Cooper’s dogweed, which is also referred to as Cooper’s dyssodia, bears the Latin names Adenophyllum cooperi and Dyssodia cooperi). Of the family Asteraceae, Cooper’s dogweed is a low growing, subshrub with short, upright stems and spiky leaves. It will achieve a height of about 18 inches, usually lower. Generally inconspicuous on the landscape, this plant sports leaves with oil glands. When brushed or stepped on, the plant releases a pungent, unpleasant odor.
A relatively common component of vegetation communities in the Eastern and Southern Mojave Desert, the plant ranges to all areas of San Bernardino County’s desert area. It has within the last two weeks been noted on Fort Irwin, as well as along Kelbaker Road and Kelso-Cima Road in the Mojave National Preserve, and on Highway 247 south of Barstow. It is common along roadsides and on well-drained sandy, gravelly, and rocky soils in washes and on upper bajadas and moderate slopes into the lower mountains in creosote bush scrub areas, Joshua Tree woodlands, Lower Sonoran and Upper Sonoran and pinyon-juniper woodland life zones from 1,800 feet to 4,500 feet.
Cooper’s dogwood blooms in the spring and has yellow, orange and gold ray and disk flowers with the ray flowers sitting lower than the disk flowers. Its leaves are alternate, sessile, stiff, roughly an inch long, oblanceolate with coarsely toothed or shallow lobes. The lobes have spines at the edges. At the base of each leaf are two oil glands, with one more at the tip. The stems are erect and numerous.

By Grace Bernal
The days are happy again with the high heat temperatures in San Bernardino County. Nothing but happiness with all the different activities that are finally happening with the changing of the season. The warm weather is here and were breaking into spring. The spirit of the people is looking like a strip tease down here. No jackets, no socks, and a lot of showy flesh. The parks are a wonderful destination for BBQ, bike riding, and playing ball. January, and February are gone and no more sweaters are being worn. Everywhere you look the shorts, sandals, hats, and sleeveless tops are being worn. With sunny days here again the heat is on down here in San Bernardino county. So, get out and finally get the new fresh air. Enjoy the magical color the season has to offer and have fun dressing for it.
‘In difficult times, fashion is always outrageous.’ —Elsa Schiaparelli

You can download the A.M. Edition of the March 20 San Bernardino County Sentinel by clicking on the portal below.

Sentinel 03-20-15

By clicking on the portal below, you can download a PDF of the March 13 edition of the San Bernardino County Sentinel.

Sentinel 03-13-15

(June 12) The worst is feared as two women from geographically disparate areas of the county have gone missing recently under suspicious or troubling circumstances. The personal effects of each turned up in a way that could suggest either one or both could have hastily fled or encountered someone who might have taken them hostage.
Twenty nine-year-old Krystie Stuart left her home in Lucerne Valley for a dentist appointment in Apple Valley on March 2. She never returned home and on March 8 her white Dodge Dakota was found near a burned-out structure in an unincorporated area in northern Apple Valley. Sheriff’s department investigators combed through the vehicle, seeking possible clues relating to her disappearance or whereabouts but had little success finding possible evidence or information about her whereabouts. The San Bernardino County Sheriff’s Department declared her officially missing on March 11 and brought in one of its helicopters to carry out an aerial search of the area surrounding where her car was found.
Twenty two-year-old Sahray Astina Barber, who is a student/employee at the Art Institute in San Bernardino and lived in an apartment complex in the 1500 block of West Northpark Blvd. proximate to Cal State San Bernardino, was last seen sometime shortly after 6 a.m. on March 9 leaving for the institute.
Her disappearance came in the aftermath of several recent attacks/attempted rapes on women on the Cal State San Bernardino campus. Those included a March 4 attack on a woman in the stairwell at the John M. Pfau Library, which ended with the assailant fleeing, and another on March 8 at the library in which a man attempted but failed to abduct a woman. Barber was not a student at Cal State San Bernardino, but many of those who reside in her apartment complex are students. Several of her personal items, including her laptop and cell phone, were found abandoned in bushes at that apartment complex.
Cal State police released a computerized sketch of the suspect in the two Pfau Library attacks, showing a Hispanic man with black curly hair and no facial hair, roughly 19 to 21 years old. He is described as between 5 feet 7 inches and 5 feet 8 inches tall, and weighing 135 to 145 pounds.
In the case of Stuart, it is believed that as a result of her disappearance she does not have access to prescription medications she needs. She is described as a thin white woman, 5 feet 9 inches tall and 107 pounds, with brown hair and brown eyes. She was last seen wearing a camouflage hat, white shirt, black pants and white shoes.
Anyone with information about Stuart or her whereabouts is asked to call detective Bill Doemner at the Victor Valley Sheriff’s Station at 760-956-5001 or 760-552-6800.
In the case of Barber, as of press time an intense search for her has been underway for three days, ranging from the area around Cal State San Bernardino to Live Oak Canyon in Redlands, where a lead brought investigators. Bloodhounds were used to track her from her apartment door to the complex’s front gate, at which point the trail went cold, suggesting she had left in a vehicle. Anybody with information about Barber’s whereabouts is asked to call Detective Dan Han at 909-384-5623 or the detective’s bureau at 909-384-5615.

(March 11) The county seat’s seemingly interminable and intractable financial challenges have claimed yet one more city official, as Scott Williams, San Bernardino’s finance director hired in December, has been placed on administrative leave pending his separation from the city.
Williams’ short tenure is a barometer of how much stress municipal officers face in attempting to right the city’s listing financial ship.
Williams’ predecessor, David Cain, lasted 18 months in the position, having been hired in March 2013 and exiting in September 2014.
While the city in the current 2014-15 fiscal year is functioning under a nominally balanced budget – one that anticipates $123,809,391 in revenue into the general fund and expenditures of $117,354,540 out of the general fund – that budget was strenuously reworked last year by Cain and city manager Alan Parker, entailing drastic cuts to bring the spending plan into the black after a previous draft reflected a $22.8 million deficit. The provisionally balanced budget represented a considerable feat for the city which filed for Chapter 9 bankruptcy protection in August 2012.
The budget, however, was reworked from previous drafts, which at reflected a $22.8 million deficit.
The Herculean task of arriving at a budget for the county seat took its toll on Cain, who upped and quit three months later. A telling feature of his exhaustion was that in June, after having put the unwieldy fiscal figures onto paper, Cain was not up to the task of attending the city council meeting where the budget was passed, where he would have needed to withstand the firestorm of protest over the cutting he had done. Parker did not attend that meeting either.
Both of Parker’s predecessors as city manager, Charles McNeely and interim Andrea Travis-Miller, were undone by San Bernardino’s financial challenges. McNeely left just prior to the city’s bankruptcy filing. Travis-Miller was understandably overwhelmed at taking the helm of a financially foundering city. She has since moved on to become the executive director of the San Gabriel Valley Council of Governments, a regional joint powers planning agency.
Williams was riding herd on a team of auditors and financial consultants seeking to put together a bankruptcy exit plan and its attendant documentation for presentation to U.S. Bankruptcy Court Judge Meredith Jury, who is overseeing the city’s bankruptcy case. Jury has set a May 30 deadline for the presentation of that plan. Parker gave indication that assistant city manager Nita McKay will now take on Williams’ assignment.
Given the manner in which William’s change of active status with the city was announced, there was a suggestion that he was being relieved for some act of misfeasance. City officials would not go beyond stating that he had been placed on administrative leave. None denied that like his predecessor Cain, who had been driven to distraction in attempting to lift the city out of its financial abyss, Williams, who had been the lead financial adviser for the Regional Governmental Services Authority in Napa and the finance director in Sonoma before coming to San Bernardino, was overwhelmed by the crush of putting a bankruptcy exit plan together while seeking to administer a porous budget, which included deferring $10.6 million in payments being demanded by creditors, many of whom have been lined up for two years in seeking payment following the city’s bankruptcy filing.

UPLAND—(March 10) The Upland City Council in a 3-2 split decision on Monday March 9 voted to postpone a citywide initiative on permitting three medical marijuana dispensaries to operate in a confined district at the extreme west end of the city along Foothill Boulevard until the November 2016 election.
Proponents of that initiative had gathered 6,865 signatures of city residents between October 21 and January 14 endorsing a petition for that initiative under the expectation that the vote would take place in a special balloting this year. That special election, which had been given a tentative date of June 16, would cost as much as $180,000 to hold, according to the San Bernardino County Registrar of Voters Office. The city would have been responsible for covering that cost.
But city attorney Richard Adams found a loophole in the initiative’s language that he said could be interpreted as requiring that the vote be held during a regularly scheduled municipal election.
The initiative calls for an automatic “fee” of $75,000 being levied by the city upon the applicants for a dispensary permit, Adams said. But the city’s actual costs in carrying out background checks and permit processing is far less than $75,000, he said. The California Constitution defines any government-imposed fees that are greater than the cost of the service rendered as a tax, Adams said, and municipal taxes must be voted upon during a normally scheduled municipal election and not at a special election. Adams said that while the gathering of more than 15 percent of the city’s voters’ signatures on the petition mandated a special election, there is a conflict between the election code, as passed by the legislature, and the state constitution. The state constitution trumps an act of the legislature, he said.
Adams said the city council had several options, which included simply using its own authority to pass the initiative as a city ordinance without taking it to a vote of the residents; scheduling the election for June 16; scheduling the election for June 16 and placing a competing initiative on the same ballot; or holding off on the vote on the initiative until the next scheduled citywide municipal election next year.
The three members of the city council adamantly opposed to permitting the sale of marijuana medical or otherwise at Cannabis dispensaries in town – Mayor Ray Musser and council members Glenn Bozar and Carol Timm – jumped at the chance Adams’ had provided them and voted to schedule the election for November 8, 2016 election. That vote came after an earlier effort, supported by council members Debbie Stone and Gino Filippi to schedule the initiative vote for June 16.
The timing of the election was considered significant for two reasons. The first is the cost. The county registrar of voters would charge the city as much as $180,000 to handle the election as a stand-alone event this year. The city would reap considerable savings by putting the election on the 2016 ballot, when the mayor’s post, a single city council position and city treasurer spot are up for reelection. Secondly, advocates of the initiative see a special election as the forum in which sale of medical marijuana within the city limits of Upland is most likely to gain acceptance of the voters participating. Informal surveys of Upland voters show that, on balance, the city’s residents are against the initiative. But special elections normally have poor voter turnout and the initiative’s advocates believe that through the aggressive and energetic use of social media and networking among that portion of the city’s electorate most favorably inclined to the accessibility to medical marijuana and marijuana use in general, they can drive enough voters to the polls to prevail in a special election while a significant portion of the city population opposed to the concept of open access fail to participate.
A number of residents weighed in on the matter prior to the vote.
Bob Nelson said, “These dispensaries are going to invite more crime. We don’t need this in Upland. They are a front for drug activity. I hope we don’t go down this road.”
Raymond Herrera said allowing legal sales of marijuana for medical purposes would likely result in untoward activity. “How many people buy this stuff and sell it to high school students?” he asked.
Carmen Limon, who lives proximate to an existing dispensary functioning illegally, enlarged upon Herrera’s theme, saying “The amount of traffic is alarming. I see the cars lined up. I see the exchanges made. There are many children that walk by this place every day. I see this as a disaster waiting to happen. If people want this to continue, I say have them in your neighborhood, not mine.”
Others, such as former city manager Stephen Dunn and initiative proponent Nicole DeLaRosa, recommended that the city put the initiative before the voters in a special election this year.
Dunn cautioned the city council against using the loophole Richards had discovered to force the election to be held in 2016, saying that it would establish a precedent that is contrary to the city’s financial interest. Using the “tax versus fee” rationale to require a vote at a general election would invite comparisons to other fees the city has established, Dunn said, and he suggested “Most of the city’s fees would not hold up under the scrutiny.” He cited $2.1 million in revenue into the city’s development services budget that could be lost. “Be careful what you do,” he said. “The reality is if you don’t send this on to the voters tonight, the proponents might look at [challenging] other fees.”
DeLaRosa said she was there to “protest your referring to the fee as a tax. It is not a tax. It is a fee and is a reasonable fee.”
Others such as Jim Richardson and David Wade charted a middle ground.
Richardson said he believed a majority of the people in town were recoiling from the concept of allowing marijuana clinics to function in the city and were opposed to the initiative but that the city council had an “obligation to look out for the minority.” He said the city should “get out in front of’ the issue and draw up a “decent set of ordinances.” He said the initiative as proposed did not have protections for the neighborhoods, customers and business owners. He called for the city to put together a better ordinance. “I don’t see why we have to accept it,” he said of the initiative.
Wade was critical of the initiative, which he said conferred a virtual monopoly on initiative proponent Randy Welty, who is a major landowner in the zone where the initiative allows dispensaries to be set up, but he chided the city for its lack of imagination in simply offering an alternative initiative that reasserted the city’s existing ban on cannabis shops.
Of note was the level of tension, vitriol and enmity evinced by two of the key initiative backers toward the city council even before the vote took place on Monday night. Previously, Randy Welty, a board member of the California Cannabis Coalition which is co-sponsoring the initiative, and Craig Beresh, the president of the California Cannabis Coalition, had been somewhat deferential toward the council. But in addressing the council on March 9, Beresh talked openly of initiating a recall campaign against the city council if it did not comply with the call to put the initiative on a special ballot this year. Welty, who owns and operates the Tropical Lei strip club and controls other property within the area along the north side of Foothill Boulevard between Airport Drive and Monte Vista Avenue where the initiative specifies the three medical marijuana dispensaries are to be located, wore a shirt emblazoned with the epigram: “You say tomato. I say f— you.” as he addressed the council.
Adams in making his presentation emphasized that the council’s vote that evening should not be framed as a judgment of the merits of the initiative but should reflect only the council’s decision on the advisability of the timing of the initiative election based upon the legal requirements and considerations. Nevertheless, in their remarks, both Musser and Bozar engaged in a critical review of the initiative itself, although Bozar did dwell on the legal issues pertaining to the city’s potential liability in scheduling the election both immediately and next year.
“There is nothing in here that is going to benefit the city of Upland,” Bozar said. “It is all to the benefit of the proponent. There is no sense rushing to spend $180,000 to do that.”
In making his remarks, Bozar caused Adams to cringe, as did Musser when, in explaining why he was voting to hold off on the initiative election until 2016, he said, “Our community is not ready for this.”
Councilman Gino Filippi during the discussion relating to the initiative expressed dismay at the manner in which Adams had laid out the city council’s options and alternatives. He suggested that Adams and staff had evinced bias toward the initiative and those who had endorsed the petitions calling for a vote upon it by providing the council with a limited set of alternatives, when the council’s direction, given at a council meeting last month, was to explore all options.
Filippi told the Sentinel, “The city attorney’s prior comments and the staff report clearly indicated a level of prejudice. There was a great effort by the city attorney and city staff in coming up with a competing ordinance to uphold the existing ban of medical marijuana dispensaries to the point that a sample ordinance upholding the ban was provided to the city council. However, there was no effort on a compromise ordinance such as was done in Yucca Valley. In addition, contrary to the staff report, there was never any discussion and/or direction from city council in closed session or public meeting to justify the direction the city attorney and staff undertook. In my view, this was a violation of law. I do think Musser and Bozar have intended on denying the petitioners their due process for a special election since the signatures were verified.”
When asked if the initiative’s proponents would undertake a legal challenge of the council’s vote and seek an injunction to force the city to hold the special election for the initiative this year, Welty told the Sentinel, “Our lawyer is looking into that right now.”

VICTORVILLE— (March 11) The Excelsior Charter School Board and its interim top administrator have declined to clarify what form of a severance package was conferred upon former superintendent Bill Flynn and former assistant superintendent of student services Minda Stackelhouse when they made their departure from Excelsior last month.
The board was equally vague about what prompted it to put Flynn and Stackelhouse on administrative leave in early February, although unofficial statements emanating from faculty members indicated Stackelhouse had been overbearing and unduly insulting in dealing with employees and Flynn had indulged her in her management style. In the immediate aftermath of the board’s action, Flynn and Stackelhouse retained the services of attorney Diana Carloni-Nourse, who protested the administrative leave as a violation of Flynn’s $165,000 per year contract running through December 31, 2018 and Stackelhouse’s $127,727 per year contract running through June 30, 2017. At a February 10 board meeting Carloni Nourse indicated the pair would seek reinstatement or whatever was due them under the terms of their contracts.
On February 19, Flynn and Stackelhouse resigned, but no indication was given as to whether they were to be paid the money due them under their contracts, whether the contracts had been bought out at a percentage of their full worth or whether they were paid only through February 19.
Excelsior Charter Schools is a public entity, chartered under the authority of the Victor Valley Union High School District, serving students in grades seven to twelve. It consists of five schools, two in Victorville and one each in Phelan and Barstow as well as in Norco in Riverside County.
Excelsior Acting Superintendent Peter Wright did not return any of four phone calls, including one left with his secretary in which the Sentinel’s inquiry into the terms under which Flynn and Stackelhouse departed was explicitly stated. Neither did Victor Valley Union High School District Superintendent Ron Williams respond to questions about what monitoring the High School District is doing of money spent by the charter school organization it is sponsoring.

(March 12) The San Bernardino Public Employees Association began sending out mail ballots to its members on Thursday to ascertain if a majority of them are in favor of affiliating with the International Brotherhood of Teamsters.
The push to form an alliance with the Teamsters is led primarily by the association’s board, which has drafted a 9-page affiliation agreement. The board and association president Deidre Rodriguez have been reeling and trying to regroup ever since a secession effort last spring by dissident association members. The dissidents expressed dissatisfaction with the San Bernardino Public Employees Association’s efforts in representing them in contract talks with the county. Beginning in 2011, county chief executive officer Greg Devereaux began seeking across-the-board contract concessions from all of the county’s employee bargaining units to offset skyrocketing governmental operating costs and end what he termed an “institutional structural deficit” plaguing the county. Several of the county employee unions came to some form of terms or compromise with Devereaux, though not all were ready to accept the economies he proposed. Devereaux scored a major coup when he convinced the county firefighters’ union to pick up the percentage of employee contributions the county had been paying into the workers’ retirement accounts and accept reduced annual promotional increases. In September 2012 the Safety Employees Benefit Association, a separate union representing the county’s sheriff’s deputies, made contract concessions. In April 2013, Devereuax imposed contract concessions on deputy prosecutors and public defenders, who have their own union as well.
In July 2013, San Bernardino Public Employee Association (SBPEA) General Manager Bob Blough was abruptly terminated and rumors began to circulate to the effect that he was under investigation by the district attorney’s office.
In May 2014, two classes of county workers, nursing division supervisors and managers, accepted the county’s terms. The same month, SBPEA rejected the latest contract offered to the various classifications of county workers by the county. Of the 5,524 county employees who voted on the proposal, known as a tentative agreement, 3,523 voted no. The other 2,001 members of the San Bernardino Public Employees Association who are employed by the county who participated in the vote cast ballots of acceptance. Some 7,000 county employees represented by the union did not participate in the vote.
Last year the contingent of SBPEA members dissatisfied with the association’s leadership urged their fellow union members to reject the contract Devereaux was proposing, while seeking a special election to decertify the San Bernardino Public Employees Association as the county general line employees’ representative. They instead sought to install Service Employees International Union Local 721 as their bargaining unit. Their effort did not succeed, and SBPEA’s leadership retaliated against the dissidents by expelling those members advocating the change and obtaining a restraining order against the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) in June 2014, effectively ending SEIU’s ability to lobby SBPEA members.
On February 11, the SBPEA board informed the association’s membership an affiliation with the Teamsters was under consideration, asserting such an affiliation with the Teamsters would increase SBPEA’s leverage at the bargaining table. There is a contingent within the association adamantly opposed to affiliating with the Teamsters. Some dissatisfaction with the current SBPEA board exists and the move to associate with the Teamsters would virtually lock in the current set of union bosses, some members believe.
The association’s internal financial picture is somewhat shaky, and the current board and president now say that some $700,000 that went missing or is unaccounted for was embezzled by former general manager Blough, whom the association is now suing. Blough has denied the association’s allegations in a response filed with the court.
What is unclear at this point is whether the affiliation with the Teamsters would result in an increase in union dues. As it currently stands, SBPEA is entitled to dues equal to no more than 1.3 percent of a member’s salary. Language in the affiliation agreement is ambiguous and contradictory on whether that dues figure would remain at 1.3 percent, which is suggested in one section of the document, or would increase to 2.3 percent, as is required of all Teamster’s members according to the Teamster charter, and which is suggested in another passage in the proposed affiliation agreement.
The San Bernardino Public Employees Association, which came into existence in 1938 as the representative of San Bernardino County and San Bernardino City employees, today handles collective bargaining for over 11,000 employees working for San Bernardino County and 3,000 others working for 16 of the county’s cities – Barstow, Big Bear, Chino, Chino Hills, Colton, Fontana, Hesperia, Loma Linda, Montclair, Needles, Ontario, Rancho Cucamonga, Redlands, Rialto, San Bernardino, and Upland, as well as three cities in east Los Angeles County, Claremont, Pomona and West Covina, and Banning in Riverside County.
For three quarters of a century, the San Bernardino Public Employees Association had remained in a relatively secure position as the representative of the lion’s share of county workers, but beginning four years ago internal and external events and pressure have threatened to shatter the association. Despite the injunction the association obtained against SEIU and SEIU agitators last year, a vote of SBPEA’s professional unit vote was forced last month, in which those members were polled on whether they wanted to keep SBPEA as their representative or bring in SEIU. The results of that vote are not publicly known at this time and a count by the State Mediation and Conciliation Service is to begin on March 16.
The association’s leadership has expressed confidence a majority of the membership will reject SEIU, but have indicated SBPEA becoming an independent local of the Teamsters is desirable. “Local politicians have targeted our wages, benefits and pensions. We need to fight back to save our way of life,” SBPEA posted on its website last month. “If we do not evolve and progress, we may lose it all. Affiliation will give us the support and the backing of an organization that has 1.4 million union members nationally and 140,000 locally.”

NEEDLES—(March 9) The Needles City Council has extended until August 31 Community Healthcare Partners, Inc.’s deadline for closing the final element of the sale of Colorado River Medical Center.
The city took on ownership of the Colorado River Medical Center in April 2008 after Brentwood, Tennessee-based Lifepoint Hospitals, a for-profit corporation, embarked on an effort to move the institution’s equipment and personnel to another hospital it owned in Arizona, roughly 12 miles from Needles.
Because of long-running inadequate billing practices, including failures to invoice Medicare and Medi-Cal as well as insurance companies and patients in a timely fashion, the hospital under the city’s guidance had lost money. To redress the financial liability to the city, the city council created a board of trustees to oversee the hospital, and that panel, together with the city council, came to a consensus that spinning the facility off to an independent operator was the best solution for ensuring that the community has adequate medical care without soaking the taxpayers.
In June 2010, Needles voters passed Measure Q, which called for keeping the hospital open and absolving the city of the financial burden of subsidizing the facility by having a non-profit entity selected to run the hospital.
In 2011, a nonprofit group, Needles Hospital, Inc., led by former Needles councilwoman Rebecca Valentine formed. Needles Hospital, Inc. offered to purchase the Colorado River Medical Center and the 5.71 acres it sits upon for $3,587,002. For that amount, Needles Hospital Inc. was to take possession of most assets and liabilities of the hospital, including accounts receivable, operating inventory in place, outstanding bills and unemployment obligations. Unassumed debts were to be deducted from the purchase price, but the city was to keep any cash in the hospital’s coffers at the time of sale.
Needles Hospital, Inc. lost its opportunity after it failed to meet an April 26, 2012 deadline to prove it had the funding to make the purchase. AM Pharmacy, headed by Bing Lum, had put together a competing proposal to purchase the hospital and run it as a for-profit entity. The city council turned down that proposal in January 2012 in favor of Needles Hospital, Inc.’s offer. After the Needles Hospital, Inc. bid fell through, however, the city council agreed to accept a revamped $2.577 million purchase proposal by Lum which entailed AM Pharmacy creating a non-profit wing, National Healthcare Partners, Incorporated, to run the hospital.
Under that agreement, Community Healthcare Partners, Incorporated was to pay $2.2 million at a so-called first closing to cover the value of the hospital itself and $377,000 at a second closing to cover the cost of a portion of the real property.
The initial $2.2 million payment was made in June 2012 and there was progress toward making the second payment to the city, which owns the totality of the property the hospital is situated on. Nevertheless, the Bureau of Land Management held reversionary rights to a portion of the hospital grounds, including that portion upon which the emergency room is located. This created the need for the two-step closing process, as it was anticipated there would be a slight delay in the clearance for the total sale being completed.
The two-part closing was undertaken because the city was running up considerable expense as a consequence of its ownership and continuing management responsibility at the medical center and there was a priority on stanching the hemorrhaging of red ink as soon as was practical.
Currently, the hospital is under a lease while Community Healthcare Partners. Inc. addresses some outstanding items that are required by the Bureau of Land Management for the purchase.
According to city attorney John Pinkney, the original agreement between the city and Community Healthcare Partners, Inc. was to be fully closed by February 28, 2015. If the second closing couldn’t be completed by February 28, 2015, a long term lease of 28 years with Community Health Care Partner, Inc. at a rate of $1 rent per year was to be effectuated.
At the city council’s February 24 meeting, an extension of that deadline until August 31 was agreed to.
Bing Lum, the first principal of Community Healthcare Partners, Inc. and the executive vice-president of the Colorado River Medical Center, said Community Healthcare Partners, Inc. has proven a good steward of the hospital and that the company had fulfilled all of the elements of the arrangement to take over the hospital. He said Community Health Care Partners will be better able to guarantee that it can meet the long term needs of the community once it is in full possession of the medical center.
The local office of the Bureau of Land Management has accepted an appraisal of the property and is amenable to National Healthcare Partners, Incorporated’s purchase. The local office’s recommendation has been passed along to the state Bureau of Land Management office, which must confirm the local recommendation before forwarding its recommendation to the national office, which must ultimately okay the sale. Already more than 22 months have passed as the local office has carried out its due diligence with regard to the matter. It was originally anticipated that the Bureau of Land Management would grant its approval of the pro forma for National Healthcare Partners’ takeover of the hospital by March 26, 2013 and in no case later than June 30, 2013. Because of the delay and the approaching deadline, city council agreed to an amendment of the sales agreement with National Healthcare Partners.