Despite criticism from some city leaders in recent weeks over HCA Healthcare's previous service cuts, the San Jose City Council won’t stand in the way in which of the health care provider's plans to construct a brand new facility at Good Samaritan Hospital.

Instead, the City Council voted unanimously Tuesday to rezone the hospital's campus in order that the permitting process could move forward to construct recent facilities that comply with state seismic laws. The project received overwhelming support from patients, work groups and healthcare professionals.

“We will not address the lack of behavioral health capacity in our community by delaying a seismic rehabilitation and rebuilding of a hospital that has provided excellent health services to so many in our community,” said San Jose Mayor Matt Mahan.

Due to the age of most of its facilities, HCA must rebuild all but one structure on Good Samaritan's campus to satisfy seismic requirements that take effect January 1, 2030.

Without the seismic setbacks, the state could revoke the Good Samaritan's license to offer acute care beds, which might place greater strain on the health care system. HCA estimates it is going to invest $1.2 billion within the project to permit the present hospital to stay operational during construction.

The recent project could create 1,000 construction jobs along with supporting the hundreds currently working on the hospital.

“We are grateful for the San Jose City Council’s approval of the proposed $1.2 billion investment to meet the state’s seismic safety requirements,” the hospital wrote in a press release to The Mercury News. “This investment is critical to ensuring our 55,045 annual patients continue to have access to essential community health care now and into the future. We greatly appreciate the Council’s decision and the extraordinary support of the San Jose community.”

The city approved an analogous project last month when Kaiser Permanente received approval to start construction of its recent hospital in South San Jose.

HCA initially attempted to rezone its property to extend the allowable floor area for the brand new hospital. The company still needs to acquire its permits before it may possibly begin construction.

But as a substitute of its application being treated as an easy land use issue prematurely of Tuesday's meeting, like Kaiser's project, HCA faced stiff opposition from community groups, planning commissioners and even City Council members due to impression that profits were more essential than patients Compromise care and harm the healthcare system.

In a symbolic vote last month, town's Planning Commission decided to not recommend approval of the Good Samaritan project after a flood of critical comments about HCA's business practices.

Similarly, the Rescue Our Medical Care campaign – a coalition of community advocacy groups – targeted HCA for previously reducing services at various facilities in Santa Clara County.

They remembered the downgrading of East San Jose Regional Medical Center's trauma unit, which ultimately led to the county purchasing the hospital to revive care.

The group also cited the closure of San Jose Medical Center, the closure of the maternity ward at Regional Medical Center and the elimination of acute psychiatric beds at one other facility.

Fearing possible cuts to services at Good Samaritan Hospital, the campaign demanded that HCA establish a patient protection fund and restore acute psychiatric beds.

“I’m not against development,” said Darcie Green, executive director of Latinas Contra Cancer. “I am opposed to HCA, the company, writing a blank check to worsen our quality of life and create health disparities that would not otherwise exist in this city. Our general plan includes equal access to health care. HCA’s closures and divestitures undermine the City’s vision of a connected, healthy community with access to essential services.”

fifth District Councilman Peter Ortiz was sympathetic and sought to delay the method so HCA officials could meet with more community members and hearken to their demands. Ortiz also claimed that town could take HCA's previous actions into consideration during deliberations.

“I just want to note that the council has the right and responsibility to consider the community benefit of a health care organization when making land use decisions,” Ortiz said. “Furthermore, the General Plan requires us to support development that meets the health needs of the residents of this city, not just a portion of the city, but the entire city, and we must ensure that there is no adverse impact.” on your complete health system of the district.”

However, the prosecution disagreed.

“We have a lot of guidelines that are very broad, but ultimately the decision has to be related to the location, the neighborhood, the location and that particular use,” said Assistant District Attorney Johnny Phan.

Although HCA acknowledged it had reduced inpatient psychiatric services, the corporate said it might consider adding them to the ability under the suitable circumstances. Complicating matters, nevertheless, was the dearth of psychiatrists to satisfy the county's behavioral health needs.

“This community currently has a shortage of 61 psychiatrists to meet the need, and so I think we need to work together to figure out how we can close that deficit so we can meet the need,” said Jackie Van Blaricum , President of HCA's Far West Division. “It’s not just about the beds. It’s about having doctors who support these patients.”

HCA has also signaled its support for establishing a community advisory board, like those found at other facilities, to advertise dialogue about operations and make sure the hospital is a great steward.

As a part of the advantages package negotiated by District 9 Councilmember Pam Foley, HCA agreed to pay $3 million to town for emergency shelter and inexpensive housing construction, although the project is exempt from business connection fees.

“The connection between housing and health care is undeniable,” Foley said. “People in stable housing are going to have better outcomes, health outcomes, which is why I look at these funds not just as housing, but as health funds.”