HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 08011989 - 1.31 1-031
TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
Contra
FROM: Phil Batchelor, County Administrator
Costa
DATE: July 24, 1989 ---------- County
cou -
SUBJECT: LEGISLATION: SB 376 (Cecil Green)
SPECIFIC REOUEST(S)OR RECOMMENDATION(S)&BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION
RECOMMENDATION:
Take no position on SB 376, which would expand the number of persons who
would be eligible for 24-hour care under the in-home supportive services
without providing the state with an adequate source of revenue with which
to reimburse the counties for the increased costs, thereby forcing the
state to reduce reimbursements to the counties in other areas .
BACKGROUND:
Existing law provides for the In-Home Supportive Services Program (IHSS) ,
under which qualified aged, blind and disabled persons receive services in
order to permit them to avoid institutionalization. Among the supportive
services which are provided is protective supervision. SB 376 specifies
that protective supervision includes, but is not limited to, monitoring the
behavior or physical condition of mentally or physically disabled
recipients in certain circumstances . The bill expands the definition of
persons who are eligible to protective supervision to include adults having
physical disabilities or physical impairments . This level of service
requires 24-hour care and monitoring.
The Social Services Department reports that currently about 90 of the IHSS
recipients (280 clients out of a total caseload of 3000) receive 24-hour
care. Passage of SB 376 would make about 5% more of the clients eligible
for 24-hour care. Current law requires the state to reimburse counties for
all IHSS program costs above the 1987-88 county contribution to IHSS.
However, without a new revenue source, the state would have to reduce
funding for other programs, possibly doing even more damage to the Social
Service Department ' s already inadequately funded programs . It is not
argued that these additional individuals are not in need of the services
which would be provided by SB 376, only that expanding this program will
necessarily reduce funding to other critically needed programs and that
CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: -YES SIGNATURE: P
RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR -RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE
APPROVE OTHER
SIGNATUREM:
ACTION OF BOARD ON AUG 1 1929 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED X OTHER
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE
UNANIMOUS(ABSENT AND CORRECT COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN
AYES: NOES: AND ENTERED ON THE MINUTES OF THE BOARD
ABSENT: ABSTAIN: OF SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN.
AUG 1 1989
CC: ATTESTED
PHIL BATCHELOR,CLERK OF THE BOARD OF
SUPERVISORS AND COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
BY DEPUTY
M382 (10/88)
this program is not the highest priority in the view of the Social Services
Director. Senator Green wrote to the Board of Supervisors soliciting the
Board' s support for SB 376. In view of the above and in view of the status
of SB 376, the Social Services Director recommends that the Board take no
position on SB 376 and so inform Senator Green and this office concurs with
that recommendation.
SB 376 was heard in the Senate Appropriations Committee on June 21, 1989
and was held in committee and under submission, which is tantamount to
refusing passage of the bill. Therefore no position the Board would take
at this point would be likely to have any influence on the legislation in
any case.
cc: County Administrator
Social Services Director
Senator Cecil Green
Les Spahnn, SRJ. Jackson, Barish & Associates