HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 06251996 - SD6 SD.6
THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
Adopted this Order on June 25, 1996, by the following vote:
AYES: Supervisors Rogers, Bishop, DeSaulnier and Smith
NOES: Supervisor Torlakson
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
SUBJECT: Drug and Alcohol Testing in the Workplace
The Board considered an oral report from John Cullen, Social Services Director,
regarding the prevalence of drug and alcohol testing in the workplace, as requested
by the Board on June 18, 1996.
Following the Board's consideration of the report, IT IS BY THE BOARD ORDERED
that the report from John Cullen, Social Services Director, is ACCEPTED; and
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Board ADOPTED a position in support of AB
127 (Rainey) with amended language relative to the method of testing being a
questionnaire screening mechanism, rather than biological testing.
cc: County Administrator
Social Services Director Ihereby certify that this Isatrue and Correctcopyof
COunt Counsel an action taken and entered on the minutes of the
County Board of Supery Bhate shown. p
Health Services Director a
T AOR,Gerk of the Bodrd
Substance Abuse Program Director of and county strata
The Honorable Richard K. Rainey
Assemblyman, 15th District E
Room 3173, State Capitol
Sacramento, CA 95814
Les Spahnn
Heim, Noack, Kelly & Spahnn
1121 L Street, Suite 100
Sacramento, CA 95814
SD. 1to
bad
TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Contra
/ L
FROM: PHIL BATCHELOR, COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR' Costa
_. Count
DATE: June 12, 1996 �OSTq COIh� `Ty
SUBJECT: LEGISLATION: AB 127 (RAINEY)
SPECIFIC REQUEST(S)OR RECOMMENDATION(S)&BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION
RECOMMENDATION:
ADOPT a position in SUPPORT of AB 127 by Assemblyman Richard Rainey which
amends existing law regarding the eligibility of drug and alcohol addicts to General
Assistance.
BACKGROUND:
Existing law requires counties to provide aid and assistance to its indigent
population. Existing law also creates various crimes connected with controlled
substances. Existing law also permits a county to require adult General Assistance
applicants and recipients to undergo screening for substance abuse when it is
determined by the County that there is reasonable suspicion to believe that an
individual is dependent upon illegal drugs or alcohol.
Assemblyman Rainey has introduced AB 127 which, as amended May 20, 1996,
would do the following:
❑ Prohibit any person convicted of various controlled substances related
offenses from received General Assistance for 5 years, unless the individual
enters and completes a substance abuse program.
❑ Clarifies the provision in current law regarding testing for drug and alcohol
dependency by eliminating the "reasonable suspicion" requirement, thereby
making the testing requirement much more straightforward and more easily
understandable and enforceable.
CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: YES SIGNATURE:
RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE
_L APPROVE OTHER
SIGNATURE(SI: Pjoz D Z
ACTION OF BOARD ON dune 18, 1996 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
1 EBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE
UNANIMOUS(ABSENT AND CO CT COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN
AYES: NOES: AND ENTERED THE MINUTES OF THE BOARD
ABSENT: A IN: OF SUPERVISORS O E DATE SHOWN.
ATTESTED
Contact: PHIL BATCHELOR,CLERK OF E BOARD OF
Cc: S age 2. SUPERVISORS AND COUNTY ADMI RATOR
BY UTY
County staff is particularly interested in having the "reasonable suspicion"
requirement removed in order to insure that screening can be enforced without
having to prove that reasonable suspicion exists for the testing before it is
undertaken.
In view of the provisions included in AB 127 and the need for the County to insure
that its General Assistance Program serves those who are interested in helping
themselves, it is recommended that the Board of Supervisors indicate its support for
AB 127.
cc: County Administrator
Social Service Director
County Counsel
Health Services Director
Substance Abuse Program Director
The Honorable Richard K. Rainey
Assemblyman, 15th District
Room 3173, State Capitol
Sacramento, CA 95814
Les Spahnn
Heim, Noack, Kelly & Spahnn
1121 L Street, Suite 100
Sacramento, CA 95814
-2-
AMENDED IN SENATE MAY 20, 1996
AMENDED IN SENATE APRIL 8, 1996
AMENDED IN ASSEMBLY JANUARY 23, 1996
AMENDED IN ASSEMBLY MARCH 27, 1995
AMENDED IN ASSEMBLY MARCH 15, 1995
CALIFORNIA LEGISLATURE-1995-96 REGULAR SESSION
ASSEMBLY BILL No. 127
Introduced by Assembly Member Rainey
January 12, 1995
{
An act to add Division 8.5 (commencing with Section 7800)
to Title 1 of the Government Code, and to amend Section
17001.51 of the Welfare and Institutions Code, relating to
public assistance.
h LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST
AB 127, as amended, Rainey. General assistance
j programs.
Existing law requires each county to provide aid and health
care to its indigent population. These programs are commonly
referred to as county general assistance programs.
Existing law creates various crimes connected with
controlled substances.
This bill would provide that any person convicted of various
controlled substances related offenses would be prohibited
from receiving any aid under a county's general assistance
94
AB 127 — 2 —
program
2 —
program for 5 years, unless the individual enters and
completes a substance abuse program.
Existing law permits a county to require adult general
assistance program applicants and recipients to undergo
screening for substance abuse when it is determined by the
county that there is reasonable suspicion to believe that an
individual is dependent upon illegal drugs or alcohol.
This bill would delete the reasonable suspicion
requirement.
Vote: majority. Appropriation: no. Fiscal committee: no.
State-mandated local program: no.
The people of the State of California do enact as follows.
1 SECTION 1. Division 8.5 (commencing with Section
2 7800) is added.to Title 1 of the Government Code, to read:
3
4 DIVISION 8.5. PUBLIC MONEY RESTRICTIONS
5 FOR DRUG OFFENDERS
6
7 7800. (a) (1) Except as otherwise provided in this
8 section, a person convicted of a violation of Section 11351,
9 11352, 11358, 11359, 11378, 11378.5, 11379,11379.6, or 11383
10 of, or subdivision (a) of Section 11360 of, the Health and
11 Safety Code, or felony violations of Section 182 of the
12 Penal Code, including a conviction through a plea of nolo
13 contendere,shall be prohibited from receiving any public
14 assistance for five years, unless the person agrees to enter
_;_.. 15 and complete a substance abuse pregraffir or drug abuse
r: : 16 program. A person shall not be required to participate in
17 a substance or drug abuse program unless and until
18 participation for that individual is available. Any time
19 participation In a substance or drug abuse program is .
20 available, he or she shall be required to participate in the
21 program, and shall be subject to the period ofineligibility
22 specified by this section.if the individual refuses, without
23 good cause, to participate in the program at that time. If
24 the person fails to complete the program, or discontinues
25 participation at any time in the program, public
26 assistance shall be terminated for five years.
94
i
sv. �
— 3 — AB 127
and 1 (2) For purposes of this section, "public assistance"
2 refers only to aid under Part 5 (commencing with Section
feral 3 17000) of Division 9 of the Welfare and Institutions Code.
ergo 4 (b) This division shall only apply on a prospective
the 5 basis.
Lt an 6 (c) This division shall not apply to the extent that it
7 would violate the United States Constitution or California
.cion 8 Constitution.
9 SEC. 2. Section 17001.51 of the Welfare and
no. 10 Institutions Code, as added by Chapter 6 of the Statutes
11 of 1996, is amended to read:
12 17001.51. (a) A county may require adult applicants
)Ws., 13 and recipients of benefits under the general assistance
14 program to undergo screening for substance abuse.
tion 15 (b) A county may require as a condition of aid
ead: 16 reasonable participation in substance abuse or alcohol
17 treatment programs for persons screened pursuant to
vS 18 subdivision (a) and professionally evaluated to be in need
19 of treatment, if the services are actually available at no
20 charge to the applicant or recipient.
this
,351,
1383
and
the
nolo
iblic
anter
buse
to in
until
time
122 Is
i the
ulity
bout
e. If
nues
Iblic
O
94 94
Background on SD-6
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
Socia! Service Department
4 s
John Cullen, Director
4 Z 4f�y
C,L.
TO: John Cullen,:Director �C
FROM: John Lee, Division Manager, General Assistance Policy
Jewel Mansepit, Program Analyst, General Assistance
SUBJECT: Drug and Alcohol Testing in the VVwkpiace
This is In response to the question posed by certain members of the Board of
Supervisors regarding the prevalence of drug and alcohol testing in the workplace.
Mh have conducted a brief survey, utilizing some available wri#en material, some
Information received via the Internet, and telephone calls_
Fogowing is a summary of what we learned:
• Judici4f History -
Various state and:%deral courts in the past have ruled that drug and alcohol
testing programs in::pubk workplaces are unconstitutional if they are not based
on some kind of individualized suspicion. However, in 1989, the US Supreme
court ruled on the'consthitionality of testing government employees not actually
suspected of dru®use, and found that in cases involving Customs guards and
railroad workers, the.employees' Fourth Amendment right to privacy was
outweighed by the governments Interest in maintaining a drug*ee woftlece.
• Government frnploytws
i The Omnibus Transportation Employee Testing Act of 1991 requires
alcohol and drug testing of safety-sensitive employees in the aviation,
motor carrier, railroad, and mass transit induabies.
• Drug Free Workplace Act, Department of Transportation, Department of
Defense, an l-the Department of Energy Nuclear Regulatory Commission
contain requutments for testing safety-sensitive employees for drug use.
. i i'civate sector ernpEio�'t®es
i Private sector employers traditionally have had extremely broad
discretion in oersomel matters, including drug and alcohol testing.
ADMJNISTRATIVE.OFFICE: 40 Douglas Drive Martinez CA • 94553-4068 Voice (510) 31 3-1 500 FAX (5101313-1575
CO,d -IUICLL
There have been some lawsuits involving state constitutional and
statutory challenges, but nothing of particular note.
! Many private employers, such as Target, price-Costco, Kraft Foods,
Coca-Cola, and Monsanto, have long-standing pre-employment drug and
alcohol testing policies, many of which have withstood legal challenges.
• Other Information
i According to.,Dr. Norman Hoffmann, University of Minnesota, drug and
alcohol testing,is a very common practice in the private sector, and is
done predominancy updront, as a condition of employment
Most.drug and alcohol testing for maintaining employment is done
by agencies dealing with safety-sensitive jobs, e.g. Department of
Transportation, FAA, and Department of Energy.
• Also according to Dr. Hoffmann, the prevalence of confirmed alcoholism/
drug addiction among populations such as General Assistance applicants
and recipients:is 35%, as compared to 5% of the general population.
0 Most of the available information uses "alcohol/drug testing" as
synonymous with breath testing (for alcohol) and/or urine testing (for
other drugs). We could locate no information speck to the type of
screening/assessment that we do for General Assistance. (However, the
results of the court-ordered study that we have been conducting should
be available ta share with the Board In the not-Wo-distant future.)
0 Although the SASSI Institute has advised us in the past that several
employers nation-wide administer the BASSI for purposes of
sc reeningftasting for employment, we were unable to obtain specific
infwmation:frm them for this report.
20'd 'a-H TT OUD Ol .1d3Q 39 I nd35 -Id 190S WJeJd TS:9 L 966T-VE-Nnf