El Centro council to face off with community over abortion agreement

By RICHARD MONTENEGRO BROWN and ALEJANDRO DAVILA

Religious leaders, hundreds of community members and an attorney who has fought on behalf of high-profile faith-based issues of constitutional law will look to the El Centro City Council tonight for answers on an agreement clearing the way for an abortion clinic to operate in the city.

At issue is how the execution of a transfer agreement between El Centro Regional Medical Center and Planned Parenthood of the Pacific Southwest to conduct abortion and other procedures at Planned Parenthood’s clinic went from an information-only item at a hospital board meeting in January, to an issue that moved into closed session last week, ended with an agreement already underway and a dead-locked “poll” of hospital trustees.

The transfer agreement between the hospital and Planned Parenthood is mandated by state health and safety codes in the performance of surgical procedures such as abortions. El Centro Regional announced it would sign the agreement last week, after scores of protesters had dispersed under the impression that the agreement was not up for discussion during the meeting.

That transfer agreement has already been signed by El Centro Regional Chief Executive Officer Tomas Virgen and was awaiting a signature from Planned Parenthood officials as of Monday afternoon, hospital spokeswoman Cathy Kennerson said.

The central argument by members of the religious community and the attorney representing it pro bono is whether the transfer agreement was given a full public airing.

“It’s just very curious to look at something that has this level of public interest, this level of citizen participation, and then they go into this kind of bizarre secret session under anticipated litigation that nobody knows about,” said attorney David Gibbs, president of the National Center for Life and Liberty on behalf of the Alliance Defending Freedom. “They want to use that to justify a vote that I believe was inappropriate.”

In January, the transfer agreement appeared on the hospital board agenda as an information item. The board pulled the item for discussion, but then tabled it asking for further information because “the board wanted additional information as it relates to any legal ramification(s),” said El Centro City Councilwoman Sedalia Sanders, who serves as liaison between the hospital board and the city.

Hospital officials say the board doesn’t have to approve transfer agreements because they are a basic administrative function. Yet, the agreement was brought back to closed session under anticipated litigation, spelled out under the tenets of the Brown Act, California’s open-meetings law. The item was vaguely worded in accordance to the law because anticipated litigation hasn’t been officially threatened.

The item “was able to go into a closed-session environment because of a potential litigation; from whom, it did not have to specify,” Sanders said. “It could have been from another agency, it could have been from anybody.”

Gibbs said he believes the hospital board violated the Brown Act by cloaking discussion of the transfer agreement under the guise of anticipated litigation.

It’s unclear what was discussed in closed session. However, according to the unofficial minutes of the meeting, the trustees reached a stalemate over legal advice provided by hospital board attorney Elizabeth Balfour.

Trustees Oliver Alvarado, Dr. Charles Humphrey and Sanders accepted the legal advice. Trustees Amanda Brooke, Jon Edney and Joe Picazo Jr. declined. Board President Alejandro Calderon gave no position. Calderon reportedly resigned from the board the next day.

It’s unclear what the legal advice was, and how it specifically relates to the transfer agreement.

“There was no official ‘vote’ or ‘poll,’ but in the course of the discussions amongst board members and legal counsel, the views of each of the board members became apparent,” according to a statement from El Centro Regional sent late Monday afternoon.

The next move is for the issue to be heard by the City Council tonight, although the transfer agreement and Gibbs’ intention to address the council is not on the agenda.

Gibbs, speaking on behalf of hundreds of community members being rallied to appear at the meeting via the newly formed Imperial Valley Coalition for Life, will look to the council for clarity on the city’s oversight of the hospital board, in seeking a reversal of the transfer agreement and presenting the council with legal options moving forward.

Gibbs sent the council a six-page letter Monday outlining legal questions and ways in which the city can respond, and will reiterate those points before the council.

“The buck stops at the City Council,” he said in an interview Monday. “And the council members will have to understand that the people are going to be there en masse Tuesday night; they are going to be listening, they are going to be watching.”

Photo by Joselito Villero

This story originally ran in the Imperial Valley Press, March 3, 2015.