Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 08101993 - H.3 4 FROM: Perfecto Villarreal, Director Social Service Department DATE: August 10, 1993 SUBJECT: APPEAL OF GENERAL ASSISTANCE EVIDENTIARY HEARING DECISION BY STEVEN KIM SPECIFIC REQUEST(S) OR RECOMMENDATIONS AND BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION RECOMMENDATION: That the Board deny Steven Kim's appeal of the General Assistance Hearing decision. BACKGROUND: Claimant filed request for Hearing on March 16, 1993. The hearing was scheduled for June 3, 1993. The claim was denied. Signature: ACTION OF BOARD ON August 10 , 1993 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED x OTHER This is the time heretofore noticed by the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors for hearing on the appeal of General Assistance Evidentiary Hearing decision by Steven Kim. Jewel Mansapit, General Assistance Program Analyst, appeared and presented the staff recommendation. The appellant did not appear. On recommendation of Supervisor Smith, IT IS BY THE BOARD ORDERED that the above staff recommendation is APPROVED; and the appeal of the General Assistance Evidentiary hearing decision by Steven Kim is DENIED. VOTE OF SUPERVISORS: x UNANIMOUS (ABSENT IV ) AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN AD ENTERED ON THE MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN. cc: Social Services Dept. Appeals Unit ATTESTED August 10 , 1993 Program Analyst PHIL BATCHELOR, CLERK OF THE BOARD OF County Counsel SUPERVISORS ND COU TY ADMINISTRATOR County Administrator Steven Kim BY a , DEPUTY CLERK OF THE BOARD Inter-Office Memo TO: Social Services Department DATE: July 21, 199.3 Appeals and Complaints Division and Program Analyst FROM: Jeanne Maglio, Chief Clerk Ann Cervelli, Deputy Clerk SUBJECT:Hearing on Appeal from Administrative Decision Rendered on General Assistance Benefits Filed By Kim Thanh Hoang aka Steven Kim Please furnish us with a board order with your recommendations and a copy of all material filed by both the appellant and the Social Service Department at the time of the Appeals and Complaints Division evidentiary hearing, plus any information which your department may wish to file for the Board appeal which is set for 2 : 15 p.m. on Tuesday, August 10, 1993 . Attachment CC : Board members County Administrator County Counsel The Board of SupervisrsContra • Philo �tchelohe rd and County Administration BuildingCO�+tCounty Administrator `a 651 Pine St., Room 106 v (510)646-2371 Martinez, California 94553 County Tom Powers,1st District Jeff Smith,2nd District Geyle Bishop,3rd District Sunne Wright McPeak 4th District Tom Torlakson,5th District July 21, 1993 •+0 Kim Thanh Hoang, aka Steven Kim 1141 A San Pablo Avenue Pinole, CA 94564 Appeal to Board of Supervisors General Assistance Benefits In response to your request and pursuant to Section 14-4 . 006 of the 'County Ordinance Code, this is to advise that a hearing on your appeal from the administrative decision rendered in your case on General Assistance benefits will be held before the board of Supervisors in the Board Chambers, Room 107, County Administration Building, 651 Pine Street, Martinez, California at 2 : 15 p.m. on Tuesday, August 10, 1993 . In accordance with .Board of Supervisor Resolution No. 75/28, your written presentation and all relevant material pertaining to the appeal must be filed with the Clerk of the Board (Room 106, County Administration Building, 651 Pine Street, Martinez) at least one week before the date of the hearing. Your attention also is directed to the other provisions of said Resolution (copy enclosed) which set forth the General Assistance Appeal procedure . Very truly yours, PHIL BATCHELOR, Clerk of the Board of Supervisors and County Administrator r,L 0-44 0 By o n Cervelli, Deputy Clerk Enclosure CC : Board Members Social Service Department Attn: Appeals and Complaints Program Analyst County Counsel County Administrator BOARD OF *RVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COU16, CALIFORNIA Re: General Assistance ) Appeals Procedure ) RESOLUTION NO. 75/28 (Jan. 14 , 1975) The Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors RESOLVES THAT: Appeals from decisions of the Social Service Department 's Complaints and Appeals Division regarding General Assistance are made to the Board of Supervisors pursuant to Board of Supervisors Resolution 7)+/365; and this Hoard therefore estab- lishes these uniform procedures for. such appeals, effective today. 1. A written appeal must be filed with the Clerk of. the Board of Supervisors within 30 days after the decision by the Hearing Officer of the Social Service Department's Complaints and Appeals Division. 2. Both the Appellant (the General Assistance applicant or recipient) and the Respondent (the Social Service Department) must file all written materials at least one week before the date set for Board hearing, of the appeal. 3. Upon hearinC of the -appeal , the Board shall make any required fact determinations based .on the record on appeal . This record shall include the Department's Hearing Officer's fact findings, plus any papers filed with that ,.Officer. The Board will not allow the parties to present new facts at time of appeal , either orally or in writing, and any such presentation will be - disregarded. If the .facts upop which .;he. appeal Ss based are not in dispute, or if any, dispute.d..rapts!,;are, not relevant to the issue ultimately to be decided by .the Board, the Board will proceed immediately to the next •step•,wlthout ;considering fact questions. The parties may stipulate ,to•"an agreed set of facts. 4. Once the facts are determined, or if there are no fact determinations required :by' tttjUPj)t81, the Board will consider legal issues -presented' by-`ths -appbal. Legal issues are to be . framed, insofar as possible, before the hearing and shall be . based on the Department 's Hearing Officer's decision and such other . papers as may be filed. Appealing parties may make'legal arguments both by written brief and orally before the..Board., , If the issues are susceptible of immediate resolution, the Board may, if it desires, immediately decide them at the appeal hearing. If the County Counsel's ad- vice is needed on legal questions', the Board will take the matter under submission, reserving its final Judgment until it receives such advice. -1- RESOLUTION NO. 75/28 ; � ' • •'e 5. If the Board's tentative decision is adverse to the appellant, the Board may modify or reverse its tentative con- clusion for policy reasons , insofar as such modification is not Inconsistent with law. Such action may be taken when the board, In its discretion, determines it -to be necessary to moderate or eliminate unduly harsh effects that might result from strict application of law or regulation. The Board may also determine that its policy for similar future cases is to be modified in accordance with its decision. Unless so stated, a decision shall have no precendential effect on future cases . G. Having made factual determinations , having received advice on the legal issues, and having applied policy cons•idera- tions , the Board will in due course render its decision. The decision will be in writing, stating findings of fact if any have been made, and summarizing the reasoning of the decision. The • . Board may direct the County •Counsel ,to draft a proposed decision for its consideration. 7. The Board may contra ct, w.ith ,a hearing officer, who shall . be a member of the California Bar, to .act on its behalf in con- ducting General Assistance appeals. The Board 's Hearing Officer shall follow steps .. l through ,4 ,above,, and s11all recommend .a proposed decision, stating findings off' fact and summarizing the reasoning of the proposed decision. The Board then will in its discretion, adopt the proposed decision, adopt a modified de- cision in accordance with step 5 above, or reject the proposed decision and render an independent decision based on its own Interpretation of the record on appeal and applicable law. j PASSED on January 111 , 1975, unanimously by the Supervisors present . i i MTIMED COPY I certify that this is a full, true is correct copy of the original document which Is on file in my offlee. and that it was passed • adopted by the Board of Supervisors of Contra Costa County, California, on the date shown. ATTEST: J. R. OLSSON, County Clerk!e=-officio Clark of said Board of Supervisors, p7 Debut Clerk. . on ja N 1 41975 cc : Director, Human Resources Agency Social Service County Counsel County Auditor-Controller County Administrator [CLERK ECEIVED ;JL 6 STEVEN KIM 1141A Son Pablo Ave. ARD OF SUPERVISORSPinole, CA 94,564 TRA COSTA CO. (510)741-7867 07/15/1993 The Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors 651 Pie Street Martinez, CA 94553 TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN I First of all, I would like to say that I am really dissatisfied with the decision of hearing on 06/03 93 because I still strongly believed that the social department has made a wrong decision alter it received the evidentiary hearing's result of the hearing scheduled on 01/27/93. The most important reason of why I still have believed my request was right is that i the social department made a righl decision as the result of the hearing on 01/27/93, I had never made a mistake that was I borrowed the money. This meant that if the department granted us the money after we applied GA then surely we had never to borrow$300 in that month to pay the rent and utility in time and the county would never subtract any thing from my grant. . 1 also would like to emphasize that I only borrowed the money alter I had received the denying of my application from the count on 12128/93. This proved that the social department forced me to borrow the money to pay the rent and utility because that was the only way I had to do hurriedly so that the landlord couldn't kid my family out and the PG&E couldn't cut off my electricity . Would you please put yourself in my situation, I believe you would do so like me . In short, the event ol•my borrowing the money to pay the rent and utility in time was entirely the fault of the social department. Therefore, in this case the social department couldn't count this sum of money as my income as the definition of section 49-301 of General Assistance Handbook. For the above reasons, I request the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors reconsider my special case . Thank you for your concerning our problem. DOAN TAIIiIM--DUNG STEVENBIM i Enclosed: The copy of General Assistance Evidentiary Hearing Decision I ` • • Please reply to: Social Service Department Contra 40 Douglas Drive Perfecto VillarrealCOC�ta Martinez,California 94553-4068 Director Costa County E o GENERAL ASSISTANCE EVIDENTIARY HEARING DECISION f IN THE MATTER OF: Kim Thanh Hoang, aka Steven Kim, Claimant County #:498510-E3ED 1141 A San Pablo Ave Filing Date: 3-16-93 San Pablo, Ca 94806 Hearing Date:6-3-93 Aid Paid Pending: no Hearing Officer: Ruby Molinari Income Maintenance Representative: Carol Calvert, IM Supervisor Place of Hearing: Richmond, Ca ISSUE Whether the County should count loans as income when retroactive aid is granted. COUNTY ACTION AND POSITION The claimant applied for General Assistance on 12-2-92 as AFDC had been discontinued effective 11-30-92. The claimant, his spouse, and two children were all college students. The application was denied as it was determined Steven Kim had quit a job without good cause. The claimant requested an evidentiary hearing and the hearing officer granted the claim. The County rescinded the denial of aid and computed aid as follows: 12-92 grant for 2 people $312.00 loan received 12-30-92 $300.00 eligible $ 12.00 1-93 grant for 2 people $312.00 loan received 1-5-93 $100.00 eligible $212.00 received on a 1-6-93 app. $262.00 overpaid $ 50.00 The County contends all income, including loans, must be used to determine the amount of grant. CLAIMANT'S POSITION The claimant testified he applied on 12-2-92 and provided all the information the worker requested. He kept trying to hurry the approval of the application as he was concerned about paying his 1- 93 rent. When he received the denial Notice of Action he borrowed the money so he could pay the rent. The claimant reapplied on 1-6-93 . That application was approved on 1-21-93 retroactive to 1-6-93. The claimant had borrowed an additional $100.00 on 1-5-93 to buy food. This was not counted when the application had been approved as it was prior to the application. When the County rescinded the denial of the 12-2-92 application this money was counted and caused a $50.00 overpayment. The claimant argues the County improperly denied his original application, dated 12-2-92 , and he was forced to borrow money to pay his rent and buy food. He believes because the County's denial action was reversed the loans should not be counted as income. REASON FOR DECISION GENERAL ASSISTANCE HANDBOOK Section 49-301 II. DEFINITIONS A. Income: any benefit received in cash (for example, earnings, loans, liquid assets, or in-kind. IV. TREATMENT OF INCOME D. Cash loans and gifts are considered income in the month received. CONCLUSION The County recomputed the claimant's eligibility when the 12-2-92 application denial was rescinded. In the recomputation, loans which the claimant received were used as income resulting in a $12 .00 grant for 12-92 and an overpayment of $50.00 in 1-93 . The County included the loans as income as required by the regulations. There is no regulation that would allow the loans to be exempted in a retroactive computation. I ORDER The claim is denied. o ial Service Appeals Officer Date Prog Manager, Appeals Da If you are dissatisfied with this decision you may appeal the matter directly to the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors. Appeals must be filed in writing with the Clerk of the Board, 651 Pine Street, Martinez, CA, 94553 . Appeals must be filed within fourteen (14) days of the date of this Evidentiary Hearing Decision. No further aid paid pending a Board of Supervisors appeal. i I CLERK OF THE BOARD Inter-Office Memo TO: Social Services Department DATE: July 21, 1993 Appeals and Complaints Division and Program Analyst FROM: Jeanne Maglio, Chief Clerk Ann Cervelli, Deputy Clerk SUBJECT:Hearing on Appeal from Administrative Decision Rendered on General Assistance Benefits Filed By Kim Thanh Hoang aka Steven Kim Please furnish us with a board order with your recommendations and a copy of all material filed by both the appellant and the Social Service Department at the time of the Appeals and Complaints Division evidentiary hearing, plus any information which your department may wish to file for the Board appeal which is set for 2 : 15 p.m. on Tuesday, August 10, 1993 . Attachment CC : Board members County Administrator County Counsel ECLERKBOAARDOFS E�EIVE® JUL 6 1993 STEVEN KIM 1141A San Pablo Ave. UPERVISORS Pinole, CA 94564 TRA COSTA CO. (510)741-7867 07/15/1993 The Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors 651 Pine Street Martinez, CA 94553 TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN First of all, I would like to say that I am really dissatisfied with the decision of hearing on 06/0393 because I still strongly believed that the social department has made a wrong decision after it received the evidentiary hearing's result ofthe hearing scheduled on 01/27/93. The most important reason of why I still have believed my request was right is that if the social department made a right decision as the result of the hearing on 01/27/93, I had never made a mistake that was I borrowed the money. This meant that if the department granted us the money after we applied GA then surely we had never to borrow$300 in that month to pay the rent and utility in time and the county would never subtract any thing from my grant. I also would like to emphasize that I only borrowed the money after I had received the denying of my application from the count on 12/28/93. This proved that the social department forced me to borrow the money to pay the rent and utility because that was the only way I had to do hurriedly so that the landlord couldn't kid my family out and the PG&E couldn't cut off my electricity . Would you please put yourself in my situation, I believe you would do so like me . In short, the event of my borrowing the money to pay the rent and utility in time was entirely the faull of the social department, Therefore, in this case the social department couldn't count this sum of money as my income as the definition of section 49-301 of General Assistance Handbook. For the above reasons, I request the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors reconsider my special case . Thank you for your concerning our problem DOAN THI BIM-DUNG STEVENKIM Enclosed: The copy of General Assistance Evidentiary Hearing Decision Sodial Service Department Contra Please reply to: 40 Douglas Drive Perfecto Villarreal Costa Martinez,California 94553-4068 Director County CTy .Srq•COU N'C4 GENERAL ASSISTANCE EVIDENTIARY HEARING DECISION IN THE MATTER OF: Kim Thanh Hoang, aka Steven Kim, Claimant County #: 498510-E3ED 1141 A San Pablo Ave Filing Date: 3-16-93 San-Pablo, Ca 94806 Hearing Date:6-3-93 Aid Paid Pending: no Hearing Officer: Ruby Molinari Income Maintenance Representative: Carol Calvert, IM Supervisor Place of Hearing: Richmond, Ca ISSUE Whether the County should count loans as income when retroactive aid is granted. COUNTY ACTION AND POSITION The claimant applied for General Assistance on 12-2-92 as AFDC had been discontinued effective 11-30-92. The claimant, his spouse, and two children were all college students. The application was denied as it was determined Steven Kim had quit a job without good cause. The claimant requested an evidentiary hearing and the hearing officer granted the claim. The County rescinded the denial of aid and computed aid as follows: 12-92 grant for 2 people $312.00 loan received 12-30-92 $300.00 eligible $ 12.00 1-93 grant for 2 people $312.00 loan received 1-5-93 $100.00 eligible $212.00 received on a 1-6-93 app. $262.00 overpaid $ 50.00 The County contends all income, including loans, must be used to determine the amount of grant. CLAIMANT'S POSITION The claimant testified he applied on 12-2-92 and provided all the information the worker requested. He kept trying to hurry the approval of the application as he was concerned about paying his 1- 93 rent. When he received the denial Notice of Action he borrowed the money so he could pay the rent. The claimant reapplied on 1-6-93 . That application was approved on 1-21-93 retroactive to 1-6-93 . The claimant had borrowed an additional $100.00 on 1-5-93 to buy food. This was not counted when the application had been approved as it was prior to the application. When the County rescinded the denial of the 12-2-92 application this money was counted and caused a $50.00 overpayment. The claimant argues the County improperly denied his original application, dated 12-2-92, and he was forced to borrow money to pay his rent and buy food. He believes because the County's denial action was reversed the loans should not be counted as income. REASON FOR DECISION GENERAL ASSISTANCE HANDBOOK Section 49-301 II. DEFINITIONS A. Income: any benefit received in cash (for example, earnings, loans, liquid assets, or in-kind. IV. TREATMENT OF INCOME D. Cash loans and gifts are considered income in the month received. CONCLUSION The County recomputed the claimant's eligibility when the 12-2-92 application denial was rescinded. In the recomputation, loans which the claimant received were used as income resulting in a $12.00 grant for 12-92 and an overpayment of $50.00 in 1-93 . The County included the loans as income as required by the regulations. There is no regulation that would allow the loans to be exempted in a retroactive computation. ORDER The claim is denied. o ial Service Appeals Officer Date i Prog Manager, Appeals Da If you are dissatisfied with this decision you may appeal the matter directly to the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors. Appeals must be filed in writing with the Clerk of the Board, 651 Pine Street, Martinez, CA, 94553 . Appeals must be filed within fourteen (14) days of the date of this Evidentiary Hearing Decision. No further aid paid pending a Board of Supervisors appeal. Come Coma co" ROUTE SUP +«wSpoke aww.M TO: l� PCN: DATE: . 11%aftCheckorreaAalftso El A. 30 Muir Road,Martinez p z. 40 Douglas Dr.,Martinez Cl T. 1340 ArnoldDrivo#220,Martirwz (3 Adminaration (TraininyAppeak) p M. 2500 Alhambra Ave.,Martinez O At"Agency on Aging Q c. 4545 Delta fair,Antioch O p w. 3431 Macdonald Ave.,Rich. Q L. 100 Glacier Dr.,Martinez Won's Gate) Q H. 1305 Macdonald Ave.,Richmond O x. 2301 Stanwell Dr.,Concord O G. 304S Research Dr.,Richmond lCentrafted Closed foes) p E. 3630 San Pablo Dam Rd.,EI Sob. Cl v. 2450 A Stanwell Dr.,Concord fn"7) C) R. S25 Second Strut,Rodeo p F. 330.2Sth Street,Richmond(PIC) O OTHER DEPARTMENTS i MA . Q Auditor/Controller Q OA famliy support Q County Administrate p WOW*Santo 13 Q DA p disk Man"ement p Health Services O Data Proo"servke. p County Cour" O County map" O Probation p Alternate Defender p Ward Q Purcheswto C3 County Personnel p CCC Health Plan 13 O CONCORD WALNUT CREEK RICNWW AN NU COURT Q Central Services Q Office of Revenue Collection Q Pwblk Defender .Q Antioch p Public Defender Q O_ Q Richmond O Q Martine: p OTHER: 1 ❑ Requested LU ❑ NecessaryAction NOTE 1 ❑ Return ❑ Discussed ❑ Information ❑ Discard ❑ Recommend~ Q rile ❑ Approval/Signature COMMENTS 9_ T LWe co/ FROM: N: TELEPHONE NUMBER APPEALS 3-1790 R J(Rtv.6192) n crs ROrW*gr me AnnnMws f rna,usure STEVEN KIM 1141A San Pablo Ave. Pinole, CA 94564 (510)741-7867 09/02/1993 PERFECTO VILLARREAL RECEIVED Director Social Service Department rn9 651 Pine Street SEP " 1993 Martinez, CA 94553 CLERKCOARD ONTRAOCOS A CO.SUPERVISORS Dear Sir, I am very surprised when receiving your paper and knowing that my appeal for the General Assistance Hearing decision was denied because I didn't appear on August 10, 1993. Frankly speaking,I has never received any letter required me to appear on August 8/93. After receiving your letter denied my appeal, I checked with all of my family members but no one tells me that she had received the letter from the Board. Right now,I don't know how to do but I am very regret that I has lost an opportunity to protect my right in front of the Board. Now I am sending this letter with the following ideas: 1/ I am very grateful to the Social Service Department has assisted my family in finance in our financial hard-ship. 2/ When I appealed for general assistance evidentiary hearing decision,partly because I need that sum of money to return my friend and partly I was very frustrated about that in a genuine freedom country like America,an agency like Social Service Department can punish its recipient by cutting the recipient's money only because the fault of the agency itselfl 3/ I and all members of my family have never relied on welfare but rather make use of welfare to earn a better skill to get a better job so that we can get out of welfare as soon as we can. From 6 people involved welfare from our coming this country in 1986 and now,there have been only 2 from September 92. The reason of why there still have two involving welfare because I and my wife have some health problems. After graduated on May 22, 1993 I hasn't got a job, partly due to economic down and partly becauce I was waiting a surgery and I was operated on August 11, 1993. According to my doctor, I will be recovered within from 6 to 8 weeks. Therefore, I believe after my recovery I can work,so I and my wife will get out of welfare and latest is at the end of this year. Finally,even I lost my opportunity to protect my right,I still thank you and the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors concernedMEproblem. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY RECEIVED Sincerely Yours, CFD _ H lqq OFFICE OF , COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR ;RK,calm Can COUNTY NCEMED I It 'll 7:19;x# OFFICE OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR CIL tro 0 FROM: Perfecto Villarreal, Director Social Service Department DATE: August 10, 1993 SUBJECT: APPEAL OF GENERAL ASSISTANCE EVIDENTIARY HEARING DECISION BY THOMAS STEEVES SPECIFIC REQUEST(S) OR RECOMMENDATIONS AND BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION RECOMMENDATION: That the Board deny Thomas Steeves' appeal of the General Assistance Hearing decision. BACKGROUND: Claimant filed request for Hearing on April 9, 1993. The Hearing was scheduled for June 28, 1993. The claim was denied. Signature: " ACTION OF BOARD ON August 10 , 1993 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED x OTHER This is the time heretofore noticed by the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors for hearing on the appeal of General Assistance Evidentiary hearing decision by Thomas Steeves. Jewel Mansapit, General Assistance Program Analyst, appeared and presented the Department recommendation and background on the appeal . Thomas Steeves , appellant, appeared and presented testimony relative to his appeal . IT IS BY THE BOARD ORDERED that the above recommendation is APPROVED: and tVOf9P(59WOERVISORS Steeves is DENIED. x UNANIMOUS (ABSENT ) AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN AD ENTERED ON THE MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN. ATTESTED August 10 , 1993 cc: Social Service Dept. PHIL BATCHELOR, CLERK OF THE BOARD OF Appeals unit SUPERVISORS ND COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR Program Analyst County Counsel BY 14a , DEPUTY County Administrator Thomas Steeves caw u. 3 b � $ ► � ►�f OPWK)d! � � LEr VC) L/ (� , I PEli te. LLI 08 O�- cc &TO or- T4 evep U i f 'r(L_._ �-i�5 � � t�F ►-fiT a�mss, ° �N � �o�rm�Tc,�' c i�T HciAt nY �t�:ssac� ; 6'ltvu� lutfog c � c�r� 7KO��b I'd DOTb ', i ,•fes , � � � .. - — 5. If the Board's tentative decision is adverse to the`;::; `: ;: appellant , the Board may modify or reverse its tentative cone:: . -- tib clusion for policy reasons, insofar as such modification is inot_�.,.f.:._ Inconsistent with law. Such action may be taken when the Bo,ar`..d, in its discretion, determines it -to be necessary to moderate eliminate unduly harsh effects that might result from strict application of law or regulation. The Board may also determine .. that its policy for similar future cases is to be modified in accordance with its decision. Unless so stated, a decision shall have no pre.cendent.ial effect on future cases . 5 . Fa -,4,n made fact: -1 de:erMinations , having received advice on the,.legal issues.,. and having applied policy..,cons-idera-- tions , the Board will -in due course render its decision. -The decision will be in writing, stating findings of fact if any have been made, and summarizing the reasoning of the decision. The .. ., Board may direct the County •Counsel ;to draft a proposed decision for its consideration. 7 . The Board may contract w.ith :a hearing officer, who shall . be a member of the California Bar, to act on its behalf in con- ducting General Assistance appeals . The Board 's Hearing Officer shall follow steps.. l through ,4 ,above•, and shall recommend .a proposed decision, stating findings off' fact and summarizing the reasoning of the proposed decibion. The Board then will in its _ discretion, adopt the proposed decision, adopt a modified de- cision in accordance with step 5 above, or reject the proposed decision and render an independent decision based on its own interpretation of the record on appeal and applicable law. i PASSED on January iia , 1975, unanimously by the Supervisors present . CERTIFIED COPY I certify that this is a full, true ! eorreet OPT of the original document which is on file in m7 offlce• and that it was passed A adopted Ey the Board of Supervisors of Contra Costa County, California. on the date shown. ATTEST: J. R. OLSSON, County Clerk a ex-officio Clerk of said Board of Supervisors, by Dsput Clerk. — on _fie i 41975 cc : Uirector, Human Resources Agency Social Service County Counsel County Auditor-Controller County Administrator ,x CLERK OF THE BOARD Inter-Office Memo TO: Social Services Department DATE: July 21, 1993 Appeals and Complaints Division and Program Analyst FROM: Jeanne Maglio, Chief Clerk Ann Cervelli, Deputy Clerk SUBJECT:Hearing on Appeal from Administrative Decision Rendered on General Assistance Benefits Filed By Thomas Steeves Please furnish us with a board order with your recommendations and a copy of all material filed by both the appellant and the Social Service Department at the time of the Appeals and Complaints Division evidentiary hearing, plus any information which your department may wish to file for the Board appeal which is set for 2 : 15 p.m. on Tuesday, August 10, 1993 . Attachment CC : Board members County Administrator County Counsel • The Board of SupervOrs Contra 0Cl �'' Clerk of the Board and County Administration BuildingCosta County Administrator 651 Pine St, Room 106 (510)W-2371 ` Martinez, California 94553 County Tan Powsm 1st District j@1t SnWk 2nd District � 6 L Gayle Bw,op,3rd District r Bunn@ t HiliM McPsak 4th District • Tan Talak@on,5th District ' o :` n: -•fes July 21, 1993 Thomas Steeves 952 Talbart Street Martinez, CA 94553 Appeal to Board of Supervisors General Assistance Benefits In response to your request and pursuant to Section 14-4 . 006 of the County Ordinance Code, this is to advise that a hearing on your appeal from the administrative decision rendered in your case on General Assistance benefits will be held before the board of Supervisors in the Board Chambers, Room 107, County Administration Building, 651 Pine Street, Martinez, California at 2 : 15 p.m. on Tuesday, August 10, 1993 . In accordance with Board of Supervisor Resolution. No. 75/28, your written presentation and all relevant material pertaining to the appeal must be filed with the Clerk of the Board (Room 106, County Administration Building, 651 Pine Street, Martinez) at least one week before the date of the hearing. Your attention also is directed to the other provisions of said Resolution (copy enclosed) which set forth the General Assistance Appeal procedure. Very truly yours, PHIL BATCHELOR, Clerk of the Board of Supervisors and County Administrator O 0 By �Pv Cer i, Deputy Clerk Enclosure CC : Board Members Social Service Department Attn: Appeals and Complaints Program Analyst County Counsel County Administrator BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA He: General Assistance Appeals Procedure RESOLUTION NO. 75/28 (Jan. 14, 1975) The Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors RESOLVES THAT: Appeals from decisions of the Social Service Department 's Complaints and Appeals Division regarding General Assistance are made to the Board of Supervisors pursuant to Board of Supervisors Resolution 711/365; and this Board therefore estab- lishes these uniform procedures for. such appeals, effective today. 1. A written appeal must be filed with the Clerk of the .Board of Supervisors within 30 days after the decision by the Hearing Officer of the Social Service Department 's Complaints and Appeals Division. 2. both the Appcllant (the General Assistance applicant or recipient) and the Respondent (the Social Service Department)— must file all written materials at least one week before the date set for Board hearing of the appeal. 3. -Upon hearing of the -appeal , the Board shall make any required fact determinations based on the record on appeal . This record shall include the Department' s HearIng Officer's fact findings, plus any papers filed with that ,Offleer. The Board will not allow the parties to present new facts at time of appeal , either orally or in writing, and any such presentation will be disregarded. If the .facts upop which .the. appeal Is based are not In dispute, or If any, dlsputed..rAcsl-are' not relevant to the Issue ultimately to be decided by the the Board will proceed Immediately to the next 'St*P,..Xltbout -considerInF, fact questions. The parties may stipulate ,to-lari igree�d set of facts. 4. Once the facts are determined, or If there are no fact'' determinations required.,t;j the Board will consider legal lssu6s 'presented- by-thw-appbal. Legal Issues are to be framed, Insofar as possible, before the hearing and shall be based on the Department 's hearing Officer's decision and such other . papers as may be filed. • Appealing parties may make legal arguments both by written. brief and orally before the .Board.( , If the Issues are susceptible of Immediate resolution, the Boirq may, If It desires, immediately decide them at the appeal hearing. If the County Counsel's ad- vice 19 needed on legal questions' the Board will take the matter' under submission, reserving its .final judgment until it receives such advice. HE-SOLUTION NO. 75/28 5. If the Board's tentative decision is adverse to the appellant , the Board may modify or reverse its tentative con- clusion for policy °reasons , insofar as such modification is not Inconsistent with law. Such action may be taken when the Board, in its discretion, determines it -to be necessary to moderate or eliminate unduly harsh effects that might result from strict application of law or regulation. The Board may also determine that its policy for similar future cases is to be modified in accordance with its decision. Unless so stated, a decision shall have no precendential effect on future cases . ' G. Having made factual determinations , having received advice on the legal issues, and having applied policy cons•idera- tions , the Board will in due course render its decision. The decision will be in writing, stating findings of fact if any have been made, and summarizing the reasoning of the decision. The .• , Board may direct the County •Counsel ,to draft a proposed decision for its consideration. 7. The Board may contract w.ith :a hearing officer, who shall . be a member of the California Bar, to act on its behalf in con- ducting General Assistance appeals . The Board 's Hearing Officer shall follow steps ,.l through Y4 ,above,, and stlall recommend .a proposed decision,• stating findings off' fact and summarizing the reasoning of the proposed decision. The Board then will in its discretion, adopt the proposed decision, adopt a modified de- cision in accordance with step 5 above, or reject the proposed decision and .render an independent decision based on its own interpretation of the record on appeal and applicable law. i PASSED on January lit , 1975, unanimously by the Supervisors present. I ! Y71FIED COPY I certify that this is a full, true A eorrect eaVT of the original document which is on file in m7 offlee, and that it was passed ! adopted by the Hoard of Supervisors of Contra Costa County. California, on .the data shown. ATTEST: J. R. OLSSON, County Clerk!ex-officio Clerk of said Board of supervisors, b7 Deput Clerk. _iaN 1 41975 cc: Director, Human Resources Agency Social Service County Counsel County Auditor-Controller County Administrator To ( ; 0 1 czc�lj a • c z O . C ad ri �s ECEIVED JUL 1 61993 CLERK BOARD OF SUPERW 7 SO S ° O � -i JUL_ — % S — SS MON S : 20 P . 01 Social Service Department Contra pleaso f0ply to: 40 Douglas drive Perfect*%nilarrealMartlnoz,California 04553-&M Oirottor Costa County Post-It!"brand fax transminal memo 7671 #01PApeo wr. w4l CO. Phona Fax IF G Fax ingl Evidentiary Hear" De -Ticis on IN THE MATTER OF: County #07-92-0271164 Thomas Steeves Date of County Notice: 4-9-93 952 Talbart St. Effective Date of Action: 4-30-93 Martinez CA 94553 Filing Date: 4-21-93 Hearing Date: 6-28-931 Aid Paid Pending: Yes Appeals officer Scott G. Clayton Income Maintenance Representative: Joan Balzarini Place of Hearing: Martinez Whether the county was correct in its determination that claimant failed without good cause to attend a GAADDS intake/interview appointment on February 17, 1993. The county also proposed a one month period of ineligibility. ETA KKUNT RE-Z-4m COUNTY. ACjjQN AND POSTTI Claimant signed a GAADDS appointment form on February 12, 1993 for an individual Eva luation/Assessment intake appointment on Febru- ary 17, 1993 at 9:00 am with Gary Hamilton. in March, the county received a communication from GAADDS that claimant had not been seen and *they had been unable to contact him after several attempts . Presented as evidence were fax copies of the appointment slip and progress notes from GAADDS. The notes indicate that claimant was seen on February 12, 1993, that a follow up appoint- ment had been scheduled and that the writer intends to refer claimant to Mental Health for evaluation. 'Also heard as an issue were workfare failures of March 24, .March 31 and April 7, 1993. No decision is being rendered as this issue was already heard on June 1 , 1993 by another. Appeals Officer. JUL - 119 - 93 MON 9-20 • P . 02 EVIDENTIARY HEARING Thomas Steeves, Claimant Page 2 CLAIMANTS POSITION: At Hearing the Claimant stated that he failed because he was never infoirmed of the appointment. He states he had previously talked to Gary Hamilton who told him that there would be no more meetings until a "psych eval" was completed. He stated he had tried to call GAADDS but did not leave messages. He stated that the fax copy of the appointment slip was contrived and he never signed the original. gA,-,OK AOR DF. ;5" Department Manual .Section II. POLICY A. General Assistance applicants and recipients who demon- strate noncooperation. or noncompliance with Social Service Department program requirements by failing to meet any one of their enumerated responsibilities without good cause shall be denied aid or shall be discontinued. A period of ineligibility may be imposed on recipients in instances involving noncooperation and noncompliance In accordance with guidelines which follow. 2. A recipient who fails to cooperate with the Social Service Department by failing to meet any one of his or her enumerated responsibilities without good cause, shall be discontinued aid, and sanctions will be imposed as follows: ae first failure: one month b. second failure: three months C. third failure: six months 4. Examples of recipient responsibilities include, but are not limited to: a. appearing for work Programs Assignment Group or monthly Job Club meetings b. submitting A timely and complete job search report form co performing a monthly workfare assignment d. Cooperating with GAADDS el cooperating with Quality Control f . submitting a timely and complete monthly status report (CA-7) g. cooperating with and completing the annual redetermination process h. providing requested information or verifica- tion, including verification of .unemployabili- ty, by the due date i . applying for any other resource or benefit, including Supplemental Security Income, and taking all necessary steps to receive such income. .7UL - * 9 - 93 MON 91 P . 03 r EVIDENTIARY HEARING Thomas Steeves, Claimant Page 3 J. accepting an offer of employment, and main- taining employment. F. Good Cause 1. The reasons which establish good cause for a fail- ure to cooperate or comply are subject to verifica- tion and include, but are not limited to, the following: a. employment has been obtained b. scheduled jab interview or testing C. mandatory court appearance d. incarceration el illness f. death in the family g. other substantial reason. These must be re- viewed and approved by the Division Manager. G. Willfulness 1. Each case where willfulness is an issue, will turn on its own facts. A determination must be made based on the evidence. a. Evidence can be direct, or it may be inferred from an applicant's or recipient's acts. 2. A willful act is one that is intentional or without reasonable excuse or cause. it need not be done with malice, nor with a specific purpose to violate program requirements. 3. Willfulness Cannot be found where the person is mentally disabled to the extent that s/he does .not understand his/her responsibilities or is incapable - of fulfilling them. 4. Conduct which involves negligence, inadvertence, physical disability or lesser mental disability may or may not be willful. .ENDING _or FAM It is found that claimant did not have good cause for failing to attend the February 17, 1993. It is not credible that GAADDS would falsify the appointment slip. Claimant spoke about a previous conversation with Gary Hamilton in which a psychological evaluation was discussed. This agrees with the February 12, 3993 notes from GAADDS of his meeting. The appointment slip was signed on Febru- ary 12, 1993. It is found that the failure was willful. Claimant is without a reasonable excuse for his failure to attend the GAADDS appointment. 3l.1L - i 9 - 93 MON 9 1 P . 04 EVIDENTIARY HERRING Thomas Steeves, Claimant Page 4 CON=SION As Claimant failed to meet General Assistance program requirements he is no longer eligible for assistance. The action to discontinue General.Assistance and impose a one month period of ineligibility is, therefore, sustained. OEM The claim is denied, Scott G. Clayton Date Social Services Appqaj officer Program Manager, ppeal.s to �--� If you are dissatisfied with this Decision, you may appeal the ' matter directly to the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors. Appeals must be filed in writing with the Clerk of the Board, 651 Pane Street, Room 1.06, Martinez, CA 94553 within 14 days of the date. of the Evidentiary Hearing Decision. No further aid is paid pending a Board of Supervisors appeal. JUL- - 19 - 9z MON j Social Service Department Contra Pi9Dougl s Drive 40 Douglas Drivo ftyriecto vlllarlealosta Martinot,Cabiornin 945$3-4068 ylro¢ta County Post-It'"brand tax transmittal memo 7671 +,of pngac pron► Phos•#' T rox 0 r Fax�► Evidentiary Hearrnffiq"Decs IN THE X=F- QF: Thomas Steeves County #07-92-271164 952 Talbert 5t Date of County Notice: 4-13-93. Martimez CA 94553 Effective Date of Action: 4-30-93 Filing Date: 4-21-93 Hearing Date: 6--1-93 Aid Paid Pending: Yes Appeals Officer Barbara R. Weidenfeld Work Programs Representative: Stephanie Asball Place of tearing: Martinez ssv Whether the claimant willfully and without good cause failed to ,comply or cooperate with the general assistance program require- ments. whether the county correctly proposed discontinuance and a period of ineligibility. e? acOF..ACTS COUNTY b-C lQN AND Q§ITTQNt The claimant is classified as employable, but with some limita- tions. He has agreed, in writing, to cooperate and actively participate in the work programs component of the Genearal Assistance program. The claimant was referred to St. Vincent de Paul for his monthly workfare assignment for the the following days: March 17, March 24, March 31 and April 7. This was a special assignment agreed to with St. Vincent De Paul to accomodate the claimant's limitations. He was given specific written insructions that he must provide medical, verification to substantiate any missed work, dates. The claimant provided medical verification for missing the March 17 workfare assignment.but did not provide verification that he was unable to work on March 24, March 31, and April 7. JUL- -. 19 - 9Z M O N 9� 9 • P . 02 . � r ti EVIDENTIARY HEARING DECISION Thomas Steeves, Claimant Page 2 The medical evidence that the claimant had provided to the county consisted of an "Emergency Department Past Track Record" dated March - 17 stating that he is to use warm packs twice daily, take medications as ordered and to rest his back as described until pain free. He provided an appointment slip signed on March 24 showing that no had an appointment on April 26. He signed a GA 341 on May 17 which was returned to the County showing that he kept his medical appointment on April 26 and was diagnosed as having "acute low back strain and R sciatica with re-injury with history of chronic back pain. The form said that he is unable to work until June 11 1993. .The Work Programs Supervisor determined that the claimant had not provided the verification that had been requested for the workfare dates !iof March 24, March 31 and April 7. The evidence provided shows that he has been suffering from chronic back pain since March 17. GLg,'f,MMV S POSITION: At Hearing the Claimant stated that he relied on what the doctor had said at his March 17 medical appointment and had stayed off work based upon the doctor's instructions to follow instructions until pain free. As of the date of the hearing the claimant is still in pain and has been referred for further evaluation to the "back -clinic". He contends that he cannot bend, lift, or sit in one position for very long. Q ( to DECISION Department Manual Section 49-111: II. POLICY E. Recipients 2. A recipient who fails to cooperate with the Social Service Department by failing to meet any one of his or her enumerated responsibilities without good. cause, shall be discontinued aid, and sanctions will be imposed as follows: a, first failure: one month b. second failure: three months C. third failure: six months . .TUL - 1 9 - 93 MON 0 • P . 03 . . w EVIDEKTIARy HF•ARXNG DECISION Thomas Steeves, Claimant Page 3 3. If twelve months have passed from the date of the end of the last period of ineligibility, the dycle will begin again; i.e. the next failure to cooper ate with a program requirement shall be followed by a one month period of ineligibility. F. Good Cause 1. The reasons which establish good cause for a fail- ure to cooperate or comply are subject to verifica- tion and include, but are not limited to, the following: a. employment has been obtained b. scheduled job interview or testing ee mandatory court appearance d. incarceration e. illness f. death in the family g. Other substantial reason. It is undisputed that the claimant did not comply with the county"s instructions to obtain a specific medical excuse for each day that he was unable to perform the assigned tasks; however, the medical evidence submitted at the hearing supports the claimant's conten- tion that he was physically incapacitated during the period in dispute. Considering the nature of his physical problem, alone, the fact that he continued to follow-up with his medical care, and was determined, by the doctor who followed up on his emergency visit, to be unable to work on April 24 for five weeks, it follows that he was unable to work on the date that his problem was originally identified on March 17 and the subsequent work days. CONC SJM As the claimant had good cause for failure to attend workfare on March 24, March 31 and April 7, the discontiunuance effective April 30, 1993 is not sustained. . � P . 04 JUL- L- 1 9 - 93 MON 10 r EVIDENTIARY HEARING DECISION Thomas Steeves, Claimant Page 4 QRDER Toe claim is granted. The notice of discontinuance shall be rescinded, and aid shall be restored. The failure shall be removed ftom the log. Underpayments shall be paid as required. S cial services Appeals officer Date rogram "anagKr, ppeals ate If you are dissatisfied with this Decision you may appeal. the matter directly to the contra Costa County Board of Supervisors. Appe als must be filed in writing with the Clerk of the Board, +651 PiE Street,. Room 106, Martinez, CA 94553. Appeals must be filed vI hin fourteen (14) days of the date of the Evidentiary Decision. No further aid paid pending a Board of Supervisors appeal. TL1L^— 1 — D :3 r•10r4 4a �_J • 0 1 Social Service DepartmentContra Ploase roply io: Perfecto villarreal 40 Ooupins Drive D;rcccor Costa Mnrtinox,California 9.1553-4068 County -:17? Post-It'"brand fax transmittal memo 7671 a or p.+rus . •Ar jam'• '� _ From Via?` . Ldt,l��1 Gti sr Rhon90 `'r 5`r'rl' P` Fax fr FaX N Evidentiary Hcaring X.-TIM &T2BR_Q_r_L Thomas Steeves County #07-92-271164 952 Talbert St Date of County Notice: 4-13-93, Martimcz . CA 94553 Effective Date of Action: 4-30--93 Filing Date: 4-21--93 Hearing Date: 6•-1-93 Aid Paid Pending: Yes Appeals c.-Ffzcer Barbara R. Weidenfeld Wort Representative: Stephanie Asbell Plate c lrl�,.aring: Martinez ISSOE Whether, the claimant willfully and without good cause failed to comply or cooperate with'the general assistance program require- ments. Whether the county correctly proposed discontinuance and a period of ineligibility. CnCJN Y`QCT pN 1D _ QS T g The claimant is classified as employable, but with some limita- tion-5. He has agreed, in writing', to cooperate and actively participate in the work programs component of the r iearal Assistance program. The claimant was referred to St. Vincent de Paul for his monthly workfare assignment for the the following days: March 17, March 24, March 31 and April 7. This was a special assignment agreed to with St. Vincent De Paul to accomodate the claimantfs limitations. pie was given specific written insructions that he must provide medical verification to substantiate any missed work dates. The claimant provided medical verification for missing the March 17 workfare assignment but did not provide verification that he was unable to work on March 24, March 31, and April 7 . -JUL- - 1 0 - •D3 r•10N *0C3 • F _ 0 2 EVIDEWrIARY HEARING DECISION lbomas Steeves, Claimant Page 2 The medical evidence that the claimant had provided to the county .consisted of an "Emerg;ency Department Fast Track Record" dated March 17 stating that he is to use warm packs twice daily, take medications as orderedand to. rest his back as described until pain free. He provided an appointment slip signed on March 24 showing that he had an appointment on April 26. He signed a GA 341 on May 17 which was returned to the county showing that he kept his medical appointment on April 26 and was diagnosed as having "acute low back strain and R sciatica with re-injury with history of chronic back pain. The form said that he is unable to work until. June 1, 1993. .The Work Programs Supervisor determined that the claimant had not provided the verification that had been requested for the workfare . dates ;of March 24, Murch 31 and April 7. The evidence provided shows that he has been suffering from chronic back Dain since March 17. �AIMANT'S PO$ITTON: .At Hearing the Claimant stated that he relied on what the doctor had said at his March 1.7 medical appdintment and had stayed off work based upon the doctor's instructions to follow instructions until. pain free. As of the date of the hearing the claimant is still in pain and has been rlfarre. d for further evaluation to the "back ;clinic". Fie Contends that he cannot bend, lift, or sit in one position for very long. Department Manual Section 49-111: II. POLICY E. Recipients 2 . A recipient who fails to cooperate with the Social Service Department by failing to meet any oxie of his or her enumerated responsibilities without good. cause, shall be discontinued aid, and sanctions will be imposed as follows: a. first failure: one month b. second failure: three months c. third failure; six months _T 1_1 L - 1 Sll _"DZ5 r•1 ON �1 k� • F _ 03 E"V7DEKTIARY HE,ARXNG DECISION Thomas Steeves, Claimant Page 3 3 . If twelve months have passed from the date of the end of the last period of ineligibility, the cycle will begin again; i.e. the next failure to Cooper ate with a program requirement shall be followed by a one month period of ineligibility. F. Good Cause 1. The reasons which establish good cause for a fail- ure to cooperate or comply are subject to verifica- tion and include, but are not limited to, the following; a. employment has been obtained b. scheduled job interview or testing C. mandatory court appearance d. incarceration e. illness f. death in the family g. other substantial reason. it is undisputed that the claimant did not comply with the county 0 s instructions to obtain a specific naedical excuse for each day that he was unable to perform the assigned tasks; however, the medical evidence submitted at the hearing supports the claimant's conten- tion that 'he was physically incapacitated during the period in dispute. Considering the nature of his physical problem, alone, the fact that he continued to follow-up with his medical care, and was determined, by the doctor who followed up on his emergency visit, to be unable to work on April 24 for five weeks, it follows that he was unable to work on the date that his problem was originally identified on Maruti 17 and the subsequent work days . Sca�I��U��OBi AS the claimant had good cause for failure to attend workfare on March 24 , March 31 and April 7 , the discontiunuance effective April 30, 1993 is not sustained. P 0 4 -4 j Lj L_ 'S P1 0 t 10 EVIDEWrIARY HEARXNG DECISION T,bomas Steeves, Claimant P4ge 4 OR-1-M The claim is granted. The notice of discontinuance shall be rescinded, and aid shall. be restored. The failure shall be removed from the log. Underpayments shall be paid as required. S6ciai Seri�Aces Appeals Officer Date— < frQlgram Mana4K.- ppeals Date If, you are dissatisfied with this Decision you may appeal the maitter directly to the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors. Appeals must be filed in writing with the Clerk of the Board, 651 Pine Street, Room 106,, Martinez, CA 94553. Appeals must be filed within f 6urteen (14) days of the date of the Evidentiary Decisiob. Noifurther aid paid pending a Board of Supervisors appeal. -T U L- 9;:s 1`1 0 11-4 • 0 • F1 0 1 Social Service Department Contra Pleaso reply to: 40 Douglas Drive Pedee'llo VillarfoalMartinoz.California 94553-068 Diroctor Villarreal {} untv Post4tq brand fax trailsmittal memo 7671 from Co, Kom N Fax 0 Fax 0 c i.s 3.. Evidentiary Hearf-n-g­b6 6 n IN THE MATTER OF: County #07-92-0271164 Thomas Steeves Date Of County Notice: 4-9-93 952 Talbart. St. Effective Date of Action: 4-30-93 Martinez CA 94553 Filing Date: 4-21-93 Hearing Date: 6-28-931 Aid Paid Pending: Yes Appeals officer Scott G. Clayton .Tn-ome Maintenance Representative-. Joan Balzarini ftce of Hearing: Martinez M.1!M-Td Whether the county was correct in its determination that claimant failed without good cause to attend a GAADDS intake/interview appointment on February 17, 1993. The county also proposed a one month period of ineligibility. ZU91 Claimant signed a GAADDS appointment form on February 12 , 1993 for an individual Eva luation/Assessment intake appointment on Febru- ary 17 , 1993 at 9:00 am with Gary Hamilton. In March, the county received a communication from GAADDS that claimant had not been s een _ and 'they had been unable to contact him after several attempts . Presented as evidence were fax copies of the appointment slip and progress notes from GAADDS. The notes indicate that cl,..imant was seen on February 3.2 , 1993, that-a follow up appoint- ment had been scheduled and that the writer intends to refer claimant to Mental Health for evaluation. Also heard as an issue were workfare failures of March 24 , Marcli 31 and April 7, 1993 . No decision is being rendered as this issue was already heard on June 1 , 1993 by another Appeals Officer . 20 EVIDENTIARY HEARING Thomaz steoves,, Claizant Page 2 At Hearing the Claimant stated that he failed because he Was never informed of the appointment. He states he had previously talked to Gary Hamilton who told him . that there would be no more meetings until a "psych eval" was completed. He stated he had tried to call GAADDS but did not, leave messages. He stated that the fax copy of the appointment slip was contrived and he never signed the original. ,jAf.9,N_F _Q N Department Manual Section 11. POLICY A. General Assistance applicants and recipients who demon- strate noncooperation. or noncompliance with Social Service , Department program, requirements by failing to meet any one of their enumerated responsibilities without good cause shall be denied aid or shall be discontinued. A period of ineligibility may be imposed on recipients in instances involving noncooperation and noncompliance in accordance with guide'lines which follow. 2. A recipient who fails to cooperate with the Social Service Department by failing to meet any one of his or her enumerated responsibi 3.1 ties without good cause, shall be discontinued aid, and sanctions will be imposed as followsi a, first failure: one month b. second failure: three months C. third failure: six months 4 . Examples of recipient responsibilities include, but are not limited to: a. appearing for work Programs Assignment Group or monthly Job Club meetings b. submitting a timely and complete job search report form co performing a monthly workfare assignment d. Cooperating with GAAMS eo cooperating with Quality Control. f . submitting a timely and complete monthly status report (CA-7) g. cooperating with and completing the annual redetermination process h. Providing requested information or verifica- tion, including verification of unemployabili- ty, by the due date i . applying for any ,other resource or benefit, including Supplement'--al Security Income, and taking all. necessary steps to receive such income. b -J U 1 1 cp EVIDENTIARY REkRJNG Thomas Steeves, Claimant Page 3 J accepting an offer of employment, and main- taining employment. F. Good Cause 1. The reasons which establish good cause for a fail- ure to cooperate or comply are subject to verifica- tion and include, but are not limited to, the he following: a. employment has been obtained b. schadulefid job intervicw or testing ce mandatory court appearance d. incarceration e. illness f. death in the family g Other substantial reason. These must be re- viewed axed approved by the Division Manager. G. Willfulness 1. Each case who're willfulness is an issue, will turn on its own facts. A determination must be made based on the evidence. a. Evidence can be direct, or it may be inferred from an applicant's or recipient's acts. 2. A willful act is one that is intentional or without reasonable excuse or cause. It need not be demo with malice, nor with a specific purpose to violate program requirements. 3 . Willfulness cannot be found where the pei:son is mentally disabled to the extent that s/he does not understand hi,s/hisir responsibilities or is incapable of fulfilling them. 4. conduct' which involves negligence, inadvertence., physical disability or lesser mental disability may or may not be willful. 9 J i i Q i N-1 D—SOK ff-&C"f It is found that claimant did not have good cause for failing to attend the February 17, 1993 . It is not credible that GAADDS would falsify the appointment slip. Claimant spoke about a previous conversation with Gary Hamilton in which a psychological evaluation was d'iscussed. This agrees with the February 12, 1993 notes .from GAADDS of his meeting. The appointment slip was signed on Febtu- ary 12, 1993 . It is found that the failure was willful . Claimant is without a reasonable excuse for his failure to attend the GAADD' S appointment. TUL — 3 9z t'10N 21 P _ C, 4 EVIDENTIARY HEARING Thomas Steeves, Claimant Page 4 As clainant failed to meet General Assistance program requirements he is. no longer eligible for assistance. The action to discontinue General.Assistance and impose a one month period of' ineligibility is, therefore, sustained. .QIP The claim is denied. Scott G. 'Clayton �.. Date Social Services Ap al officer �! �s Program k1an,ager, Appeals to if you are dissatisfied with this Decision, you may appeal the . matter directly to the Contra costa County Board of Supervisors. Appeals .must be tiled in writing with the Clerk of the Board, 651 Pine Street, Room 106, Martinez, CA 94553 within 14 days of the date of the Evidentiary Hearing Decision. No further aid is paid pending a Board of Supervisors appeal . Td -�OoVp I c ri 612 J TH�'i l Sio Bim' or, c�� riE G)ot �.i SF�iF K�f' �j �rE ECENED F �llL 161411 CLERK BOARD OF SUPERVISORS I.CONIM COSTA CO. T se' s rrL4F. cl 4553 } .� ', .. ' , ��, �- �, M :. r/t T��. �.�`' ice. rs S U} nr1 r, ��, KT' O �+ �� �'Y f i b�llt%G ° p ,1�1 f., ''� ..amar ' ' F� v� `1 � �a�. ��, � `� �� �� l4 �� �r � �, V