A coalition of community and health advocacy groups are urging San Jose city leaders to secure health services commitments from HCA Healthcare as it seeks to rezone Good Samaritan Hospital’s campus in a rush to build new facilities to comply with state seismic laws by 2030.

The Rescue Our Medical Care campaign had sought to engage the hospital in negotiations to restore acute psychiatric beds and create a patient protection fund, citing HCA’s business practices and divestment of health services.

But after meeting with the healthcare provider Wednesday, the group has expressed doubt that the hospital will meet its demands as the City Council is set to hear the matter on Tuesday.

“One of the things that became clear is that HCA offers no guarantee around what kind of services they will continue to offer at (Good Samaritan) moving forward,” said Joao Paolo Connolly, an organizing director at Working Partnerships USA. “There’s no guarantee and this all depends on market conditions and what’s in the best interest of this national corporation.”

HCA intends to invest $1.2 billion in the new facilities on Samaritan Drive, with the deadline for meeting seismic requirements looming. A California law in effect for the past few decades set a Jan.1, 2030 deadline for older hospitals offering acute beds, leaving the options of retrofitting the current facilities, building a new hospital, or facing the possibility that the state could revoke its facility license.

Rezoning would allow HCA to increase the floor space for its buildings. HCA would still need to gain approval for building permits. While Good Samaritan executives disclosed that the facility is already behind schedule because it will take nearly six years for the new facilities operational, they have warned that further delays could place further strain on the community.

“Good Samaritan Hospital has been a faithful steward of San Jose’s planning process, communicating extensively the benefits and impact of our $1.2 billion proposal and state-mandated seismic retrofit,” the hospital wrote in a statement to The Mercury News. “We incorporated extensive community feedback into the plan submitted to the City Council. We are hopeful the City Council approves our proposal and ensures a vital community hospital meets the 2030 retrofit deadline without risking the hospital’s ability to remain operational.”

Facing a similar dilemma over the age of its facilities, Kaiser Permanente recently received approval from the city to build a new hospital in South San Jose. Like Kaiser, HCA intends to keep the current hospital running while it constructs the new facilities.

However, unlike Kaiser’s project, HCA has faced significant pushback from the city’s planning commission and advocacy groups due to its previous divestments in the community moves considered detrimental by these groups who assert precedent exists for considering an applicant’s track record when voting on zoning decisions.

“Kaiser is a very different player in our community and in our health system than HCA is,” Connolly said. “That is evident by the fact that there were no negative community feelings towards what Kaiser was trying to do. There are very strong negative community feelings about HCA. In District 9 and throughout the city, they are a very harmful player in our community.”

Among the instances cited were the shuttering of San José Medical Center, the removal of the neonatal intensive care unit and acute care psychiatric services at Good Samaritan, the shutting down of the maternity ward and the downgrading of the trauma center at Regional Medical Center.

State law does not mandate hospitals to provide acute psychiatric beds as part of the core service requirements.

This past summer, the changes at Regional Medical Center prompted Santa Clara County to purchase the hospital and prevent impacts to trauma services.

“That’s why I’m urging the city to defer the proposed zoning changes there until we see real accountability,” said Nathalie Carvajal, a senior director at the Latina Coalition of Silicon Valley. “We need a patient protection fund with community oversight to ensure that healthcare services are protected and that our hospitals remain accessible to everyone, regardless of their income or their transit. The bottom line is this: healthcare is a right, not a privilege.”

While the city’s planning staff believes Good Samaritan’s rezoning complies with the general plan, HCA can expect opposition from some members of the City Council based on recent statements.

Just as he did last week, District 5 Councilmember Peter Ortiz has called on the city to hold off on making a decision.

“I implore my colleagues on the city council to vote with me to defer consideration of this project,” Ortiz said Wednesday. “We need this time to engage with the community to better determine what is best to show that HCA healthcare can be trusted to guarantee healthcare equity a city’s land use policies are deeply reflective of its city values. They determine which community gets resources, who has to travel further for essential services and whether our city is responsive to urgent challenges like the current mental health crisis.”