Sutter Hospital Continues to Say NO to a CBA - Community Leaders Push Back

 Impolitic Corporate Hubris:

Pushed to Commit to Negotiate With the Community, Sutter Demurs

Community Leaders are Unimpressed

News Analysis

Executives at Sutter Health Corporation redoubled their insistence recently, that they would not partake in any Community Benefits Agreement proposed by the Emeryville community associated with their proposed $1 billion hospital campus at 53rd and Hollis streets.  The surprising Sutter recalcitrance has prompted government officials, community leaders and city council candidates to publicly weigh in on the corporation's lack of faith in the same community it wants to locate within.  

Sutter is aware their participation is voluntary and there is no law constraining them with regard to such a Community Benefits Agreement (CBA) made with the community.  They are however constrained by law with regard to negotiating and entering into an agreement with the City of Emeryville if they wish to locate their hospital campus here.  Such an agreement is called a Development Agreement (DA).

Sutter's Media Relations Manger
Monique Binkley Smith
She took issue with the Tattler's story on
Sutter's refusal to participate in a CBA.
But she refuses to commit to Sutter 
participating in a CBA.  Gaslighting?

Sutter’s latest dustup with the community and their CBA proposal came in response to a Tattler inquiry made after our September 8th story, where we broke the news of Sutter’s intension to waive off a CBA.  That story hit the streets with quite a fury causing Monique Binkley Smith, Sutter’s Media Relations Manager, to write a September 9th email to the Tattler expressing disfavor over what she saw as inaccuracies in the story.  Ms Smith asserted, “Statements [in the Tattler story], including the headline that 'Sutter Hospital Says NO Community Benefits Agreement', as well as assertions that Sutter 'will not participate' in a CBA or 'will not negotiate directly with the community', do not accurately reflect what we communicated”.  

The Tattler responded to Ms Smith and the management at Sutter, the email trail informs that they had in fact asserted they would not participate in a CBA for their Emeryville project but if Sutter wants to change their refusal (as hinted to by the denials in the September 9th email from Ms Smith), the Tattler would gladly commit to a story on Sutter’s new found community spirit and commitment to participating in a CBA.  We said in the email response we would give them ample time to mull it over.  That was September 9th.   We conclude now that Sutter continues to refuse to participate in a CBA associated with their Emeryville project and their refusal to clearly say they are willing to participate is what drives our conclusion.

Simply put, Sutter can inform the community at any time they want that they are willing to participate in a CBA and the community will oblige and the Tattler will report.  Gaslighting the press or the community directly will not help in Sutter’s quest to make the friends they will need in Emeryville as they attempt to move the project forward.  This obstinacy will make the city council’s job more difficult when they consider whether to grant approvals for the project and it is not a stretch to imagine this kind of impolitic corporate behavior by this want-to-be corporate neighbor, will harm Sutter’s prospects.

A CBA is a legally binding agreement between the community and a developer.  Municipalities are not part of a CBA.  Negotiations during the CBA process brings community benefits provided by the developer and signed off promises from the community to not further block a developer's project proposal.

The Community Speaks

The whole imbroglio has brought the community into conversation:  

North Oakland's Cathy Leonard
She has much experience with CBAs
in her community activism and she
indicates it is critical Sutter act in good 
faith to mollify community impacts.

North Oakland resident and Golden Gate Community Association (GGCA)  Board Chair, Cathy Leonard, stated, “The (GGCA) supports a formal Community Benefits Agreement negotiated with Sutter Health by a unified local coalition of residents and other stakeholders from project-impacted neighborhoods across all three cities, i.e. Oakland, Emeryville, and Berkeley.  As part of this coalition, GGCA would work to ensure that affected neighborhoods and taxpayers do not bear the hazards and cost burdens associated with Sutter Health's increased traffic, noise, pollution, and other probable impacts clearly identified through the EIR scoping process by more than 60 residents, public agencies, the City of Oakland, Emeryville City Council members and Emeryville Planning Commissioners.” 

United States Congresswoman Lateefah Simon said she expects “robust community engagement” with Sutter in Emeryville.  She added, “Sutter needs to listen to the people in the community”, while California  Assembly Member Mia Bonta told the Tattler simply, “CBAs are good things in the community”.

Emeryville City council candidates were eager to weigh in: 

Brandon Soublet said, “I’m glad to see local elected and appointed officials uniting around a resident-first approach. We all agree this development has to work for Emeryville—and with a non-profit partner like Sutter, that means securing binding agreements for real community benefits.  This project has to make sense for Emeryville residents, and because Sutter is a non-profit, that means legally binding agreements to bring tangible benefits to our community.”

Corry Frydlewicz told us, “I think developing a CBA can be a great idea. The ideas shared that get the community on the same page can be helpful for organizing and educating our representatives. Sutter has been asking for our feedback, so hopefully they'd welcome it too. There's really no downside for openly collaborating on a plan, even if it doesn't get accepted.”

Current City Councilman and candidate for re-election Kalimah Priforce had the shortest answer of any of them.  When we told him Sutter so far is refusing to commit to a Community Benefits Agreement, the Councilman simply said, “We’ll see about that”.

David Mourra, also current Councilman and candidate for re-election was asked directly about the Sutter refusal but he also refused….to comment.

Rounding out the City Hall response, the following were contacted but refused to comment on the failure of a Sutter CBA:

-Mayor Sukhdeep Kaur

-Vice Mayor Mathew Solomon

-City Councilwoman Courtney Welch

-City Manager LaTanya Bellow

-Emery Schools Superintendent Quiauna Scott

The initial September 8th Tattler story on the Sutter CBA refusal is HERE.

Congresswoman Lateefah Simon
California’s 12th Congressional District
U.S. House of Representatives
"Sutter needs to listen to the
people in the community".
"Nothing for us without us".