing to hear what the group has to say. A Jindal spokesman said the administration "will continue to make folks available to hear their concerns, " but did not commit the governor's time to the matter.

The historical group has discussed its ideas with Louisiana Recovery Authority chief Paul Rainwater, who reports to Jindal.

Jindal and Levine support LSU's proposal for a $1.2 billion, 400-plus-bed academic medical center that would be built alongside a 200-bed U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs hospital.

The two campuses would cover about 70 acres bound by Tulane Avenue, South Claiborne Avenue, Canal Street and South Rocheblave Street.

The historical foundation plans are detailed in a September 2008 report from the Philadelphia architecture firm RMJM Hillier. The alternative would have LSU rebuild within a stripped shell of Charity Hospital, with the VA building its new complex on the lower nine or 10 blocks of the larger Mid-City footprint. The idea calls for LSU to take over the existing VA campus adjacent to

Charity for support buildings or future expansion.
The pressure directed at Jindal and Levine comes amid increasing public acrimony between LSU officials and the groups that oppose the university's plan.

The two sides have traded letters and reports, including documents written by the state facilities office that reports ultimately to the governor, disputing various claims about the respective proposals. State facilities chief Jerry Jones and LSU administrators say rebuilding Charity would be neither cheaper nor faster than constructing a new campus, as the Hillier report says.

The preservationists, as well as patient advocacy groups that want Charity reopened, have intensified their efforts in recent months as LSU's financing plan has come under increasing scrutiny. LSU's project budget depends on getting a $492 million reimbursement from the federal government for Hurricane Katrina damage to Charity and then securing about $400 million on the private bond market. Neither is a sure bet.

The preservationists have met with LSU System President John Lombardi and Dr. Larry Hollier, chancellor of the school's New Orleans medical operation. The university says publicly that the issue is settled, particularly given that the Legislature already has appropriated $74 million for land acquisition and other initial costs, while including another $226 million in long-term credit through the state's five-year capital construction budget.

"These groups say they have not gotten their say, when in fact they have just not gotten their way, " LSU spokesman Charles Zewe said in a recent interview.

That attitude, Stokes said, makes it all the more important to get to Jindal.

Stokes said her group has made at least four attempts to schedule meetings with both Jindal and Levine, including an opportunity for the governor to preview the Hillier report before its release. Levine had one meeting scheduled but had to cancel, she said.

Levine said: "I'm willing to be an audience. I just don't know that I can offer them anything" when discussing the "complexities of engineering and architectural" debates. "That's just not my expertise."

Bill Barrow can be reached at bbarrow@timespicayune.com or 504.826.3452.

HANO - HUD Goat Rodeo

HUD HANO Goat Rodeo (Cont)
By Professor William P. Quigley

Just when it seemed like HUD and HANO, who tore down thousands of fixable low cost apartments with a plan to only to replace them with only hundreds, could not give New Orleans any worse news, the Times-Picayune reports a multi-million dollar squabble over payment for the demolition of the CJ Peete housing development.

Sam Bailey, a former public housing resident himself, started a demolition company and got the over $1 million contract to tear down the CJ Peete housing development. But the Atlanta company who hired him still owes him $700,000. The Atlanta company, Dalyrymple Corp., says they are still owed money from HANO and the major contractor McCormack Baron out of St. Louis. Three other subcontractors claim they are owed another $400,000 and change too. Everyone is going to court and filing liens and pointing their fingers at everyone else.

If HUD and HANO cannot figure out how to pay to tear the thing down, under what circumstances would we believe they can figure out how to put it up correctly?

HUD and HANO have already decided that New Orleans will get, at a maximum under all plans, two-thirds less affordable housing than we had before Katrina. And that assumes that CJ Peete will be rebuilt and a hundred or so public housing families will get to return to the site where nearly a thousand lived at one time.

While tens of thousands remain displaced from New Orleans and the Disaster Housing Program is set to terminate, HUD and HANO continue their stumbling ways.

There is a term in the country when things are messed up beyond belief, they term it a goat rodeo. The Army calls it FUBAR, or " ___ ed up beyond all repair." Goat rodeo or FUBAR, HUD and HANO are at it again while thousands remain in need of affordable housing. Pull up a chair, it looks like it is going to be a long wait.

Professor William P. Quigley is Director of the Loyola Law Clinic & the Gillis Long Poverty Law Center at Loyola University in New Orleans.

The Community Speaks Out in Favor of Restoring Charity Hospital

Last night a standing room only overflow crowd of residents, neighborhood leaders, healthcare advocates and others spoke out in favor of restoring Charity Hospital in New Orleans.

The audience heard the details of a plan to build a world-class, state of the art academic medical center inside the four walls of Charity Hospital for hundreds of millions of dollars less years earlier than LSU's plan to demolish the historic Lower Mid City neighborhood to build an unsustainable $1.2 billion medical center.

The meeting was hosted by the ReBuild Center at St. Joseph's Church and was sponsored by the Committee to ReOpen Charity Hospital, Louisiana ACORN, the United Teachers of New Orleans and C3.

Sheldon Fox of ABC26 News reports:

Legislature raises questions on proposed LSU teaching hospital in New Orleans

Legislators weigh price tag for new LSU teaching hospital in New Orleans
by Jan Moller, The Times-Picayune
Thursday January 22, 2009, 10:03 PM

BATON ROUGE -- Members of a legislative budget committee grilled state officials Thursday about the financing for a proposed New Orleans teaching hospital and the decision to ignore potential alternatives that could prove less costly and less disruptive to existing neighborhoods.

It's unclear whether the seven hours of testimony will have any effect on the state's ongoing effort to build a replacement for Charity Hospital, as Gov. Bobby Jindal's administration has given no indication of backing away from its plan to build a $1.2 billion academic medical complex in lower Mid-City.

But the hearing by the House Appropriations Committee provided lawmakers with their most extensive look at a plan offered by the Foundation for Historical Louisiana that calls for gutting the old Charity Hospital building and refurbishing it into a first-rate teaching hospital.

Steve McDaniel, an architect with the New York firm RMJM Hillier, said the state could shave $283 million from its expected costs by doing a gut-rehab. That includes money saved by not having to acquire land, and more than $100 million in savings through federal and state tax credits that would not be available should the state build a new facility.

"The question isn't whether we want state-of-the-art care, but how we get it, " said Sandra Stokes, executive vice president of the historical foundation.

State facilities director Jerry Jones disputed the cost estimates, and said the preservationists' plan could actually prove more expensive than what the state is proposing. He said the gut-rehab plan does not account for the cost of medical equipment, parking, information technology and an ambulatory care building that the state included as part of its figures.

The preservationists found a receptive audience among legislators, some of whom appear to be growing increasingly concerned about the cost and timetable of building a new hospital and the prospect of uprooting existing homes and businesses. The state's plan calls for spending $54 million to buy hundreds of properties inside a 70-acre footprint bordered by Canal Street, South Rocheblave Street, Tulane Avenue and South Claiborne Avenue.

"It just doesn't make much sense to me to tear up this entire neighborhood, " said House Speaker Jim Tucker, R-Algiers. Tucker said the state already owns land along Tulane Avenue, west of Interstate 10, that could be put to a medical use without affecting private property owners.

Bobbi Rogers said she and her husband are among several neighborhood residents who received taxpayer-financed Road Home grants to rebuild properties that were destroyed by Hurricane Katrina, only to face the prospect of having them taken by the state.

"These are the people that make New Orleans work, " Rogers said.

But Pam Perkins, the general counsel for the state Division of Administration, said the vast majority of property owners in the area have indicated a willingness to sell their property. "They are very eager to get on with their lives, " Perkins said.

Tucker joined several legislators in questioning the financial underpinnings of the project.
State officials have $450 million committed, and are counting on FEMA recovery dollars and a future bond issue to cover the rest. But there is no guarantee that the federal dollars will be forthcoming, and the shaky credit markets have made it difficult for many large-scale projects to obtain financing.

"I am very leery about getting halfway pregnant in this process and not being able to complete it, " Tucker said.

There is also the matter of the state's constitutional limit on borrowing. The Jindal administration plans to structure the bond issue in a way that the money doesn't count against the cap. But there is no guarantee that the bonds could be issued without a state guarantee, and state Treasurer John Kennedy said taxpayers would likely be on the hook if the hospital can't pay back the bonds.

Dr. Fred Cerise, who oversees health-care services for Louisiana State University, said the state's plans to build adjacent to the new VA hospital would save $400 million over 25 years by allowing the two hospitals to share certain functions.
"I think we lose critical financial and clinical efficiencies" by not building next to the VA, Cerise said.

Rep. Kevin Pearson, R-Slidell, said the state could solve the proximity problem by building a Disney World-style rail system to shuttle doctors and medical students between the two facilities.

House Speaker Pro Tem Karen Carter Peterson, D-New Orleans, said LSU needs to do a better job of reaching out to Tulane University, Xavier University and other institutions that will be using the new hospital to train medical students and allied health workers.

"There needs to be a different level of engagement and commitment to other stakeholders, " Peterson said, adding that a failure to do so could result in a loss of support for the project from New Orleans legislators.
. . . . . . .

Hospital at risk

Posted by Jack Davis, guest columnist, The Times-Picayune

Published January 22, 2009

State government and Louisiana State University are undermining New Orleans' chances for quick progress toward a new medical complex. Whether through misguided planning or stubbornness, they are defending a plan that:

-- Adds hundreds of millions of dollars of unnecessary expense when state and federal resources are shrinking.

-- Imposes a long construction schedule for a new LSU hospital, delaying its completion by two years.

-- Invites controversy and more delays through lawsuits challenging the secrecy and flawed planning procedures.

-- Destroys a historic residential neighborhood that could otherwise provide essential housing for medical-center workers.

-- Causes City Hall to waste $79 million to buy land, demolish architecturally valuable houses and relocate residents from a site that wouldn't be needed by a smarter hospital plan.

-- Completely ignores the immense value of one of the nation's best-designed, best-constructed, still usable medical buildings.

Why are they putting at risk the single most important economic development project this region has begun since Katrina? Their plan may fail to get financing because of its illogic and waste. And then where will we be?

LSU and the administration of Gov. Bobby Jindal are commendably right in envisioning a major medical complex and committing to put it in downtown New Orleans. But they are wrong in planning the project largely behind closed doors and ignoring at least one appealing alternative. It's not too late for them to start doing it right.

In 2006, the Legislature gave the Foundation for Historical Louisiana the job of assessing the condition of Charity Hospital, the durable 1939 landmark that has long symbolized Louisiana's commitment to taking care of its people. Lawmakers wanted to make sure, before LSU irrevocably committed to new construction, that Charity -- with its great location and its million square feet of interior space -- was being properly valued.

The foundation raised $600,000 to pay for a study by architects RMJM Hillier, who have deep experience in both hospital design and historic preservation.

Their August 2008 report demonstrated that Charity could be totally gutted and rehabilitated with new systems and state-of-the-art technology to create a new hospital that would work better than new construction, would be finished at least two years sooner and would cost 22 percent less -- $136 million less.

Keeping the LSU hospital in Charity allows the Veterans Administration hospital to move to the currently proposed LSU site -- meaning that the city wouldn't need to spend that $79 million for land and evictions for the VA. That's $215 million in savings -- before counting the benefits of bringing the biomedical district into reality two years sooner.

The state budget, developed in the pre-recession days of surpluses, now faces $2.34 billion of cuts this year and next, much of it in health care.

A rational Gov. Jindal probably will perceive that spending hundreds of millions of dollars unnecessarily just won't work in 2009. And President Obama's stimulus program surely expects higher investment returns than LSU's wasteful plan offers.

The state House Appropriations Committee has scheduled a hearing today on the proposal to rehab Charity. The committee should call for a speedy independent study of the costs and benefits of both plans. The Jindal administration should also insist that LSU be open with the public.

Secrecy and bad planning have put the medical complex in jeopardy. Let's save it.

. . . . . . .

Jack Davis is a board member of the National Trust for Historic Preservation and Smart Growth Louisiana. His email is jacdav@aol.com.

Lolis Eric Elie asks: "Is the LSU Medical Center Project A Done Deal?"

Done deal? Many hope not
Monday, January 19, 2009
By Lolis Eric Elie, The Times Picayune

"Is it really a done deal?"

This question is being posed by a coalition of groups who wonder whether the current plans to abandon the Charity and Veterans Administration hospitals are wise or final ones.

Consider the statistics compiled by the Vieux Carre Property Owners, Residents and Associates; the Foundation for Historical Louisiana; and the National Trust for Historic Preservation:

If the ruinous plan goes forward in its current state, more than 70 acres of Mid-City will be demolished and more than 1 million square feet of downtown office buildings will be left abandoned.

Much of downtown New Orleans will be set firmly on the path to blight, and a large area of Mid-City will become parking lots.

--- Do the math ---

State and local officials seem strangely unmoved by the findings of a report requested by the Legislature and paid for by the Foundation for Historic Louisiana.

The study estimates that the 70-year-old Charity Hospital building could be rehabilitated in three years at a cost of $484 million. Building a new hospital would require two extra years and an additional $124 million.

It's the sort of math you'd expect the state to be moved by at a time when Louisiana faces a projected $2 billion deficit in the 2009-10 budget year that starts July 1.

It's the sort of thing in which you'd expect the New Orleans mayor or City Council to take a public interest.

Several relevant hearings were held by federal agencies, in fulfillment of requirements of the National Historic Preservation Act and National Environmental Policy Act.

However, neither the mayor nor the City Council has sponsored hearings on the subject.

--- Years of waiting ---

It's been three years since American soldiers cleaned the first few floors of Charity Hospital and, according to physicians familiar with the work, rendered them safe for patients.

It's been more than three years that we have been without the city's most important health care facility.

And, if this plan goes forward, it'll be five years before a replacement facility is ready for us.

In the meantime, New Orleanians should be certain not to get sick.
. . . . . . .

Proposed Hospital Merger Negotiations Need Transparency

For the past couple of weeks LJI Co-Director Jacques Morial has been working with Merger Watch (www.mergerwatch.org) and the ACLU of Louisiana to examine the proposed alliance between LSU and Our Lady of the Lake Regional Medical Center (OLOL) in Baton Rouge. As you may know, LSU recently announced that it is cancelling the long -studied plans to build a replacement facility for Earl K. Long Medical Center in Baton Rouge due to funding constraints. Instead, LSU has decided to pursue an alliance with the Franciscan owned and operated OLOL Hospital, where EKL patients would be treated at OLOL Hospital and where residents and other medical professionals would train.

This proposed alliance concerns us for several reasons, including:
1. Access to healthcare services in the North - Central Metro BR area would be severely curtailed.
2. Access to services and information related to reproductive health would likely be restricted at this private, catholic OLOL Hospital and facility.
3. Graduate Medical Education would likely not include critical training in reproductive health, including birth control and women's health, and sexually transmitted diseases.
4. The proposed alliance could give raise anti-trust concerns because of OLOL's already commanding market share of acute care hospital services in the Metro Baton Rouge Market.

Furthermore, there is a legal conflict: the Taylor and Porter law firm – attorneys for LSU – also represent OLOL. Taylor and Porter recently asked the State Ethics Commission for an advisory opinion on this matter. The Ethics commission was non-committal. What is telling is that the Taylor and Porter firm did not request an opinion from the one legal body responsible for governing ethical transgressions by Louisiana licensed attorneys, the Office of the Chief Disciplinary Counsel. That would be Charles B. Plattsmier. Some call him Voldemort. No doubt, this fool-hearty move by the Firm will hit Mr. Plattsmier’s desk very soon. This issue is just more evidence of LSU's arrogant attitude related to healthcare access.

The fact that Taylor and Porter is representing both parties in this matter is outrageous. Even more disturbing is that we've seen no evidence of how this proposed alliance will improve access to vital healthcare services for the most vulnerable populations in the Baton Rouge area.