The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutMINUTES - 03231993 - H.3 H. 3a THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA Adopted this Order on March 23 , 1993 by the following vote: AYES: Supervisors Powers, Bishop, McPeak and Torlakson NOES: None ABSENT: Supervisor Smith ABSTAIN: None --------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------------- SUBJECT: Hearing On Appeal By Michael Johnson Of General Assistance Evidentiary Hearing Decision This is the time heretofore noticed by the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors for hearing on the appeal by Michael Johnson of the General Assistance Evidentiary hearing decision. . Jewel Mansapit, General Assistance Program Analyst, Social Services Department, appeared and advised the Board of Supervisors of a request from the appellant for a continuance of this matter. IT IS BY THE BOARD ORDERED that the hearing on the above appeal is CONTINUED to March 30, 1993 at 2: 00 p.m. in the Board Chambers, 651 Pine Street, Room 107, Martinez . I hereby certify that this Is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors onhe date shown. ATTESTED: PHIL&-tCHELOR,Cork f the Beard Orig. Dept. : Clerk of the Board SupervI rsandCc tyAdministrator cc: County Counsel o Social Services Dept. By ,Deputy Michael Johnson H. 3a THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA Adopted this Order on March 23 , 1993 by the following vote: AYES: Supervisors Powers, Bishop, McPeak and Torlakson NOES: None ABSENT: Supervisor Smith ABSTAIN: None --------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------------- SUBJECT: Hearing On Appeal By Michael Johnson Of General Assistance Evidentiary Hearing Decision This is the time heretofore noticed by the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors for hearing on the appeal by Michael Johnson of the General Assistance Evidentiary hearing decision. . Jewel Mansapit, General Assistance Program Analyst, Social Services Department, appeared and advised the Board of Supervisors of a request from the appellant for a continuance of this matter. IT IS BY THE BOARD ORDERED that the hearing on the above appeal is CONTINUED to March 30, 1993 at 2: 00 p.m. in the Board Chambers, 651 Pine Street, Room 107, Martinez. I hereby certify that this Is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervlsors on he date shown. ATTESTED: -a I , 9`3 ; I �Q PHIL BATCHELOR,Clerk 6f the Board Orig. Dept. : Clerk of the Board Supervl rs and Co ty Administrator CC: County Counsel Social Services Dept. By ,Deputy Michael Johnson • CLERK OF TEE BOARD Inter - Office Memo TO: Social Services Department DATE: March 2 , 1993 Appeals and Complaints Division FROM: Jeanne Maglio, Chief Clerk Ann Cervelli , Deputy Clerk SUBJECT: Hearing on appeal from Administrative Decision Rendered on General Assistance Benefits Filed by Michael Johnson 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 : 0 p.m-on Tuesday, March 23 , 1993 Attachment cc: Board Members County Administrator County Counsel GA Program Analyst-SS Dept . 40Douglas Drive Phi elor ..The. Board of Super visW Contra CerkloltthehBoard and County Administration Building • County Administrator Costa 651 Pine $t., Room 106 Costa (510)646-2371 Martinez, California 94553 County _ Tom Powers,1st District Jeff Smith.2nd District Gayle Bishop,3rd District Sunne Wright McPeak 4th District f Tom Torlakson,5th District a VS March 2 , 1993 Michael Johnson 1816 Maine Avenue Richmond, CA 94804 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 : 00 p.m. on Tuesday, March 23 , 1993 . In accordance with Board of Supervisors 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 er i orsCounty Administrator By a n erve i , eputy !Ter Enclosure cc: Soard Members Social Service Department Attn: Appeals & Complaints County Counsel County Administrator I BOARD OF SWERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COU40, CALIFORNIA Re: General Assistance ) Appeals Procedure ) RESOLUTION NO. 75/28 (Jan. 14 , 1975) The Contra Costa County hoard 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 hoard of Supervisors Resolution 71+/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 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 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 Hearin; 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 ,the, appeal is based are not In dispute, or if any. dispute.d.Sapts!;are` not relevant to the issue ultimately to be decided by .the Board, the Board will proceed Immediately to the next step,%., &thout ;considerinP fact questions. The parties may stipulate ,to,"ah agreed set of facts . 4 . Once the facts are determined, or if there are no fact determinations required kiy tti%14D'tal, the Board will consider legal issues presented- by--tha -appeal. 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..Boardi , If the issues are susceptible of immediate resolution, the .Board may, if it deuires , 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 , : . •16 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. HavinC made factual determinations , having received advice on the legal issues, and having applied policy considera- 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 •Caunsel ;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 . 1 through ,r4 .above•, and shall recommend a proposed decision, stating findinCs o� fact and summarizing the reasoning of the proposed deci§ion. The Board then will in its discretion, adopt the proposed decision, adopt a modified .de- c1sion 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 Ili , 1975, unanimously by the Supervisors present. i t!EATIPIED COPY I osrury that this is a full, true ! eorrect toll of the Original document which is on file in my offlee, and that it was passed A adopted by the Hoard of Supervisors of Contra Costa County, California. on the date shown. ATTEST: J. R. OLSSON, County Clerk!ex-officio Clerk of said Board of Supervisors, by Deput Clerk. _�e 1 41975 cc: Uirector, Human Resources Agency Social Service County Counsel County Auditor-Controller County Administrator Aw &L,//�ai�o qp(e q.[ 7-o �'C Lip f-K tial Service DepartmentP1eatefeplyto. Contra oAppeaS oZ- �_3 Perfecto-•i7illareal Costa (510) 313-1790 Director Court / 40 Douglas Dr. RECEIVED artinez, Ca. 94553 r tb 2 41993 GENERAL ASSISTANCE EVIDENTIA ' pv�lUN pealsOfficer: �L / Hearing Date: T ce of Hearing: ❑ Martinez (] Antioci, Ichmor;d e proceeding was tape recorded and all testimony and evidence was accepted under penalties of perjury. THE MATTE ��,� A Case 107- filing Date: Aid Paid Pend—frig Hearing ^ es ❑ No Date of Notice: Effective Date of Action: SENT: ' Qalmant ❑ County Representat;ve(s): Authorized Representative(s): - ❑ v„tness(es): Other: 10N UNDER APPEAL: Denial ,scontinuance Application Date ffeCtive Date ❑ Notice Of Action Otice of Action eriod of Inel1g;b"14'ty E: Employment Requlrt-mcnts neMpf ability Reputtements ❑ Employabtltly Assc%�n,et,1 .P.edi(al ve(tft(aw)n - O Job Sear(h n Unemployal),Iriy l.l)C55rn(n� O Wo(k(afe (l AigK aS%ewnew and pan.(rpat•on I] lob OuiU 1 uec7 rut 0111or ❑ 0111,•, r� fi'JClj C•3 S:,: • • . GENERAL ASSISTANCE EVIDENTIARY HEARING DECISION (cont'd.) R(SDf ON DM 49-700: DM 49-701): Timely Filing of Appeal C] Challenge only to Regulation ] Untimely Filing of Appeal : ❑ Issue Outside Scope of Program Period Expired: ❑ Good Cause :DENCE CONSIDERED : Cl ant TestimonyDocumentary County Testimony ❑ GA 34 Cooperation Agreement Document Date: • ❑ Assessment Appointment Notice ❑ Work Programs otice ❑ Other: POSITIONAL FINDINGS/CONCLUSION: e.evidence and testimony having been heard and considered,the following findings are reached: Ctaiman eceiv dJid i receive notice of the particular assignment under review claim wasot capable of understanding and meeting the particular assignment under review:•. - ;y: Educational ❑ Physical ❑ Emotional (DM 49-102 II B.) mod Cause (OfJI 49-t t t IIF) ] Good Cause Exists Good Cause Does Not Exists ❑ Employment has been obtained ❑ Scheduled Job Interview or Testing ❑ Mandatory Court Appearance ❑ Incarceration ❑ Illness ❑ Death in the Fam.i)- ❑ Circumstances beyond Applicant/Recipient's control Nillfulness (01tir 49. 11 1 11 til 311v✓dlfulness Exisis (] willfulness DoesNoI1xis1s I] Failure vias deliberate and intenooncl ❑ County resonded will fulness deter mIna tion O Failure Yeas more than a single Occurrence Q County failed to provide sufficient evidence to ❑ Failure was Itie result of Intentional mistake/omission establishv:illfulneSS C) f a' ure vwa� ina((ative of a pattern of non-cooperation Q Other Ed l Las ca.t-se a.- o:» GENERAL ASSISTA& EVIDENTIARY HEARING DECOON(cont,d) SUMMARY OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF THE EVIDENCE: The claimant was sent a Notice of Action on 1-6-93 stating that on 12-10-92, he did not attend an appointment with the counselor for a medical review. The county submitted into evidence a copy of the sign-in log for the reception desk for 12-10-92 for Work Programs . The claimant testified that he did appear on 12-10-92 and asked for the counselor but was told that the counselor was not available. The claimant was very verbose about his dissatisfaction with the entirety of the department and seemed to question the methods, behavior, attitude, and policies of the department. The claimant testified that if his name is not on the log, it is because the red4ionist refused to enter it. The record was held open for the claimant to submit a note from his grandmother verifying that he was in the office on 12- 10-92. This note was received on 2-3-93. The evidence presented by the county of the sign-in log would seem to verify that the claimant either was not present in the office on 12- 10-92 or that he did not present himself to the receptionist. On the other hand, the note handed in by the claimant would appear to overcome the evidence of the sign-in log except for the fact that the note appears to be altered. (Copy attached to decision. ) The alteration is in the same color ink and it is impossible to tell if the alteration was done by the signer or not. In addition, the claimant was clearly instructed to mail the note directly to the hearing officer. This he did not do. Instead, he took the note to the office and had it sent via inter-office mail . Such a variance from instruction is minor but it reveals a willingness to deviate from given procedures . The upshot of all this is that the county case must be upheld. The claim is denied. ORDER: C i.m Denied: ❑ Claim Dismissed: ' Aid shall be discontinued and the Period of Ineligibility imposed. ❑ Aid shall be discontinued. The Period of Ineligibility shall be expunged from the record. Claimant may reapply at any time. ❑ Claim Granted: ❑ General Assistance shall be restored. The. proposed discontinuance is reversed. The Period of Ineligibility shall be expunged from the record. 0 Other: 0 Written copies of the Order were issued by ❑ mail ❑ at Hearing ❑ Additional Regulatory Authority was attached to the foregoing Or r P ogram Managei-, Appeals Date CAC 23(revised 6(92) A7STAS EVIDENTIARY HEARING DEC�N(cont'd) G Assistant Director Date 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, Room 106 , Martinez, CA 94553 . Appeals must be filed within thirty (30) days of the date of the Evidentiary Decision. No further aid paid pending a Board of Supervisors appeal . CAC 23(revised 6/92) i t w t t ` 4I It , It ti uf�f� eq,( 7-o . Please reply xo: ocial Service Department Contra C] Appeals 79 0z-j (510) 313-1790 P647f ec to_-Vi I la rea 1 Costa 40 Douglas Dr. . Director CoU* RECEIVED artinez, Ca. 94553 FEB 2 41993 GENERAL ASSISTANCE EVIDENTIA Hearing Date: 4'ppeals Of ficer: 'lace of Hearing: Cj- Martinez ❑ Antioch Wf-,—ch,n o I: -he proceeding was tape recorded and all testimony and evidence was accepted under penalties of pe(iury- NTHE MATTE10F. %4"case#07- 3, Filing Date: /1-13 Aid Paid Pefi@`ngHeWfinqFes�ONo� cc) Date of Notice: Effective Date of Action: IESENT: ,Z'lg �Iant ❑0 CountylRe Representative(s):m p 3�-Authorized Representative(s). 0 Witness(es): -1 Other: CTION UNDER APPEAL: ti Denial <,conuan(e C1 Application Date156-c-c-it i v e D a t e ❑ Notice of A0100 6--60(i(e"of Action P—re'6od of I-eligibli-ty UE: Employment Requl(C_M�nts f0i n�eanplabillty Requirements ❑ Employability Assessmentod,(al Vefifi(ai.on ❑ Job Sear(h j Urlemployabiloy E) Workfare AIRS assessmenl and Par1;0P3t-0n ❑ Job Oulu fl(((j to, 01hec ❑ Wol V.Sl 101) 0 f� Good 0a_ne f--7 �, ' �• ' �. c.fir'£=�:a�..:z T'=�.,..�,G�=-' -c3.341.F� �� u _.-.�_.__ :_..__ GI �� t}��; �� ,, ;� �ryi.r LS �.. _. , a GENERAL ASSISTANCE EVIDENTIARY HEARING DECISION (cont'd.) URISDI ON DM 49-700' DM 49-701). Timely Filing of Appeal ❑ Challenge only to Regulation ❑ Untimely Filing of Appeal : ❑ Issue Outside Scope of Program Period Expired: ❑ Good Cause :VIDEN ECONSIDERED CI ant Testimony Documentary County Testimony ❑ GA 34 Cooperation Agreement Document Date: ❑ Assessment Appointment Notice ' ❑ Work Programs otice ❑ Other: i(SPOSITIONAL FINDINGS/CONCLUSION: rhe evidence and testimony having been heard and considered,the following findings are reached: -Dida-ii'man ceivdigit receive notice of the particular assignment under review acli�lm wa capable of understanding and meeting the particular assignment under review_ Educational ❑ Physical ❑ Emotional (DM 49-102 II B.) od Cause (DM 49-1 1 1 II F) ❑ Good Cause Exists Good Cause Does Not Exists ❑ Employment has been obtained ❑ Scheduled Job Interview or Testing ❑ Mandatory Court Appearance ❑ Incarceration ❑ Illness ❑ Death in the Family ❑ Circumstances beyond npplicant/Reopient'scontrol illfulness f�fVr 49- t t t tt ti) willfulness Fx(sls ❑ willfulness Does Not Exists ❑ Failure was del berate and intem.onal ❑ County rescinded willfulness determination ❑ Failure vias more than a single occurrence ❑ County failed to provide sufficient evidence to ❑ Failure was the result of intentional mistake/omission establish willfulness ❑ FF re wa, indl(ative of a pattern of non-cooperation ❑ Other U-tLsP_ or f'Y.fJ-r'e -- ----- -- --------- GENERAL ASSISTANCE EVIDENTIARY HEARING DEC04(dont,d) SUMMARY OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF THE EVIDENCE: I. i;!'�',I; The claimant was sent a Notice of Action on 1-6-93 ''stating that on 12-10-92, he did not attend an appointment with the counselor for a medical review. The county submitted into evidence: a; copy of the sign-in log for the reception desk for 12-10-92 for Work Programs . The claimant testified that he did appear on 12-10-92 . and asked for the counselor but was told that the counselor was hot`'available. The claimant was very verbose about his dissatisfaction 'wit; the entirety of the department and seemed to question the methods'; : behavior, attitude, and policies of the department. The claimant. testified that if his name is not on the log, it is because the red' " onist refused to enter it. The record was held open for the claimant,i-to submit a note from his grandmother verifying that he was int 16 office on 12- 10-92. This note was received on 2-3-93. The evidence presented by the county of the sign-in' 'log would seem to verify that the claimant either was not present in th'e'; office on 12- 10-92 or that he did not present himself to the receptionist. On the other hand, the note handed in by the claimant woul,d 'appear to overcome the evidence of the sign-in log except for, the±;fact that the note appears to be altered. (Copy attached to deci. iIldri. ) The alteration is in the same color ink and it is imposs,kb'le ' to tell if the alteration was done by the signer or not. r: In addition, the claimant was clearly instructed to ''mal : the note directly to the hearing officer. This he did not do:'' ,. 'Instead, he took the note to the office and had it sent via inter=office mail. Such a variance from instruction is minor but it repeals 'a willingness to deviate from given procedures . " ;Y The upshot of all this is that the county case must',,be ;upheld. The claim is denied. ORDER,: fir.;,:; C1 im Denied: ❑ Claim Dismissed'':':; Aid shall be discontinued and the Period of Ineli ibilit ,. g Y imposed. ! ❑ Aid shall be discontinued. The Period of .In li:gibiiity shall be expunged from the record. Claimant :.may reapply at any time. ❑ Claim Granted: ❑ General Assistance shall be restored. The'.proposed discontinuance is reversed. The Period o''f: I#eligibility shall be expunged from the record. , ❑ Other: ❑ Written copies of the Order were issued by ❑ mal;O' at Hearing ❑ Additional Regulatory Authority was attached to',`'.the ';foregoing Program Manage , Appeals Date','.; CAC 23(revised 6/92) GENERAL AS TANCE EVIDENTIARY HEARING DEAION(cont'd) Assistant Director Date 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, Room 106 , Martinez, CA 94553 . Appeals must be filed within thirty (30) days of the date of the Evidentiary Decision. No further aid paid pending a Board of Supervisors appeal. I: I i1 i, ii i'. 11 W CAC 23(revised 6/92) �';''• = a ;::; :—..�... � is _ .I.•_:. /:.... • (,i : 1� 4 r ii� Contra Costa County JROIi I TXAftj D Social Service Department TO: ® PCN: DATE: �, f � /Ja,�td .�'2 3 Please Check Correct Address E] 40 Douglas Dr., Martinez ❑ 30 Muir Road,Martinez ❑ 1340 Arnold Drive#220,Martinez ❑ Administration (Training/Appeals) ❑ Area Agency on Aging ❑ 2500 Alhambra Ave.,Martinez ❑ ❑ 4545 Delta Fair,Antioch ❑ 100 Glacier Dr., Martinez ❑ 3431 MacdonaldAve.,Richmond (Lion's Gate) ❑ 1305 Macdonald Ave.,Richmond ❑ 2301 Stanwell Dr.,Concord ❑ 3045 Research Dr., Richmond (Centralized Closed Files) ❑ 3630 San Pablo Dam Rd., EI Sobrante ❑ 2450 A-Stanwell Dr.,Concord ❑ 525 Second Street, Rodeo (YIACT)330-25th Street, Richmond(PIC) El (. A,;,51 OTHER DEPARTMENTS MARTINEZ ❑ Auditor/Controller ❑ DA Family Support ❑ County Administrator p Welfare Section ❑ ❑ DA Investigations �j Risk Manaqement ❑ Health Services ❑ Data Processing Services ❑ County Counsel 0 County Hospital ❑ Probation ❑ Public Defender(ADO) p ward ❑ Purchasing ❑ County Personnel p CCC Health Plan p ❑ CONCORD WALNUTCREEK RICHMOND JUVENILE COURT ❑Central Services []Office of Revenue Collection ❑Public Defender ❑ Antioch ❑Public Defender ❑ ❑ ❑ Richmond ❑ ❑ Martinez ❑ OTHER: AS ❑ Requested FOR ❑ Necessary Action NOTE & ❑ Return ❑ Discussed ❑ Information ❑ Discard ❑ Recommendation ❑ File ❑ Approval/Signature COMMENTS =ROM: PCN: TELEPHONE NUMBER -34 2,? R 2(Rev.2/92) ❑ SEE REVERSE FOR ADDITIONAL COMMENTS H. 3b FROM: Perfecto Villarreal, Director Social Service Department DATE: March 23 1993 SUBJECT: APPEAL OF GENERAL ASSISTANCE EVIDENTIARY HEARING DECISION BY DENISE DE RAMO - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - SPECIFIC REQUEST(S) OR RECOMMENDATIONS AND BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION RECOMMENDATION: That the Board deny Denise De Ramo's appeal of the General Assistance Hearing decision. BACKGROUND: Claimant filed request for Hearing on December 5, 1992. The request was not filed in a timely manner. Claimant did not present evidence supporting her claim that she had good cause for late filing. No Hearing was scheduled. Signature: - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ACTION OF BOARD ON March 23 , 1993 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER x On March 9 , 1993 , the Board of Supervisors continued to this date the hearing on the appeal by -Denise DeRamo .ffom. the administt.ative decision rendered on General Assistance benefits . Jewel Mansapit, General Assistance Program Analyst, Social Service Department, presented the staff report on the appeal . Ellen J. Tabachnick, Contra Costa Legal Services Foundation, representing the appellant, presented testimony relative to the appeal . Kevin Kerr, Deputy County Counsel , commented on the Social Service Department ' s actions, and the Board discussed the matter. On recommendation of Supervisor McPeak, IT IS BY THE BOARD ORDER that the appeal by Denise De Ramo is GRANTED for an evidentiary hearing. VOTE OF SUPERVISORS: UNANIMOUS (ABSENT ) AYES: 1 , 3 , 4 NOES: 5 ABSENT: 2 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 Service Dept. ATTESTED March 23 , 1993 Appeals Unit PHIL BATCHELOR, CLERK OF THE BOARD OF Program Analyst County Counsel SUPERVISORS A7 COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR Denise DeRamo CCLegal Ser. Found. BY , DEPUTY • IAT REQLTEST TO SPEAK '' ORM (THREE (3) MINUTE LIMIT) Complete this form and place it in the box near the speakers' rostrum before addressing the Board. NAME: PHONE: ADDRESS: CITY: I am speaking formyself OR organization: Ch h One: (NAME OF ORGANI7-\TION) I wish to speak on Agenda Item # C4f A. hkm , My comments will be: general for. against I wish to speak on the subject of I do not wish to speak but leave these comments for the Board to consider. SPEAKERS 1. Deposit the "Request to Speak" form (on the reverse side) in the box next to the speakers' microphone before your item is to be considered. 2. You will be called to make your presentation. Please speak into the microphone. 3. Begin by stating your name and address; whether you are speaking for yourself or as a representative of an organization. 4. Give the Clerk a copy of your presentation or support documenuLtion, if available. 5. Please limit your presentation to three minutes. Avoid repeating comments made by previous speakers. (The Chair may limit length of presentations so all persons may be heard.) ley, olb, ea r hrol men Vo4e abi q , 6,0<,ge0-s Y r Social Service Department Contra Please reply to: ❑Appeals Costa (510)646-2865 Co U 1 n It y ❑Staff Development (510)646-2861 1340 Arnold Drive,Suite 220 Martinez,CA 94553 December 22 , 1992 Ms. Denise Deramo 1671 Haller Ct. #1 Concord, CA 94520 County: #92-0401275-A4AH Filing Date: 12/5/92 Dear Ms. Deramo: Enclosed is a copy of the correction sheet that was sent to all General Assistance recipients effective 9-1-92. This correction sheet gave notice that effective 9-1-92, the period for filing for a hearing and receiving Aid Paid Pending changed from 30 to 14 days. If you can conclusively prove that you, through no action and/or fault of your own, failed to receive the above referred notice, then it may be possible to grant you a hearing. Absent such conclusive proof, the decision to not grant you a hearing stands. Appeals Coordinator 40 Douglas Drive Martinez, CA 94553 ss: Encl. : a December 16, 1992 Appeals Coordinator 40 Douglas Drive Martinez, CA 9453 Dear Appeals Coordinator: I am requesting that the county reconsider their decision denying my request for a hearing on the basis that it was not timely filed (copy enclosed) . The proposed termination was inappropriate as I had already submitted verification of a medical dispensation as the reason for a missed workfare appointment. Your courtesy and consideration to my request is greatly appreciated. Sincerely, eniseA4f 1671 Ht ')� Concord, CA 94520 Social Service Department Contra Please reply to: Perfecto Villarreal 40 Douglas Drive birector Costa Martinez.California 94553-4068 County December 8, 1992 Ms. Denise Deramo 1671 Haller Ct. #1 Concord, CA 94520 County #07-92-0401275-00-A4AH Filing Date: 12/5/92 Dear Ms. Deramo: We have received your request for an Evidentiary Hearing. However, in accord with the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors Resolution #921553 dated August 4, 1992 your request was not filed timely and thus your request for a hearing is denied. If you believe this decision to be in error, you may file a written request for reconsideration along with any necessary verifications with: Appeals Coordinator 40 Douglas Drive Martinez, CA 94553 t� y 76, 1 Z 330 1�7 f�.i.,'.7 'I ., 3,vvM3S �1NP.0 , T f. VCTME'OF PROPOSED ACTION COUNTY OF _ G� 239 H aENERAL 'ASSISTANCE PROGRAM' CONTRA COSTA DEL.10/92 NOTICE DATE 11-13-92 A4ARH CASE NAME DERA MO DENISE NUMBER 92-0401275-00-0 WORKER NAME K MARCH NUMBER A4AH TELEPHONE 646-2028 ADDRESS 30 M UI R ROAD MARTINEZ CA 94553 Questions? Ask your Worker. 51 neeealt• una traoucc16n de fatc, llaae a au trabaJacor(a) (ADDRESSEE) xin end/Oi 11fn 14e .cl Tnia Sinn vlen c,sa aIne nf� cin ban etch F DENISE D E RA M O - �• 9 -wT 1671 HALLER CT #1 CONCORD CA 94520 L J YOUR GENERAL ASSISTANCE WILL BE DISCONTINUED EFFECTIVE NOV 30 1992 - BECAUSE YOU HAVE DEMONSTRATED WILLFUL NONCOOPERATION OR NONCOMPLIANCE KITH WORK PROGRAM REQUIREMENTS BY FAILURE TO MEET YOUR RESPONSIBILITIES WITHOUT GOOD CAUSE IN THESE SPECIFIC INSTANCES: DATE OF FAILURES) NATURE OF FAILURES) BECAUSE OF THESE FAILURES YOU WILL BE INELIGIBLE TO GENERAL ASSISTANCE FOR A PERIOD OF: ( ) ONE MONTH THREE MONTHS ( ) SIX MONTHS IF YOU WISH TO REAPPLY FOR GEN AL ASSISTANCE9 YOU MAY AGAIN BE ELIGIBLE TO AID ON OR AFTER DEPENDING UPON YOUR CIRCUMSTANCES AT THAT TIME. ANY FURTHER FAILURE TO MEET THE ELIGIBILITY REQU IREMEN 1 S OF GENERAL ASSISTANCE MAY . RESULT IN ANOTHER PERIOD OF INELIGIBILITY. IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS• OR YOU BELIEVE THIS ACTION IS INCORRECT. OR YOU WISH TO GIVE YOUR REASONS WHY YOU THINK ANY FAILURE TO COOPERATE CR TO CCMPLY WITH GA REQUIREMENTS SHOULD BE EXCUSEDT YOU ARE ENTITLED TC TALK ABOUT THESE THINGS WITH YOUR WORKER OR THE SUPERVISOR. . THIS ACTION IS REQUIRED BY THE FOLLOWING LAMS AND/OR REGULATIONS DEPARTMENT MANUAL SECTIONS: 49-102 APPLICATION AND RECEPTION 49-111 DISCONTINUE• GOOD CAUSE• WILLFULNESS AND PERIOD OF INELIGIBILITY . 49-210 EMPLOYABLE PROGRAM BOARD RESOLUTION 92/553 51-500 EMPLOYMENT SERVICES 1 • . GA239 DISC— FAILED TO MEET EMPLOYMENT REQUIREMENTS- POI 078—C .A 239H(5/87) 1117-'92 H :NICE OF PROPOSED ACTION { COUNTY 4 .ENE ASSISTANCE PROGRAf�•,� C O r�g A C C-T.4 . 239 .• DEL.10/92 NOTICE DATE I!—13—q12 CASE NAME "1^ .�t I!� lF IN ; NUMBER WORKER NAME r A R CH NUMBER TELEPHONE ADDRESSU. E L1 Questions? Ask your VVorker. Si r.e lln Una c-d-76n de 45;o. I!, . 3u tr.e.).aor(,) •i?ORESSEE) 11.e.g/bi llfn :ac 41 Thies oinr. nia. �t e:� e:cr. .Y3U^ rFr;-RAL :SSI S TANIC- HILL. 3r ^'t iC rtiT"r'U� --f7� Fr T!V?- Iti3V 3�3 p 19(3? AICA ISF `!`7t1 HAVE U!-_r-'UN5T*,ATFn VrLLrt.IL y�'iC^ P^ A ION OR NCNC-IMPLI,nNC_ E WITH wn^ PROC P..Al Rz?UTR ,:MENTS ,� Y P�>ILU?.^ t0 ME--EE T YOUR WESPO-1ST91LT+ TES !11.. T`I OUT 0;l l CAUSE i N Tc cF SPEC T. ; INS T At v:4;: 1 . � Ll If' `_ �.) I.OU }:'T �.:! _ T", ::1 Tri il;. = T :"i ERIA L R PE 'In- !7 mnwH MONTHS �.� C STX MONTHS T^ P Fria ^E n'' A 1 r r+; Mw PE I%= Y�,U t'�'':�:� T r? !'�:4? �'Y �.� i r:r-? ::S S I /:.NC � Y�7 J t ,Y A_,A 1'ti L'_Is.`_.7 77 .� A. _ _ L. ._ ... _ ..} ..i._1 i ..,1 .JZ 11, ?"�i_ PP. Tr -_ y�J'li Nii.Cj.�'1 _:�.) iii\:- {;]l�n h�L .tiJL��rS i'"'i�f '�:1�� ;-i �ylh. i��"��+r i-.r.' T iJ` = T�: C-�n1PFRA+T!`CR TJ CV.PLY %SIT}1 .iJM �.r^tJIR=''Ire^JTS SH7+1L.D :XCt�;-C. YnU` A?E .E'-4TiTL L� ?C TALC; Afl0 7 �"Et' T�iI.:NG , .''.aITH YOUR W0RKU `O7r T4e=" SUPF:iVISC1R. •,^ U'lvl: 1.�'. �.�. 7 \j C:" �•^ ^i�1��.:ll!�.l 2- rA v THIS ACTIO! 'ISREQUIRED BY- THE FOLLOWING LAWS AND/0P REGULATIONS CEPA RTMENT MANUAL SFCTi!3`J; : 49- 10:1 A P 0 L IC-AT ION ANC. REC EPT TCr4 `4•Q- 111 0ISCf41TINtirOtf1 CAUSE, WILL GULINESS M40 PERIM (Ir 1N EL IiliF! ILITY 49—?11 :''1PLOYA?LF PRi(R.AM 51-500 E. ,MPLt')Y r?dT SERVICES 99ARC R57S7LUTIfIi4 '42J553 GA239 FISC—. FAILED Tn . SET E19PLOYM "!T RF�UIREflENT° POI 078+—!", 239H(5/87).. 1112 92 . H ,. 7. GA 239 F 1. You have the right to a conference with representatives'of the Social Service Department to talk about this intended action. At such a conference, you may speak for yourself.or be.represented by a lawyer,.a,friend or other spokesman. If you want a conference, contact your worker within ten.days of the date of this notice:: . -. 2. If this notice proposes. a denial.or discontinuance.or..a..perio&of ineligibility for.failure:to-meet-program requirements, you are entitled to a hearing at which the Department must prove your failure to comply, and you will be entitled to show that the failure is excused for good cause or because it was not willful. 3. Whether you request a conference or not, you also have the right to request a Hearing and a decision. Your request must be in writing.Your request for a hearing must be mailed or delivered.to Social Service Department within 14 days of the date of this notice. 4. if you ask for a Hearing within 14 days of the date of this notice, and if tais notice proposes a reduction or termination of a GA grant that you are now receiving, your aid will be continued until a decision has been reached. 5. Your county worker will help you ask for a Hearing. 6. If the decision is that you were not entitled to the.aid which you were paid, the overpayment may be recovered from you by reducing your General Assistance grant after the decision, or through other legal means. 7. At a Hearing you have the right to be represented by an attorney or any other person (a friend, relative, or any other j spokesman) of your choice. If you need an interpreter we will provide one for you. You may obtain free legal advice and services by contacting the nearest legal services office at: CONTRA COSTA LEGAL SERVICE SERVICES :FOUNDATION From East CCC call 439-9166 From West CCC call 233-9954 From Central CCC call 372-8209 8. You have the right to request that the Eligibility Worker, Work Programs staff, or any staff tnember who has actual knowledge regarding the issue under appeal be present at the Hearing as a witness. 9. Regulations governing Hearings are available at this office of the county welfare department. IF YOU NVIS11 TO REQUEST A HEARING,WRITE TO: Office of Appeals Coordinator 40 Douglas Drive l Martinez, CA 945534068 Please include one copy of this notice with your hearing request and keep the other copy for your records. If you wish to have your worker or other staff person present at the Hearing, please indicate that on your Hearing request. REMEM13ER THAT YOUR REQUEST FOR HEARING MUST BE MAILED OR DELIVERED.TO THE SOCIAL SERVICES DEPARTMENT WITHIN 14 DAYS OF THE DATE OF THIS NOTICE. 0 0 U Q Q F Z U N CI N !�vj�'�'�..�:1.a. >..__ .. r •,.+>._ _.��;,i _:•_. . ,'fir i;;�.L : = r,">> _ 4�qeect ..,. r. H. 2b THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA Adopted this Order on March 9, 1993 by the following vote: AYES: Supervisors Smith, Bishop, McPeak and Torlakson NOES: None ABSENT: Supervisor Powers ABSTAIN: None --------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------------- SUBJECT: Hearing On Appeal From Administrative Decision Rendered On General Assistance Benefits Filed By Denise DeRamo This is the time heretofore noticed by the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors for hearing on the appeal by Denise DeRamo from the administrative decision rendered on General Assistance benefits. Jewel Mansapit, General Assistance Program Analyst, Social Services Department, advised of the Department' s agreement with a request from Ellen J. Tabachnick, Contra Costa Legal Services Foundation, for a continuance of the above appeal to March 23 , 1993 at 2: 00 p.m. IT IS BY THE BOARD ORDERED that the above appeal by Denise DeRamo is CONTINUED to March 23 , 1993 at 2: 00 p.m. in the Board Chambers. 1 hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Sp Isors o the date shown. ATTESTED: PHIL IJAHELOR,Clerk of the Board f Supervi s and Cou ty dministrator Orig. Dept. : Clerk of the Board Social Services Dept. By , Deputy Jewel Mansapit Denise DeRamo Ellen J. Tabachnick CC Legal Services Foundation Law Offices of Contra Costa ]Legal Services Foundation Main Office Telephone 1017 Macdonald Avenue West County (5 10)233-9954 P.O.Box 2289 t (510)439-91W Richmond,California 94802 ��e IV a� Cen al (510)372$209 66..�i Q� D ax (510)236-6846 ssnt by fax March 5,1993 MAR _ 8 1 CLERK BOARD OF SUPERVISORS CONTRA COSTA CO. Office of County Counsel Attn. Attorney Kevin Kerr This is to confirm that County Counsel's office and CCLSf have agreed to continue the GA appeal to the Board of Supervisors from March 9,1993 at 2pm to March 23,1993 at 2pm. Thank you. Sincerely, CONTRA COSTA LEGAL SERVICES by: ELLEN J. TABACHNICK V cc: Denise DeRamo Clerk of the Board of Supervisors • CLERK OF THE BOARD • , Inter - Office Memo TO: Social Services Department DATE: February 22 , 1993 Appeals and Complaints Division FROM: Jeanne Maglio, Chief Clerk Ann Cervelli, Deputy Clerk SUBJECT: Hearing on Appeal from Administrative Decision Rendered on General Assistance Benefits Filed by Denise DeRamo 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 : 00 p.m-on Tuesday, March 9 , 1993 . Attachment cc: Board Members County Administrator County Counsel GA Program Analyst-SS Dept . 40Douglas Drive P/ BOARD OF OERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUI, 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 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 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 (late 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 ,.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 .the„ appeal is based are not in dispute, or if any, dispute.d..raps!;are' not relevant to the issue .;,. ultimately to be decided by .the Eoard•, the Board will proceed ` immediately to the next •step-..Xltbout ;considering fact questions. The parties may stipulate ,to•"an e�reed bet of facts. 4. Once the facts are determined, or if there are no fact' determinations required : ttiqurl bbl, the Board will consider legal issues 'presented• by•'th4 appeal. 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...Boarddt 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. 75/24 , f �- •do l 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 considera- 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. •Pounsel ;to draft a proposed decision for its consideration. ' 7. The Board may contra ct' wlth :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 , 1 through Y4 ,above., and shall recommend -a proposed decision, stating findings 'o� fact and summarizing the reasoning of the proposed decition. 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. PASSED on January 111 , 1975, unanimously by the Supervisors present . . enTin m COPY I certify that this 1s a full, trite ! correct cony of the original document which is on file in my offlee, ' and that 1t was passed A adopted by the Board of Supervisors of Contra Costs County, California, on the date shown.ATTEST: J. R. OLSSON. County Clerk t ex-officio Clerk of said Board of Supervisors, by Deput Clerk. dd It ac on .le i 41975 cc: Director, Human Resources Agency Social Service County Counsel County Auditor-Controller County Administrator notdIsfor The Board of Supervi rs Contra • «�of the Bowd County Administration Building Costa oDµ=-071 Pine St., Room 106 ,,,} , Martinez, California 94553 � tl y Torn Powers, 1st District Nancy C.Falmism 2nd District Robert 1.Schroder,3rd District Sunne Wright McPeak,4th District Tan Tortekson,5th District February 18 , 1993 Denise DeRamo 1671 Haller Court #1 concord, CA 94520 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 : 00 p.m. on Tuesday, March 9 , 1993 . In accordance with Board of Supervisors 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 jery cors a d County Administrator B {.��v . o Anrj Cervelli, D puty Clerk Enclosure cc: Board Members Social Service Department Attn: Appeals & Complaints County Counsel County Administrator ' LAW OFFICES OF CONTRA COSTA LEGAL SERVICES FOUNDATION Main Office Telephone 1017 Macdonald Avenue West County(510)233-9954 P.O.Box 2289 East(510)439-9166 Richmond,California 94802 Central(510)371-8209 Fax(5 10)23"W February 3 , 1993 RECEIVED FEB - 51993 Tom Torlakson, Chairperson District #5 Board of Supervisors CSR�p RA COSTA CO �SORS Contra Costa County 651 Pine Street, Room 106 Martinez, CA 94553 Re: Request for General Assistance Evidentiary Hearing Reinstatement Claimant: Denise DeRamo 1671 Haller Ct. , #1 Concord, Ca 94520 Resolution Requested: Rescission of Notice of Dismissal Dear Chairperson and Board Members: I. BACKGROUND: The issue in this case is limited solely to claimant's legal right to be heard. This is a procedural, not substantive appeal requesting the Board to review the case and applicable law regarding my client's right to be heard. This is an appeal regarding Jurisdiction and the three month sanction Ms. DeRamo is currently serving (January 1 . 1993 - April 7 . 1993) . We contend it is without statutory authority. The notice of action that this appeal addresses is dated 11/13/92. The appeals unit dismissed the appeal and her 12/92 request for hearing reconsideration (12/92) continually due to an alleged lack of jurisdiction. However, this County's decision and conclusion is incorrect. Denise DeRamo wishes to be heard regarding a General Assistance workfare problem. We have evidence showing good cause may well have existed, but for the County's denial of appeal jurisdiction. II. JURISDICTION EXISTS BECAUSE THE NOTICE OF ACTION OF NOVEMBER 1992 WAS INADEQUATE UNDER STATE AND FEDERAL LAW: A. The claimant filed what the county states was an "untimely" appeal dated December 5, 1992, of a November 13, 1992 Notice cutting her of General Assistance fore months. It also sanctioned her for 12/92 due to another General Assistance appeal unfavorable to claimant. In other words two separate sanctions on one notice. Thus, for reasons summarized below, the 14 day General Assistance appeal time limit has not even started to run on the appeal or subsequent Board of Supervisor deadlines. 1. When a County proposes taking an action affecting public assistance, the County must give claimant adequate notice. (D.M. 49-700 et seq. ) . 2 . The County's own regulations violate notice language requirements, as to what is legally adequate. The November 13, 1992 notice which Ms. DeRamo received did two specific things: First, there was an unfavorable pro per General Assistance negative decision issued November 5, 1992 . The GA laws required the decision be implemented within 5 days. Instead, what the Department did was send a notice beyond 5 days and sanction her twice in the same notice. There is no legal authority for double sanctions on one notice. (11/13/92) It went so far as to not only impose a one month sanction for 12/92 but simultaneously sanction her again for three months (see attached notice) . 3 . Notice is adequate only if it sets forth the intended action, and the specific regulations. Due to the double sanction (12j92 , 1/93 , 2/93 , 3/93) contained in the same notice, this notice was inadequate. Even with an unfavorably evidentiary hearing decision, no General Assistance regulation supports compliance and due process with the County's own regulations and Board order when it: (a) provides for a one month sanction (12/92) at the bottom of the notice; (b) and simultaneously proposes a second 3 month sanction on the same notice. (1/93 - 3/93) It is no wonder claimant filed for an appeal when she did. In all cases, separate notices should be sent and are. If a claimant loses an appeal, it should be implemented separate from any new action by the Department. It is not whether claimant received a notice of change in appeal deadlines, it is an issue of whether the notice was adequate in the first Place The front of the same notice is defective since it does not inform her she has a right to appeal. The appeals rights are on the back but never indicate any right of appeal on its face. We contend this omission makes the notice defective. A right of appeal and applicable regulations should be spelled out on the front Page of the termination notice. Since this does not exist, no adeQuate notice of determination was ever made. Thus, as stated, the deadlines have not begun to run. c�sa 2 This client i0currently without aid forke entire winter, posing an unreasonable burden and hardship without legal justification. Therefore, a denial of this appeal for lack of jurisdiction based upon an untimely appeal would be improper. C. Finally, the burden of proof is with Contra Costa County and not claimant in proving they did provide adequate notice on 11/13/92. The Appeals Unit informed her twice that her appeal was untimely but that constantly precluded her right to put forth evidence that the November 13 notice was inadequate. The claimant relied on the County to provide her with a full, complete and adequate notice. This is also a violation of the State of California Constitution and the United States Constitution 14th Amendment. In that the notice was and is inadequate, there is also a deprivation of property in violation of due process requirement of Goldberg v. Kelly. If the Department's records are to be believed, they fall short in light of the evidence needed to sustain the dismissal. Thus, the County has yet to prove their own notice was correct. CONCLUSION WHEREFORE, claimant request that the December 1992 denial of her appeal for reconsideration of the right to be reversed and heard. In fact, the Board should on it's face reverse the decision on the record. Ms. DeRamo is entitled to adequate notice. Ms. DeRamo is entitled to jurisdiction. She is not "entitled" to any four month sanction without either. In addition, anyone facing such a severe consequence and hardship should have the right to be heard, especially since the notice is wrong, compelling corrective action. In light of the confusing language of this specific notice, we request that the denial of jurisdiction-reconsideration be reversed. Please notify Contra Costa Legal Services Foundation and claimant of her Board of Supervisors appeal date. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely yours, ' CONTRA COSTA LEGAL SERVICES FOUNDATION By: ELLEN J. XABACHNICK AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE EJT:vh 3 cc: Denise DeRamo Kevin Kerr office of the County Counsel r 4 i NOTICE OF APPOINTMENT OF _AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE I, , claimant of le-I / � el , -#- /1 t m a .California, hereby appoint CONTRA COSTA LEGAL SERVICES FOUNDATION, 1017 Macdonald Avenue, P.O. BOX 2289, Richmond, California 94802, and any agent thereof to act in my behalf as my AUTHORIZED REPRESENT.JKTI7E in corAection wi�th� my application for and/or receipt of [TYPE OF ASSISTANCE] , -;�`CLUDING ANY APPEAL REGARDING SAID AID. I hereby authorize CONTRA COSTA LEGAL SERVICES FOUNDATION and any agent thereof to make or give any request or notice ; present or elicit evidence; obtain and review any and all information including medical records; and receive any notice in connection with my claim wholly in my stead. D ' ated:\ (S GN TURE) PLEASE ADDRESS PTL CORRESPONDENCE TO: lc , CONTRA CO TA LEGAL SERVICES FOUNDATION 1017 Macdonald Ave. , P.O. Box 2289 Richmond, California 94802 'NOTICE OF PROPOSED ACTIO COUNTY OF �� _ GA 2 GENERAL ASSISTANCE PROG CONTRA COSTA ` DEL 1C _ NOTICE DATE j —1 3-92 CASE NAME DERA MO DEN I SE'. NUMBER 92-0401275-CO-0 WORKER NAME K }LARCH NUMBER A4AH TELEPHONE 646-2028 ADDRESS 30 MUIR ROAC ' MARTINEZ CA 945-53 Questions? Ask your Worker. 0sl neeemita une treareei6n ae fate. llue a w traaa]aaer (ADDRESSEE) Sin an{/ai 11an Ise e01 Tei:•Inn elan "a slab nal e1e . r DENISE DERAMO -1 CCNCCFLCA 94520 L J YOUR GENERAL ASSISTANCE WILL BE DISCONTINUED EFFECTIVE N7V 31 , 1992 BECAUSE YOU HAVE DEMONSTRATED WILLFUL NONCOOP=RATION OR NCNC3M?LIANCE KITH WORK PROGRAM{ REQUIREMENTS BY FAILURE TO MEET YOUR RESPONSIBILITIES WIT140UT GOOD CAUSE IN THESE SPECIFIC INSTANCES: DATE OF FA.ILURE(S) NATURE OF FAILURES) BECAUSE3F THESE =AILU.:ES YOU !ILL ?= INELIGIBLE TC GEAERAL ASSISTANCE FDR A Pc4IOD OF: ? ONE MONTH THP=-E MONTHS ( ) SIX MONTHS IF YOU WISH TO R=APPLY FOR GENERAL ASSISTANCE• 'YOU MAY ISAIK ELIGIBLE TO AIC OV OR AFTER D c?.fDIyG UPON: YCLR CIRCUkS7A.NCES AT THAT TIME. ANY FUR: H=R FAILURE TO MEET THE ELI v IH ILITY R=OUIREKcN1S OF GENERAL ASSISTANC= MAY R=SU_T TN ANOTHEP. PERIOD OF IN=LIGIEILITY. IF YCU HAVE ANY 2JESTIONS9 OR YOU BELIEVE THIS ACTION IS INCORRECT9 CF YOU WISP TO GIVE YOUR R=ASONS WHY YOU THINK ANY FAILURE TO COOPERATE CR� TO CEMPLY WITH GA REJUIRFMENTS SHOULD SE EXCU _ • '�• �^ TALK' JABOUT THESE THINGS WITH YOUR {WORKER 1OR THE SU PERV I SOF. GR THIS ACTION IS REQUIRED BY .THE FOLLOWING LAWS AND/OF REGULATIONS `' DEPARTMENT MANUAL SECTIONS: 49-102 APPLICATION AND RECEPTICN 49-111 DISCONTINU=• GOOD CAUSES WILLFULNESS AND PERIDC OF INELIGIBILITY 49-210 EMPLOYABLE PROGRAM BOARC RESOLUTION 92/553 51-500 EMPLOYMENT SERVICES t GAZ39 DISC— FAIL=ED TO DEET EMPLOYMENT RECUIREMENTS- POI GA 239H(5/87) I ` LAW OFFICES OF • CONTRA COSTA LEGAL SERVICES FOUNDATION Main Office Tekphooe 1017 Macdonald Avenue West County(5 10)233-9954 P.O.Box 2289 East(5 10)439-9166 Richawnd,California 94802 Central(510)372-8209 Fax(510)236846 February 3 , 1993 RECEIVED FEB - 51993 Tom Torlakson, Chairperson District #5 Board of Supervisors CLER CpNTRACOSTACO.ISORS Contra Costa County 651 Pine Street, Room 106 Martinez, CA 94553 Re: Request for General Assistance Evidentiary Hearing Reinstatement Claimant: Denise DeRamo 1671 Haller Ct. , #1 Concord, Ca 94520 Resolution Requested: Rescission of Notice of Dismissal Dear Chairperson and Board Members: I. BACKGROUND: The issue in this case is limited solely to claimant's legal right to be heard. This is a procedural, not substantive appeal requesting the Board to review the case and applicable law regarding my client's right to be heard. This is an appeal regarding Jurisdiction and the three month sanction Ms. DeRamo is currently serving (January 1. 1993 - April 7 . 1993) . We contend it is without statutory authority. The notice of action that this appeal addresses is dated 11/13/92. The appeals unit dismissed the appeal and her 12/92 request for hearing reconsideration (12/92) continually due to an alleged lack of jurisdiction. However, this County's decision and conclusion is incorrect. Denise DeRamo wishes to be heard regarding a General Assistance workfare problem. We have evidence showing good cause may well have existed, but for the County's denial of appeal jurisdiction. II. JURISDICTION EXISTS BECAUSE THE NOTICE OF ACTION OF NOVEMBER 1992 WAS INADEQUATE UNDER STATE AND FEDERAL LAW: A. The claimant filed what the county states was an "untimely" appeal dated December 5, 1992, of a November 13, 1992 Notice cutting her off General Assistance for 3 months. It also sanctioned her for 12/92 due to another General Assistance appeal unfavorable to claimant. In other words, two separate sanctions on one notice. Thus, for reasons summarized below, the 14 day General Assistance appeal time limit has not even started to run on the appeal or subsequent Board of Supervisor deadlines. 1. When a County proposes taking an action affecting public assistance, the County must give claimant adequate notice. (D.M. 49-700 et seq. ) . 2 . The County's own regulations violate notice language requirements, as to what is legally adequate. The November 13 ,. 1992 notice which Ms. DeRamo received did two specific things: First, there was an unfavorable pro per General Assistance negative decision issued November 5, 1992. The GA laws required the decision be implemented within 5 days. Instead, what the Department did was send a notice beyond 5 days and sanction her twice in the same notice. There is no legal authority for double sanctions on one notice. (11/13/92) It went so far as to not only impose a one month sanction for 12/92 but simultaneously sanction her again for three months (see attached notice) . 3 . Notice is adequate only if it sets forth the intended action, and the specific regulations. Due to the double sanction (12/92 , 1193 , 2/93 , 3/93) contained in the same notice, this notice was inadequate. Even with an unfavorably evidentiary hearing decision, no General Assistance regulation supports compliance and due process with the County's own regulations and Board order when it: (a) provides for a one month sanction (12/92) at the bottom of the notice; (b) and simultaneously proposes a second 3 month sanction on the same notice. (1/93 - 3/93) It is no wonder claimant filed for an appeal when she did. In all cases, separate notices should be sent and are. If a claimant loses an appeal, it should be implemented separate from any new action by the Department. It is not whether claimant received a notice of change in appeal deadlines, it is an issue of whether the notice was adequate in the first place The front of the same notice is defective since it does not inform her she has a right to appeal. The appeals rights are on the back but never indicate any right of appeal on its face. We contend this omission makes the notice defective. A right of appeal and applicable regulations should be spelled out on the front pane of the termination notice. Since this does not exist, no adequate notice of determination was ever made. Thus, as stated, the deadlines have not begun to run. Baas 2 This client is currently without aid for the entire winter, posing an unreasonable burden and hardship without legal justification. Therefore, a denial of this appeal for lack of jurisdiction based upon an untimely appeal would be improper. C. Finally, the burden of proof is with Contra Costa County and not claimant in proving they did provide adequate notice on 11/13/92. The Appeals Unit informed her twice that her appeal was untimely but that constantly precluded her right to put forth evidence that the November 13 notice was inadequate. The claimant relied on the County to provide her with a full, complete and adequate notice. This is also a violation of the State of California Constitution and the United States Constitution 14th Amendment. In that the notice was and is inadequate, there is also a deprivation of property in violation of due process requirement of Goldberg v. Kelly. If the Department's records are to be believed, they fall short in light of the evidence needed to sustain the dismissal. Thus, the County has yet to prove their own notice was correct. CONCLUSION WHEREFORE, claimant request that the December 1992 denial of her appeal for reconsideration of the right to be reversed and heard. In fact, the Board should on it's face reverse the decision on the record. Ms. DeRamo is entitled to adequate notice. Ms. DeRamo is entitled to jurisdiction. She is not "entitled" to any four month sanction without either. In addition, anyone facing such a severe consequence and hardship should have the right to be heard, especially since the notice is wrong, compelling corrective action. In light of the confusing language of this specific notice, we request that the denial of jurisdiction-reconsideration be reversed. Please notify Contra Costa Legal Services Foundation and claimant of her Board of Supervisors appeal date. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely yours, CONTRA COSTA LEGAL SERVICES FOUNDATION 1 By: ELLEN J. JrABACHNICK AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE EJT:vh sc4s 3 cc: Denise DeRamo Kevin Kerr Office of the County Counsel I 4 NOTICE OF APPOINTMENT OF AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE I, �/ / ^ -2e) claillmant of galbj/ q / -# ��(c�a ll VS �l California, hereby appoint CONTRA COSTA LEGAL SERVICES FOUNDATION, 1017 Macdonald Avenue, P.O. BOX 2289 , Richmond, California 94802, and any agent thereof to act in my behalf as my AUTHORIZED REPRESEN IVE in co ction with my application for and/or receipt of [TYPE OF ASSISTANCE] , CLUDING ANY APPEAL REGARDING SAID AID. I hereby authorize CONTRA COSTA LEGAL SERVICES FOUNDATION and any agent thereof to make or give any request or notice; present or elicit evidence; obtain and review any and all information including medical records; and receive any notice in connection with my claim wholly in my stead. Dated: (S GNATURE) PLE a c E ADDRESS ALL CORRESPONDENCE TO: CONTRA CO TA LEGAL SERVICES FOUNDATION 1017 Macdonald Ave. , P.O. Box 2289 Richmond, California 94802 ;.NOTICE OF PROPOSED ACTT �� COUNTY OF GA 7'- 'GENERAL ASSISTANCE PROM CONTRA COSTA i DEL 1C NOTICE DATE 11-13-92 CASE NAME DERA MO DEN I SF' NUMBER 192-0401275—CO--O WORKER NAME K MARCH r NUMBER A4AH TELEPHONE 61t6-2028 ADDRESS 30 MUIR ROAC ? MARTINEZ CA 945155 3 Questions? Ask your Worker. 1 S! neeea lts uns trs0uee an Oe bts, llsss s su trssysasr ` (ADDRESSEE) ISn end/t.: 1ltn la'e .C1 Th"Sinn Ilk tus ■Ynn n!u rlc si' r DENISE D E RA M O 1671 HALLS CT f1 CCNCORO CA 94520 L J -- YOUR GENERAL ASSISTANCE WILL BE DISCONTINUED EFFECTIVE NOV 33, 1992 ' BECAUSE YOU HAVE DEMONSTRATED WILLFUL NONCOOPERATION OR NCNCOM?LIANCE kITH WORK PROGRAM REQUIREMENTS BY FAILURE TO MEET YOUR RESPONSIBILITIES WITHOUT GOOD CAUSE IN THESE SPECIFIC INSTANCES: DATE 7F FA.ILURE(S) NATURE OF FAILURES) Q�:CAUSE OF TH=SE =AILURES YOU VILL INELIGIBLE TC GENERAL ASSISTANCE FOR A PFRIOD OF: ? ONE MONTH THP,EE ,c { ) SIX MONTHS IF YOU �'I.SH TO R=APPLY FOR GENERAL ASSISTANCE, YOU PAY tSAIN EE L' ELIGIBLE TO AIfly OR Ar TER = �- ^E?=LADING UPON: YCLR CIRCUMSTANVCES AT THAT TIME. ANY FURTH=R FAILURE TO ME=T THE EL Iu IB IL ITY R=QU IREM'cty 1 S OF S ENE RAL ASSISTANC= MAY RESULT IN ANOTHER PERIOD OF IN=LIGIEILITY. IF YOU HAVE ANY 2JESTIONS9 OR YOU BELIEVE THIS ACTION I! INCORRECTip CP YOU WISH TO GIVE YOUR R=ASON' WHY YOU THINK ANY FAILURE TO C-30PERATE CRI TO CC'MPLY WITH GA REQULR=ME NTS SHUJLD fl�E E7CCU _ , - °. TALK ABOUT THESE THINGS WITH YOUR WORKER OR THE SUPERVISOF-� �L`L �L:Ci.\ ►'�:��\G.\�J �U C7r� v"t tZ1c� l . THIS ACTION IS REQUIRED BY .THE FOLLOWING LAWS AND/OF REGULATIONS C, DEPARTMENT MANUAL SECTIONS: 49-102 APPLICATION AND RECEPTION 49-111 DISCONTINUE• GOOD CAUSEv WILLFULNESS AND PERIOC Or INELIGIBILITY 49-210 EMPLOYABLE PROGRAM BOARD RESOLUTION 92/553 51-500 EMPLOYMENT SERVICES r- . GAZ39 DISC— FAILED TO MEET EMPLOYMENT RECUIREMENTS- POI GA 239H(5/87) _•. �.•_ T T �1 I -f I 9 A -e-Z�L 1 I -4-�J�3, LIII/ V2 O YtA LAW OFFICES OF • CONTRA COSTA LEGAL SERVICES FOUNDATION Main Office Telephone 1017 Macdonald Avenue West County(510)233-9954 P.O. Box 2289 Fast(510)439-9166 Richmond,California 94802 Central(510)372-8209 Fax(510)236-6846 February 3, 1993 ZI Tom Torlakson, Chairperson District #5 Board of Supervisors SUP Contra Costa County 651 Pine Street, Room 106 Martinez, CA 94553 Re: Request for General Assistance Evidentiary Hearing Reinstatement Claimant: Denise DeRamo 1671 Haller Ct. , #1 Concord, Ca 94520 Resolution Requested: Rescission of Notice of Dismissal Dear Chairperson and Board Members: I . BACKGROUND• The issue in this case is limited solely to claimant's legal right to be heard. This is a procedural, not substantive appeal requesting the Board to review the case and applicable law regarding my client's right to be heard. This is an appeal regarding. Jurisdiction and. the---three month sanction. Ms.. DeRamo is currently serving (January 1 . 1993 - April 7 . 1993) . . We contend it is without statutory authority. The notice of action that this appeal addresses is dated 11/13/92 . The appeals unit dismissed the appeal and her 12/92 request for hearing reconsideration (12/92) continually due to an alleged lack of jurisdiction. However, this County's decision and conclusion is incorrect. Denise DeRamo wishes to be heard regarding a General Assistance workfare problem. We have evidence showing good cause may well have existed, but for the County's denial of appeal jurisdiction. II. JURISDICTION EXISTS BECAUSE THE NOTICE OF ACTION OF NOVEMBER 1992 WAS INADEQUATE UNDER STATE AND FEDERAL LAW: A. The claimant filed what the county states was an "untimely" appeal dated December 5, 1992, of a November 13, 1992 Notice cutting her off General Assistance for 3 months. It also sanctioned her for 12/92 due to another General Assistance appeal unfavorable to claimant. In other words, two separate sanctions on one notice. Thus, for reasons summarized below, the 14 day General Assistance appeal time limit has not even started to run on the appeal or subsequent Board of Supervisor deadlines. 1. When a County proposes taking an action affecting public assistance, the County must give claimant adequate notice. (D.M. 49-700 et seq. ) . 2 . The County's own regulations violate notice language requirements, as to what is legally adequate. The November 13 , 1992 notice which Ms. DeRamo received did two specific things: First, there was an unfavorable pro per General Assistance negative decision issued November 5, 1992. The GA laws required the decision be implemented within 5 days. Instead, what the Department did was send a notice beyond 5 days and sanction her twice in the same notice. There is no legal authority for double sanctions on one notice. (11/13/92) It went so far as to not only impose a one month sanction for 12/92 but simultaneously sanction her again for three months (see attached notice) . 3 . Notice is adequate only if it sets forth the intended action, and the specific regulations. Due to the double sanction (12/92 , 1/93 , 2/93 , 3/93) contained in the same notice, this notice was inadequate. Even with an unfavorably evidentiary hearing decision, no General Assistance regulation supports compliance and due process with the County's own regulations and Board order when it: (a) provides for a one month sanction (12/92) at the bottom of the notice; (b) and simultaneously proposes a second 3 month sanction on the same notice. (1/93 - 3/93) It is no wonder claimant filed for an appeal when she did. In all cases, separate notices should be sent and are. If a claimant loses an appeal, it should be implemented separate from any new action by the Department. It is not whether claimant received a notice of change in appeal deadlines, it is an issue of whether the notice was adequate in the first place. The front of the same notice is defective since it does not inform her she has a right to appeal. The appeals rights are on the back but never indicate any right of appeal on its face. We contend this omission makes the notice defective. A right of appeal and applicable regulations should be spelled out on the front page of the termination notice. Since this does not exist, no adequate notice of determination was ever made. Thus, as stated, the deadlines have not begun to run. 6418 2 This client is currently without aid for the entire winter, posing an unreasonable burden and hardship without legal justification. Therefore, a denial of this appeal for lack of jurisdiction based upon an untimely appeal would be improper. C. Finally, the burden of proof is with Contra Costa County and not claimant in proving they did provide adequate notice on 11/13/92. The Appeals Unit informed her twice that her appeal was untimely but that constantly precluded her right to put forth evidence that the November 13 notice was inadequate. The claimant relied on the County to provide her with a full, complete and adequate notice. This is also a violation of the State of California Constitution and the United States Constitution 14th Amendment. In that the notice was and is inadequate, there is also a deprivation of property in violation of due process requirement of Goldberg v. Kelly. If the Department's records are to be believed, they fall short in light of the evidence needed to sustain the dismissal. Thus, the County has yet to prove their own notice was correct. CONCLUSION WHEREFORE, claimant request that the December 1992 denial of her appeal for reconsideration of the right to be reversed and heard. In fact, the Board should on it's face reverse the decision on the record. Ms. DeRamo is entitled to adequate notice. Ms. DeRamo is entitled to jurisdiction. She is not "entitled" to any four month sanction without either. In addition, anyone facing such a severe consequence and hardship should have the right to be heard, especially since the notice is wrong, compelling corrective action. In light of the confusing language of this specific notice, we request that the denial . of jurisdiction-reconsideration be reversed. Please notify Contra Costa Legal Services Foundation and claimant of her Board of Supervisors appeal date. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely yours, -- CONTRA COSTA LEGAL SERVICES FOUNDATION f \ By: ELLEN J. JrABACHNICK AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE EJT:vh 6aas 3 cc: Denise DeRamo Kevin Kerr office of the County Counsel uaas 4 NOTICE OF APPOINTMENT OF AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE claimant California, hereby appoint CONTRA COSTA LEGAL SERVICES FOUNDATION, 1017 Macdonald Avenue, P.O. BOX 2289 , Richmond, California 94802, and any agent thereof to act in my behalf as my AUTHORIZED REPRESEN FIVE in cormection with my application for and/or receipt of [TYPE OF ASSISTANCE] , WCLUDING ANY APPEAL REGARDING SAID AID. I hereby authorize CONTRA COSTA LEGAL SERVICES FOUNDATION and any agent thereof to make or give any request or notice; present or elicit evidence; obtain and review any and all information including medical records; and receive any notice in connection with my claim wholly in my stead. Dated: (S 'G TU RE) PLEASE E A.DDRES S ALL CORRESPONDENCE TO: CONTRA CO TA LEGAL SERVICES FOUNDATION 1017 Macdonald Ave. , P.O. Box 2289 Richmond, California 94802 NOTICE OF PROPOSED ACT COUNTY OF � _ GA 2: iGENERAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAM CONTRA COSTA _ DEL is NOTICE DATE 11-13-92 CASE NAME DERA MO DENISE' NUMBER 92-0401275—CO—C WORKER NAME K PARCH t NUMBER A4AH TELEPHONE 646-2028 ADDRESS 30 M UI R ROA C MARTINEZ CA 945`3 Questions? Ask your Worker. C) (ADDRESSEE) s1 nee.a l . un. tr.C."16n a. f,te. 11.■. . .0 tr.e.J■Ocr: Ilr. 8nf/Oi llfn 140 r01 This 81nh 918n cu■ ■Inn nfu efr ea F_ DENISE D E RA M 0 .�K^ 9�;..■....r.:..,...;.. .� 1671 HALLER CT ;ft1 CGRCORJ CA 94y20 L J YOUR GENERAL ASSISTANCE WILL BE DISCONTINUED E=FEC TIVE NOV 31 , 1992 BECAUSE YOU HAVE OEKONSTRATED WILLFUL NONCOOP=RATION OR NCNC`]M?LIANCE klTH WORK PROGRAH REQUIREMENTS BY FAILURE TO MEET YOUR RESPONSIBILITIES WITHOUT GOOD CAUSE IN THESE SPECIFIC INSTANCES: DATE 7F FAILURE(S) NATURE OF FAILURE(S) Q;CAL'SE "F TH=SE =AILURES YOU VILL INELIGIBLE TC GENE?AL ASSISTANCE FDR A PFR'106 OF= �! ? ONE MONTH ... C,� THREE MONTHS , c J ( ) STX MONTHS IF YOU WISH TO R=APPLY FOR GENERAL ASSISTANCE• YOU PAY t:Sl1IK _` ELIGIBLE TO AIC Oy DR AFTER � �_ DE?=P�DIy;S UPON',, YCLR CIRCUMST&NCES AT THAT TIME. ANY FURTHER FAILU2E TO MEET THE EL.I—IBILT_TY R=QUIREF.EN1S OF aENERAL ASSISTANCE MAY R=SUET TN ANOTHER, PERIOD OF IN,LIGIEILITIt. IF YCU HAVE ANY 7-JESTIONS9 OR YOU BELIEVE THIS ACTION IS INCORRECTv CR YOU WISH TO GIVE YOUR RcASONWHY YOU THINK /INY FAILURE TO COOPERATE CR_ TO CLMPLY WITH GA REQUIREMENTS SHOULD BE EXCU-S i TALK ABOUT THESE THINGS WITH YOUR WORKER OR THE SUPERVISOR.. , I f / � C7t� Cl�a 'v l 12- 92---�zrl THIS ACTION IS REQUIRED BY ,THE FOLLOWING LAMS AND/Of REGULATIONS DEPARTMENT MANUAL SECTIONS: 49-102 APPLICATION AND RECEPTION 49-111 DISCQNTINU::,p GOOD CAUSE, WILLFULNESS AND P�RIOC cF INELIGIBILITY 49-210 EMPLOYABLE PROGRAM 51-500 EMPLOYMENT SERVICES BJARC RESOLUTION 92/553 GA239 DISC— FAIL—=D TO *BEET EMPLOYMENT RECUIREMENTS• POI _ , GA 239H(5/87) FROM: Perfecto Villarreal, Director Social Service Department DATE: March 23, 1993 SUBJECT: APPEAL OF GENERAL ASSISTANCE EVIDENTIARY HEARING DECISION BY SHIELA MCCAULIE - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - SPECIFIC REQUEST(S) OR RECOMMENDATIONS AND BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION RECOMMENDATION: That the Board dismiss Shiela McCaulie's appeal of the General Assistance Hearing decision. BACKGROUND: Claimant filed request for Hearing on August 25, 1992. The Hearing was scheduled for November 23, 1992, and the decision rendered on January 4, 1993. The claim was denied. The Social Service Department has resolved this matter in Ms. MacCaulie's favor. The appeal is moot. Signature: - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ACTION OF BOARD ON March 23 , 1993 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED x OTHER VOTE OF SUPERVISORS: x UNANIMOUS (ABSENT z 1 ) AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: cc : Social Services Appeals Unit I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE AND Program Analyst CORRECT COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN AD County Counsel ENTERED ON THE MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF Shiela McCaulie SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN. Ralph Murphy- CC Legal Services ATTESTED March 23 , 1993 PHIL BATCHELOR, CLERK OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS A COUNTY DMINISTRATOR BY AAAA 4444� , DEPUTY H. 2c THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA Adopted this Order on March 9, 1993 by the following vote: AYES: Supervisors Smith, Bishop, McPeak and Torlakson NOES: None ABSENT: Supervisor Powers ABSTAIN: None --------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------------- SUBJECT: Hearing On Appeal From Administrative Decision Rendered On General Assistance Benefits Filed By Sheila McCaulie This is the time heretofore noticed by the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors for hearing on the appeal by Sheila McCaulie from the administrative decision rendered on General Assistance benefits. Jewel Mansapit, General Assistance Program Analyst, Social Services Department, advised of the Department' s agreement with a request from Ralph Murphy, Contra Costa Legal Services Foundation, for a continuance of the above appeal to March 23, 1993 at 2: 00 p.m. IT IS BY THE BOARD ORDERED that the above appeal by Sheila McCaulie is CONTINUED to March 23 , 1993 at 2: 00 p.m. in the Board Chambers. 1 hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Su ry sora on the date shown. ATTESTED: PHIL BA ,CHELOR,Clerk of the Board uperviso and County A inistrator Orig. Dept. : Clerk of the Board Social Services Dept. By - ,�eouty Jewel Mansapit Sheila McCaulie Ralph Murphy CC Legal Services Foundation 0 LAW OFFICES OF • CONTRA COSTA LEGAL SERVICES FOUNDATION Main Office Telephone 1017 Macdonald Avenue West County(510)233-9954 P.O.Box 2289 East(510)439-9166 Richmond,California 94802 Central(510)372-8209 Fax(510)236-6846 March 8, 1993 Clerk, Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors County Administration Building 651 Pine Street Martinez CA 94553 Re: Sheila McCaulie Sheila McCaulie has a G.A. appeal scheduled before the Board on March 9th at 2 p.m. . Assistant County Counsel Kevin Kerr and the Department of Social Services have agreed that this matter should be postponed for two weeks to March 23rd at 2 p.m. Could you please have the matter postponed accordingly? Thank you for your time on this matter. RECEIVED l Ralph Murphy MAR 9 199' Staff Attorney RM•me [WER.1 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS CONTRA COSTA c0. • LAW OFFICES OF CONTRA COSTA LEGAL SERVICES FOUNDATION Main Office Telephone 1017 Macdonald Avenue West County(510)233-9954 P.O. Box 2289 East(510)439-9166 Richmond,California 94802 Central(510)372-8209 Fax(510)236-6846 March 8, 1993 Clerk, Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors County Administration Building 651 Pine Street Martinez CA 94553 Re: Sheila McCaulie This corrects the dates on the recent letter I faxed to you. Sheila McCaulie has a G.A. appeal scheduled before the Board on March 10th at 2 p.m. . Assistant County Counsel Kevin Kerr and the Department of Social Services have agreed that this matter should be postponed for two weeks to March 24rd at 2 p.m. Could you please have the matter postponed accordingly? Thank you for your time on this matter. C) Ralph Murphy Staff Attorney RM:me o F. PA -r eA ��i O0-- 1 i v � 0 d � O yt d D, 4t C CO v All, LAW OPFICFS OF CONTRA COSTA LEGAL SERVICES FOUNDATION Main Office Telephone 1017 Macdonald Avenue West County(510)233.9954 P.O.Box 2289 Rant(510)439-9166 Richmond,California 94902 Control(510)372.9209 Pax(510)236-6846 March 81 1993 Clerk, Contra Costa County Board of supervisors County Administration Building 651 Pine Street Martinez CA 94553 Re: Sheila McCaulie Sheila McCaulie has a G.A. appeal scheduled before the Board on March 9th at 2 p.m. . Assistant County Counsel Kevin Kerr and the Department of social services have agreed that this matter should be postponed for two weeks to March 23rd at 2 p.m. Could you please have the matter postponed accordingly? Thank you for your time on this matter. Ralph Murphy 7 Staff Attorney RM:me Q Al T LAW 017FICE5 OF CONTRA COSTA LEGAL SERVICES FOLNDATION Main OMce Telephone 1017 Macdonald Avenue West County(510)233.9954 P.O. Box 2289 Past(.5 10)439-9166 Riahmond,California 94802 Central(510)372.8209 Pax(510)236-6846 March 8, 1993 Clerk, Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors County Administration Building 651 Pine street Martinez CA 94553 Re: Sheila McCaulie Sheila McCaulie has a G.A. appeal scheduled before the Board on March 9th at 2 p.m. . Assistant county counsel Kevin Kerr and the Departmr�nt of Social Services have agreed that this matter should be post-L -c-c.7- for two weeks to March 23rd at 2 p.m. Could you please have: th.9 matter postponed accordingly? Thank you for your time on this matter. Ralph Murphy Staff Attorney RM:me CLERK OF TBE BOARD Inter - Office Memo TO: Social Services Department DATE: February 22 , 1993 Appeals and Complaints Division FROM: Jeanne Maglio, Chief Clerk Ann Cervelli, Deputy Clerk OA-� SUBJECT: Hearing on Appeal from Administrative Decision Rendered on General Assistance Benefits Filed by Sheila McCaulie 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 : 00 p.m.on Tuesday, March 9 , 1993 . Attachment cc: Board Members County Administrator County Counsel GA Program Analyst-SS Dept. 40Douglas Drive The.-Board of SupervjWrs Contra CWk of OW 60111 1 and County Administration Building Costa N=-071 661 Pine St., Room 106 ^' Martinez, California 94553 I." qy Tom Powers,tst District Nancy C.Fohdsn,2nd District Robert I.Schroder,3rd District Bunn Wrioht McPask,4th District Tom Todekson,5th District February 18 , 1993 Sheila McCaulie 147 1st Street Richmond, CA 94801 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 : 00 p.m. on Tuesday, March 9 , 1993 . In accordance with Board of Supervisors Resolution No. 7Y/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 S erv' rs a County Administrator By q An—nCe'rWlli, Deputy Clerk Enclosure cc: Bqard Members Social Service Department Attn: Appeals & Complaints County Counsel County Administrator BOARD OF *ERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, 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 4 Complaints and Appeals Division regarding General Assistance are made to the Board of Supervisors pursuant to Board of Supervisors Resolution 71+/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 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 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 ,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 .xhe. appeal is based are not in dispute, or if any..dispute.d.,rapts?;are` not relevant to the issue ultimately to be decided by .the Eoard', the Board will proceed immediately to the next 'sCep,.�,W .tgout ;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.15" tti��a�sptal, the Board will consider legal issues -presented• by•`th&-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..Boardf.', 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 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 . 6. Having made factual determinations , having received advice on the legal issues, and having applied policy cons1dera- 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, with :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 or 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. ' PASSED on January 111 , 1975, unanimously by the Supervisors present. k' RWIED COPY I certify that this is a full, true ! correct copy of the original document which is on file in my office, and that it was passed A adopted by the Board of Supervisors of Contra Costa County, California, on the date shown. ATTEST: J. R. OLSSON. County Clerk!e:officlo Clerk of said Board of Supervisors, py Dsput Clerk. on _!e N 1 4 1975 cc: Director, Human Resources Agency Social Service County Counsel County Auditor-Controller County Administrator i Re: notice of appeal of unfavorgable G 't 1 specifically address the sacntion issu F2E`,-" 2 E- CLERK 3February 2,19934 BOAD OF SUPERVISORS Dear Board of Supervisors: CONTRA COSTA CO- 5 I am serving a GA sanction I have already served. It is summary below. 6 1. I received a negative GA decision dated January 4. 7 2. I was cut off in August and timely appealled the notice. 8 3. When I asked for my 10/92 GA appeal to be postponed, 9 it was granted but my aid paid pending taken away despite the fact that the appeal was pending. 10 4. The appeal was held 11/23, and now I have been 11 snactioned for a GAADDS alleged failure that I still disagree with. However, the point of this appeal is 12 5. The implication of the 1/4/93 appeal decision is that 13 I am to serve a sanction. the decision also acknowledges that aid paid pending stopped 10/27. The notice. of Action from 14 August was enforced, not just the concept of postponement. 15 WHEREFORE, claimant believes this Board should make a finding that I have already served my sanction. The most important 16 thing to rememberlwas not on GA since NOVEMBER 1 1992 due to the appeal money stopping, 17 6. Although I have other appeal going, this Board 18 appeal is about th 1/24 notice, which on its fact to this honorable board shouldreflect that due to aid ceasing 19 that I had already served my sanctioned retroactily. Thereo, to apply in NOW poses a risk of unbdue burden 20 AND LEGALLY INCORRECT. Please review the decision and RSVP. 21 THANK Y OU VERY MUCH. Sin a el22 , 23 �- 24 SHEILA MC AULIE 25 26 27 i c n't o rJ p� CA 28 �'f`ta o1 Re: notice of appeal of unfavorqable GA 1 specifically address the sacntion issu REFn I 2 �I FEB - 41993 � 3 February 2,1993 CLERK BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 4 Dear Board of Supervisors: CONTRA COSTA CO. 5 I am serving a GA sanction I have already served. It is summary below. 6 1. I received a negative GA decision dated January 4. 7 2. I was cut off in August and timely appealled the notice. 8 3. When I asked for my 10/92 GA appeal to be postponed, 9 it was granted but my aid paid pending taken away despite the fact that the appeal was pending. 10 4. The appeal was held 11/23, and now I have been 11 snactioned for a GAADDS alleged failure that I still disagree with. However, the point of this appeal is 12 5. The implication of the 1/4/93 appeal decision is that 13 I am to serve a sanction. the decision also acknowledges that aid paid pending stopped 10/27. The notice of Action from 14 August was enforced, not just the concept of postponement. 15 WHEREFORE, claimant believes this Board should make a finding that I have already served my sanction. The most important 16 thing to rememberlwas not on GA since NOVEMBER 1 1992 due to the appeal money stopping, 17 6. Although I have other appeal going, this Board 18 appeal is about th 1/24 notice, which on its fact to this honorable board shouldreflect that due to aid ceasing 19 that I had already served my sanctioned retroactily. Thereo, to apply in NOW poses a risk of unbdue burden 20 AND LEGALLY INCORRECT. Please review the decision and RSVP. 21 THANK Y OU VERY MUCH. 22 Sin a el , 23 ' 24 SHEILA MCCAULIE 25 = 26 ► f C�- 27 r(f-(M0A)(Jj CSI . 28 c-- 1\ V RED C� p A 1-4 Vv . . {