ALL THINGS BUDGET

 

Paid for by the Friends of Keith Carson, FPPC ID #890744

P.O. Box 722, Oakland, CA 94604

info@keithcarson.org

www.keithcarson.org

 

The Terminator’s Curveball to California’s Counties

Part 3: “Surgical cuts” gone terribly wrong

 

June 17, 2010

What does it mean to be “surgical” when it comes to fiscal management? President Obama used the term to describe the speedy, precise process that was intended to lead GM through bankruptcy in record time. In tough economic times, legislators should balance budgets by “surgically” cutting out duplicative or unproven programs.

In Governor Schwarzenegger’s world, “surgical” means something entirely different. When the Terminator goes in, it’s with a cleaver as he bluntly gouges the poor and needy. There is often no rhyme or reason as to where the knife lands. In his recent May Revise Budget Proposal, the Governor arbitrarily plans to cut programs that help California’s neediest residents. Many of his proposals would lead to higher unemployment and a loss of economic investment in local communities. Schwarzenegger is no highly trained surgeon—with every slip of the knife, he is bleeding California dry.

Let’s take a closer look at a few of the Governor’s “surgical” cuts.

Cuts to the California AIDS Drug Assistance Program

The California AIDS Drug Assistance Program (ADAP) subsidizes the purchase of costly AIDS drugs for those who cannot afford them. In the Governor’s January Budget proposal, this subsidy was cut for inmates in county jails, but remained intact for inmates in state prisons. According to the Alameda County Sheriff’s office, the Sheriff would be forced to pick up the cost of providing these services for 250 inmates to the tune of approximately $500,000 per year. This arbitrary, nonsensical scheme simply unloads the responsibility for the ADAP program on overburdened county governments. As a longtime advocate for incarcerated and formerly incarcerated citizens, I find it disturbing that the Governor would sacrifice prisoner health to save the bottom line.

Cuts to Subsidized Childcare

The Governor’s proposal eliminates funding for the CalWORKs Child Care program and all state supported childcare programs, with the exception of pre-school and after-school programs. Across the state, that would mean 142,000 children would have no place to go when their parents are at work. According to the UC Berkeley Center for Labor Research and Education, the cuts would also lead to an estimated loss of 38,000 full-time equivalent childcare provider jobs and a loss of approximately $3.1 billion in economic output in California. The number of childcare jobs is probably even higher than 38,000 considering that many childcare providers work part-time. Along with the proposed elimination of the CalWORKs Welfare to Work program, the loss of childcare robs thousands of Californians of a vital service. Childcare subsidies assist not only the state’s neediest residents of the resources to lift themselves out of poverty; students and working professionals also depend upon the services on a daily basis. Common sense tells us that if a parent can’t find affordable childcare, she or he will have trouble going to school, seeking employment or holding down a job. Why would the Governor gut programs that allow Californians to make a living and contribute to society?

Cuts to Immigrant Programs

Governor Schwarzenegger’s May Revise also attacks legal immigrants, some of whom have come to America from war-torn countries to seek asylum. The Terminator plans to eliminate the Cash Assistance Program for Immigrants (CAPI) and the California Food Assistance Program (CFAP), a program for non-citizens who are ineligible for federal food stamp aid. According to the Alameda County Social Services Agency, there are approximately 1,000 individuals who receive CAPI benefits in the County. If the CAPI program is eliminated, the majority of these individuals will become eligible for General Assistance (GA) benefits. The addition of CAPI recipients to the GA program, which is almost 100% funded by the County, would result in a $4 million increase in GA grant costs. As I mentioned in my first Op-Ed, the County has already taken actions to limit GA benefits to 3 months for a 12 month period for those deemed employable. This was a move I opposed. Adding more GA clients will only burden a program that is already in fiscal emergency. For non-citizens who struggle with the language barrier and cultural differences, the loss of these support services will make it even more difficult for them to find employment and establish themselves as tax-paying residents.

Reductions in Women’s Health Programs

The classic Terminator “surgical cuts” attack programs that both save the state money and attract hefty federal matching funds. The California Family PACT (Planning, Access, Care and Treatment) is one such program. This family planning program, which the Governor has targeted for possible elimination in the 2010-11 budget, has saved the state more than $4 billion since 1997. In other words, for every dollar invested in the PACT program, the state saves $9.25 in medical costs related to unintended pregnancies. These figures come from a recent analysis by the Bixby Center for Global Reproductive Health at the University of California San Francisco. Family PACT is also extremely successful in attracting federal matching funds. According to the Bixby Center report, for every dollar the state spends on family planning programs, Washington sends $9 in matching funds to California.

Why would the Governor slash programs that clearly save the state money, bring in federal dollars and provide crucial services to needy residents? By targeting programs that serve the most vulnerable Californians, the Governor’s cuts will significantly impact the County’s ability to serve our residents. We are the ones who have to look these people in the eye and tell them there’s no more money. With proposals like these, we are left to scratch our heads and plan for worst case scenarios. As the Terminator performs his usual botched “surgical” procedure, the State Legislature and county governments are left to clean up the mess.

Where Is the Light at the End of the Tunnel? The Saga of Alameda County’s 2010-2011 Budget

 

August 3, 2010

On June 25, the Alameda County Board of Supervisors passed a budget which closed a deficit of $ 152.4 Million dollars with a combination of one time savings, program cuts and numerous long time employees losing their jobs. This is the 18^th consecutive year when Alameda County has been required to close a budget deficit, and the cumulative cut over that time is over $1.6 Billion.  As bad as the situation is, it could have been worse. Our department heads and administration have been prudent in their budgeting all year.  In addition, many of our labor unions have agreed to concessions, because they realize we are all in this together.   To date Alameda County has been able to avoid furlough days as a result of the collaboration between labor and County administration.

The deep cuts will be felt in all aspects of county services.  The county will continue to limit General Assistance clients to aid for only three months out of the year; an initiative I continue to oppose.  Furthermore, the Social Services Agency is facing an additional $8-$9 million dollar deficit, as a result of the Federal Government’s reduction in their Federal Medical Assistance Percentage (FMAP).  The Probation Department will continue to bank cases; over 12,000 adult cases including violent offenders, and 50 juvenile cases. Banked cases are people that receive no services or supervision.  This is the first year we are implementing this practice for juveniles.  Our consortium of health care clinics are forced to take a 25% reduction in all services funded by Measure A, a ½ cent sales tax passed in 2004, due to a decline in sales tax revenue.

While Alameda County’s 2010-2011 Budget will continue to eat away at our safety net, the sluggish economy and the aptly titled jobless recovery will continue to cast a dark shadow over Alameda County’s economic future.  This year was the first time that the value of homes on Alameda County’s assessment role has decreased since 1958; that includes 1980, the first year after Proposition 13. The unemployment rate continues to hover over 10%, which means sales tax, business taxes and payroll taxes are down.  These are all vital funding sources for local government.  So at a time when people are in greater need of services, there is less revenue generated to provide them.

The enormous elephant in the room is the exploding cost of retirement and health care benefits. While the Alameda County Retirement Association (ACERA) has done an exemplary job of managing our retirement funds, they have not been untouched by this economy.  If retirement investments do not yield the returns to pay for the healthcare costs and pensions of the Alameda County’s aging workforce, the County will be forced to significantly increase its contributions, which seems certain in the future.  The increased contributions to our retirement accounts will gravely impact our ability to deliver services for those in need in the future.

As of July 19, 2010, the State of California has not passed its budget for the next fiscal year, and the writing on the wall spells less revenue for counties and other local governments.   The State is talking about “realignment,” which means transferring the responsibility for providing services from the State to counties.  Of course the question is: How much revenue will be identified/allocated to pay for providing the services? The assumption is not enough. Yet we in local government need to pick our poison.  If we refuse realignment, the state will just take a hatchet to funding for local government services.  If we do agree to realignment, then we can try and negotiate the best funding sources and look for flexibility and savings by providing the services locally.  Many in Sacramento don’t imagine the budget deal getting done until August or September when the State starts to run out of money.  It looks like a long hot summer of negotiations and the forecast calls for pain in the fall.

The State of California’s restructuring plan needs Local Government input

January 12, 2011

 

More than 300,000 Alameda County residents received health services from the County in 2010. Of the 100,000 people enrolled in indigent care, two-thirds were seen at Highland Hospital. Highland is the only trauma center in Alameda County where anyone, regardless of income or insurance status, can be treated for gunshot wounds or injuries sustained in automobile accidents.  In fiscal year 2009-2010, more than 76,000 people received emergency care.

The County’s ability to provide this level of service may be in jeopardy if aspects of Governor Brown’s budget proposal are crafted without real input from the County. The proposed “realignment,” a process of shifting responsibility for certain government programs from the state to counties, sounds appealing.  However, we fear the State will dump the responsibility for safety net services on our doorstep without a sustainable, long-term funding plan.

The State has already taken more than $3.4 billion in operating capital from Alameda County over the last 12 years, which contributed to a $152.4 million deficit in 2009-2010.

In this climate, the County is struggling to provide services.  After slashing $30 million from the Social Services Agency budget in 2010, the County managed to serve over 45,973 individuals on CalWORKs, 6,249 on General Assistance, 205,927 individuals on MediCal and 110,382 on food stamps.

This past year, more than 40,000 citizens received mental health services despite $40 million in cuts to the health care budget.

Our labor unions sacrificed their annual cost of living allowance and increased their contributions towards health coverage and retirement plans.  Our employees tripled their case loads.  The County is now “banking cases” for probationers that should have routine supervision.  Because of overcrowding in state prisons, as many as 950 inmates may be released into Alameda County over the next three years.  Many will have no housing, no jobs, and no access to health services. 

And now Gov. Brown is proposing a “vast and historic” government restructuring.

The first round of realignment in 1991 produced mixed results.  In the 1990s, hundreds of mental health patients were transferred from state facilities back to Alameda County.  While many patients landed in supportive community-based programs nearer to their families, others fell through the cracks.  Today, some of those individuals live on the streets or in County jail.

As Chair of the Alameda County Budget Committee, I can tell you that we are running out of solutions.

With realignment, counties would assume a greater share of responsibility precisely at a time when the economy is slow and County needs are skyrocketing.  Gov. Brown’s revenue “solutions,” tax extensions that voters must approve in June, are hardly reliable sources of long-term funding.  All levels of government from Gov. Brown down to utility district elected officials are coming to you our taxpayer for additional revenue.  We need a more coordinated and sustainable process for financing government at all levels.

I have already scheduled a number of public meetings as we struggle to keep the lights on in Alameda County.  We are eager to partner in the design process as the Governor and Legislature formulate a plan to close the deficit and transfer services to local government.  But we cannot fulfill our legal and moral obligation to aid our neediest citizens if Sacramento’s realignment plan redirects the downward spiral of perpetually ballooning budget shortfalls to local governments.