Sequoia Healthcare District to receive Golden Apple Award

Taxpayers and Voters please take the time to read the 2000-01 Grand Jury Report.

Please note that the Court website has it titled 2001-02 but it is really 2000-01, for some reason the court website and the San Mateo County website had some work done on the sites a week before the last election and this one Grand Jury report was not available to the public.

This is the one Grand Jury Report that none of the Directors want to talk about except Jack Hickey.

Web Link

From 2000-01 Grand Jury Report.

Recommendations:
Recommendation 2.20
The Sequoia Healthcare District should reduce property taxes for district taxpayers unless in a future election district voters approve expenditures for purposes not approved by district voters in the 1946 measure establishing the district or in 1996 Measure H. This reduction would equal the amount expended by the district for purposes not approved by the voters in the 1946 measure or in 1996 Measure H and effectively limit district expenditures to those purposes approved by district voters. By this reduction in property tax receipts to be requested under the Revenue and Taxation Code 96.8, property taxes would be lowered for all district taxpayers.

Last sentence of Response:
The Board does not believe that it would be in the best interests of the District to implement the Grand Jury's recommendations at this time and so declines to do so.

How come they didn't give them an award for the $100K the gave to the Police Chiefs and Sheriff Association.

BTW..ummm, isn't former Sheriff Horsley a member? I wonder if that's a conflict of interest in anyone's mind.

Conflicts of interest are no longer interesting in San Mateo County, they have become only common, except as a measure of power, to see how many you can have and get away with to impress you neighbors.

Redwood City San Mateo County Chamber of Commerce members list.

Taxpayers if you agree with Jack Hickey and the 38 citizens who worked on the 2 Grand Juries
of 2000-01 and 2001-02.

If this organization does not rescind this award, You have a choice to vote with you wallet.

Members list
Web Link

Hickey, Stogner and Hickey's other "shills" keep talking about the 2001-2 Grand Jury. Why don't they reference the more recent 2004-5 and 2007-8 Grand Juries which support the excellent work of the Sequoia Healthcare District?
If left up to Hickey et al thousands of unfortunate people would suffer.

Art, it is you who fail to address the 2000-01 Grand Jury Report.

The County could give this money away instead of the 5 of you.

You have never responded to my request of what do you say about the 2000-01 GJ Report.

Of course it would be great to give away $7,400,000 per year. That would really feel good.

The Sequoia Hospital District was created by voters in 1946. See:The Local Hospital District Law circa 1945 Web Link to see itemized powers authorized by voters. Absent from those powers was the power to subsidize local school districts, or to engage in charitible giving.
Many years later, the Legislature enacted the Healthcare District Law, using the original Hospital District Law as boilerplate. The NEW District TYPE created by the Legislature had notably expanded powers. See Web Link

Sequoia Hospital District ostensibly changed it's NAME to Sequoia Healthcare District after the 1998 election. In fact, the name remained the same (Sequoia) but the District TYPE changed! So, with a stroke of the pen, these clever devils avoided the process for Healthcare District formation which includes voter approval.

The 2000-2001 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury observed the evolution of the new District functions, and recommended that they reduce property taxes to a level which would support the original purpose of the District, and cease the philanthropic activity.

Begging your pardon, Arthur, but the 2008/9 Grand Jury report clearly reiterated the directive to Sequoia Health District to reduce the tax intake. Recommendation #3 says: "Declining some or all of its share of the general tax rate should be an action considered by the SHD board in years with a healthy operating surplus

Web Link

the only reason cited by the district board is that it was giving and spending so much that it lacked a healthy operating surplus. Page 6 of the link above which says:
Response: The District for several years has not maintained an operating surplus. Instead, the District has returned more dollars to the community in grants and other financial support than the amount being received in property taxes. This is possible due to low operating expenses and returns on invested funds. This practice is expected to continue for the foreseeable future, so long as funds remain available. If the District were to decline property taxes, support for existing programs would have to be reduced or eliminated

For the record, I am not a "shill" for anyone, but just observing the facts.

Observer:

Thoughtful and factually based comments are ALWAYS the most useful for everyone.

Thank you.

I've noticed for years that those who use rude and derisive comments and characterizations of others and their positions invariably are attempting to foment support due to an insecurity intuited from being a proponent of a rationally weaker argument.

All people deserve to be treated with kindness and respect and those who use such cheap bullying and intimidating tactics should be disciplined with a response by others that reflects a diminishment of their credibility simply on the basis of these offensive and inappropriate techniques.

Rudeness and intimdation by attempts to embarass someone should not be tolerated in public figures.

Vote

Due to repeated violations of our Terms of Use, comments from this poster are automatically removed. Why?

Due to repeated violations of our Terms of Use, comments from this poster are automatically removed. Why?