Ridley-Thomas on re-opening MLK hospital

Posted March 11, 2009

L.A. County Supervisor Mark Ridley-Thomas visited The Times' editorial board on Tuesday, March 10; below are his remarks on the Martin Luther King Jr. hospital.

Mark Ridley-Thomas: The good news is that we've successfully completed 100 days at this new venue and the theme that we utilize to express the first 100 days is essentially making a difference and empowering communities and delivering results.

This notion of empowerment is one that has defined my career in public life to date in a variety of ways -- it probably can be best seen through some of the work that we're doing on the Board of Supervisors. It was the first message that you sent to me on December 2, 2008 in your editorial where you chose to advise me as to how I might conduct business as a new member of the Board of Supervisors....

The additional point of consequence that you sought to get my attention on in the Dec. 2 editorial was on the [Martin Luther King Jr.] medical center. And it was at the same time, the very same day, day two of my having been in office that we convened a press conference for the purpose of jump starting the re-opening of the hospital. One of the understated issues was focusing on the matter of a seismic work that was needed there, and frankly there had been relatively little discussion about the physical aspects of what it means to run a hospital. Patient care doesn't happen on a gurney on the corner of Wilmington and 120th Street; you need to be in a hospital that is safe, secure, 21st century already. And if you don't do that properly you run the risk of both wasting a lot of money, a lot of time and not being able to reopen a facility in a way that is consistent with prudent management.

On last Tuesday, a week ago, I called on the chief executive officer to report on the results of the work that's been done to deal with the seismic issues as well as the real estate-related matters of this 38-acre parcel that has been underdeveloped since the very beginning of the hospital hasn't been dealt with and to talk about this in terms of a number of important possibilities.

The good news in connection with that is that we are just nearing a discussion with Urban Land Institute, which is no doubt the highest and most well-known, well-touted group of planners, economic development experts to help the county of Los Angeles think through how that parcel then becomes catalytic for the benefit of the Watts-Willowbrook community and is then seen as a significant feature of the healthcare solutions and of the southeastern region of the county of Los Angeles.

It is a very significant engagement that will take place and we're pleased to be able to apprise you of it.

The additional pieces of the MLK equation that we've been working on -- and I'm expecting to have a report out on next Tuesday the 17th, which gives some, more complete updates as to the status of the conversations, the discussions with the University of California as they relate to the Martin Luther King Medical Center. They day after, it is anticipated that the regents of the University of California will have the benefit of a presentation.

And so this effort has required a considerable amount of attention, and I'm pleased that it is making a rather important step forward. It will be recalled that it was an important discussion on the context of the campaign, maybe thought to be the defining issue -- it was one of many -- but there's no two ways about the fact that it has been my single most important priority, and not from a narrow point of view … but a broad point of view. What do I mean by that? When you talk about the Martin Luther King Medical Center, it needs to be seen against the backdrop of an ailing safety net in the county of Los Angeles. So no matter where you live, to the extent that this hospital is not doing what it can do, to the extent that there is no trauma center there in the case of a major catastrophe -- call it an earthquake, call it a terrorist attack, call it civil unrest, call it what you will -- the fact of the matter is, in a county of this size and sort, you need everything working, and you cannot afford to have a facility of that size and sort down.

Jim Newton, Los Angeles Times: Can I pause you on that for a moment?

Ridley-Thomas: Sure.

Newton: Because I think the other network that the hospital is part of is the county government network, and there's been some reluctance, as you well know better than anyone probably, for an outside entity to come in and take over the hospital for fear that it would have to work with county. And the county is so tainted by its mismanagement of that institution that the further the county would be away from it, the more likely there would be a suitor for it. First of all, I guess I'd ask if you agree with that, and second, if that's the case, how does the county extricate itself sufficiently from the hospital to bring someone else in?

Ridley-Thomas: You may recall that while campaigning, and frankly this is an interesting conversation because the campaign is typically not a point of reference in terms of my discussion, but it is in this context because it seems to me to be appropriate. I think the business now is that of governing, not campaigning. But if you recall the campaign … I talked about a public-private partnership because I thought that was the most intelligent, strategic and/or promising way to restore quality healthcare in the context of the Martin Luther King medical center.

I do believe that that is what you will ultimately see in terms of how the hospital is run and/or operated. And the specifics of that, we will know more about over the next several days.

Newton: Would you envision the county being the public half of the public-private partnership, or would UC, for instance, possibly be that partner?

Ridley-Thomas: It is probably the case that you'll have more than one element of the public sector, two of which you just referenced, and there will be several components of private-sector participation. There is a new model on the horizon with respect to MLK, and should it be done correctly as I expect it will be, it will have far-reaching implications for other to replicate in various parts of the country.

It is not designed to be a template for what happens in other public hospitals in the county of Los Angeles, necessarily. But it will be noteworthy enough to cause other entities to figure out how to make good on their healthcare delivery systems. It is going to be very promising....

Robert Greene, L.A. Times: On that same point, supervisor, the role of the civil service system, do you see that being altered with respect to the running of the medical center? And if so, do you see that portion of it as a template for other parts of country operations?

Ridley-Thomas: I do not think what will happen at MLK is prescriptive. We want a solution that is embraced broadly. A discussion that begins on the note of the dismantling of the civil service system is a discussion in my view that is DOA. So that's not what this is in terms of saying every other hospital needs to do this. The origin, the evolution of those other facilities differ from this, and it seems to me that what is being contemplated and/or proposed for the MLK medical center is unique to that particular complex. And I think the interest in it, frankly, is a function of its uniqueness.

Newton: Would you imagine that the employees of the hospital ... would be county employees?

Ridley-Thomas: As it is currently proposed, that's one of the discussion points, and the campus itself will consist of a variety of uses: a [multi-service ambulatory care center] as well as the Augustus Hawkins comprehensive health center. Ultimately, I suspect there will be a new trauma center there, and these things will happen iteratively. The hospital itself will perhaps have a different set of employees than would be at the MACC and Augustus Hawkins. And those are some of the issues that are currently being worked out.

Newton: How long is this going to take?

Ridley-Thomas: 2011, 2012 on the outside. There's a building that needs to be done there, and so the top three floors of the tower are essentially shells. And there's a lot that needs to be done in terms of state approval, et cetera, so what will happen in 2009 is the preliminary work that goes to just getting things properly organized and positioned, and I think 2010 is conceivable to me that shovels could be moving.