dr. browner made a good point, we really don't know what the future may bring and we really have to look at this and see what is appropriate? are we comparing apples to apples? are we comparing hospitals that are not really comparable to cal pacific for charitable care. what about kaiser was not on the list that was -- i understand they had a fairly low charitable care, i'm sorry to say that, but that's what it looked like earlier and the same was true of a couple other hospitals that weren't on there. i think we have to look at gross numbers rather than percentages. i mean, how many -- in dollars, how much do all these hospitals contribute to charitable care? and as was mentioned earlier, the medical is the tougher thing because if your attending doctors do not accept medical patients which is harder to do, then it's harder for them to get that percentage of medical patients up. i'm perfectly willing to ask that they provide as much charitable care as possible, but i think they should have as much discretion as possible in how this is -- is rendered and what form it takes. and let's see

dr. browner spoke about, if you add in the medical care, whatever the percentage, it's at least another $100 million. the $200 million they do in charitable care a year is comparable to that which stanford does. when you say stanford is in a different place, there's a lot of challenges in that part of the peninsula as well, east palo alto, menlo park, there are many people with needs for charitable care there as well. we have to look at that. as far as the housing piece, i don't believe that you should hold an institution to the same rules of the van ness plan you do commercial development. i think we can exempt it by c.u., and as was part of the mayor's plan, we will exempt it by c.u. the question is, what should be the price that they have to pay? and i think that, you know, the $73 million is an's -- is an unrealistically high figure. whatever ends up being negotiated is important but the important thing of what's negotiated, it should be applied as the nexus of the impact that the hospital has on the area. and we should -- this is a great opportunity to provide middle income housing that

dr. ed kursh, our chief of staff. he's, unfortunately, out of town, to warren browner, c.e.o. it says, "we support st. luke's executive committee for the enterprise development plan e.d.p. the st. cluke's executive committee in its meeting of may 26, 2011, reiterated its support of the conclusions of the blue ribbon panel by a unanimous vote in support of california pacific medical center's enterprise development plan as proposed to the city of san francisco. this includes the rebuild of st. luke's and the construction of the new cathedral hill hospital on van ness avenue. the medical staff was intimately involved in the planning of the clinical services to be offered and is satisfied that the community needs will be met by implementing the e.d.p. the medical executive committee is the voice of the st. luke's hospital medical staff and has been vocal throughout this process. this communication is to reconfirm our support as the e.d.p. moves forward." with a copy to mayor ed lee. i just wanted to say we desperately need a new building and new facilities at st. luke's. the building is aging. the boiler