|
 |
 |
|
Archived
News and Projects SUBCOMMITTEE REJECTS DAVIS ADMINISTRATION BUDGET REQUEST OF $3 MILLION TO FIGHT LAWSUITS
Article provided by Marty Omoto, Legislative Director CA Coalition of United Cerebral Palsy Associations
The Senate Budget Subcommittee #3 on Health and Human Services, Labor and Veteran Affairs, chaired by Senator Wes Chesbro (D-Arcata) rejected on May 6, Monday afternoon, the Davis Administration's request for an increase in the proposed state budget for 2002-2003 of $3 million for outside consultants and attorneys to fight two different lawsuits (Sanchez v. [Grantland] Johnson, and the Davis v. [Grantland] Johnson) where plaintiffs (including people with developmental disabilities) claim the state is in violation of state and federal laws. Senator Deborah Ortiz (D-Sacramento) said she was "reluctantly" voting to reject the Administration's request, generally agreeing that legal research was valid. While none of the plaintiffs in either lawsuit testified specifically with a position, Arc California - not a party to either suit - strongly opposed the Administration's request, citing the proposed budget cuts and reductions not only in the developmental services budget, but also cuts in the Department of Rehabilitation.
The Assembly Budget Subcommittee #1 on Health and Human Services previously rejected the Administration's request last week on April 29 (Monday). [NOTE: Budget items related to the Department of Developmental Services budget previously on the agenda for the May 6th Assembly Budget Subcommittee hearing, was rescheduled for May 13th.]
Sanchez v. Johnson class action lawsuit is a class action suit that contends that inadequate rates (and wages) the state provides for community services and supports for people with developmental disabilities, violates their rights under the federal Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), the Rehabilitation Act, and the Medicaid Act, which results in unnecessary isolation and segregation by the individual plaintiffs, in the state owned and operated Developmental Centers. The plaintiffs are seeking parity in rates and wages for the services and supports provided in the community as those provided in Developmental Centers. The individual plaintiffs are people with developmental disabilities - one of them who is named "Sanchez", who are currently residents in a developmental center and the organizational plaintiffs includes Easter Seals, California Rehabilitation Association, United Cerebral Palsy, Autism Society of LA, System Reform, Tierra Del Sol, Jay Nolan Center. The defendants are Secretary of the California Health and Human Services Agency, Grantland Johnson (the "Johnson" in the case) - along with the Department of Developmental Services and other state agencies. The case was filed in US District Court in June 2000 and is scheduled to go to trial this summer. A motion for summary judgement by the plaintiffs will be heard on June 7 in Oakland.
The Davis v. Johnson lawsuit contends that the state's policies result in plaintiffs (residents of various institutions, including Laguna Honda in San Francisco) unnecessary isolation and segregation in nursing homes, in violation of their rights under state and federal laws. The suit demands that the state make available access to a full range of services and supports in the community as an alternative to placement in a nursing facility. The suit also contends that these services can be available through the federal Medicaid (Medi-Cal) program.
Another suit, filed in January - Capital People First v. Department of Developmental Services, was not included in the $3 million proposal by the Administration.
WHAT THE GOVERNOR PROPOSED
The Department of Health Services (DHS) is the lead agency for the state for the Medicaid Program, and the funding request went through that department. The Davis Administration approved a "Finance Letter", which is a document for the Legislature to consider, that contains changes to the proposed budget that the Governor submitted in January. More drastic changes will come when the Governor releases a package of revisions on May 14 (called the "May Revise"). The Department of Health Services requested: * An re-appropriation of $200,000 from the current year budget (2001-02) that is not yet spent * An increase of $2.8 million ($1.8 million coming from the General Fund) to continue existing contracts with outside consultants and outside attorneys who are helping the state with the two lawsuits. - $1.250 million to continue a contract with the lawfirm of Shartsis, Friese & Ginsburg LLP to fight the Davis v. Johnson lawsuit - $750,000 to continue the contract with the lawfirm of Erickson, Beasley, Hewitt & Wilson to fight the Sanchez v. Johnson lawsuit - $1.1 million for consulting firm Tucker Alan Inc to provide economic and other financial analysis of the demands by plaintiffs in both suits. Of that total amount,the state estimates that $450,000 is for the Davis v. Johnson case, and the remaining $605,000 is for Sanchez v. Johnson. - The funds for the financial consultant will be used for developing statistical data on different relevant populations, conducting analyses of residential and non-residential providers, and performing other functions (including depositions, testimony, general discovery, etc).
IMPACT TO PEOPLE WITH DEVELOPMENTAL DISABILITIES
Direct impact in that people with developmental disabilities, and in the Sanchez v. Johnson case, providers, are plaintiffs in the lawsuits that the state wishes to appropriate an additional $3 million to fight for outside consultants and attorneys. * The state currently is proposing to make signficant reductions in services and supports in the community (at least $52 million), and more than $7 million in reductions and cuts in Rehabilitation programs impacting people with developmental disabilities.
NEXT STEPS
* Assembly Action: Assembly Budget Subcommittee #1 rejected the proposal April 29. So it is - for now - dead there. * Senate Action: Senate Budget Subcommittee #3 now has rejected the Administration's $3 million request May 6th. It is - for now - dead there too. * Governor: the Governor may try to revive this appropriation of $3 million (or some version of it) when he releases his revisions to his proposed 2002-2003 budget on May 14 referred to as the "May Revise". He could include the appropriation in a different department or budget item, or include with some other augmentation (additional spending) elsehwere in the budget. * Final Subcommittee Actions: IF the Governor attempts to propose this or a similar proposal in his "May Revise", the two budget subcommittees could reject it again, or one subcommittee could choose to forward it, to allow (or force) the issue to be decided in "conference committee". (composed of equal number of members of legislators from both houses) to work out a compromise or otherwise decide the issue along with other items that the two houses did not agree on). IF both subcommittees reject a proposal from the Governor that he resubmits (with his "May Revise"), then the issue is pretty much dead, though still must be reviewed by the full budget committees of both houses. * Final Full Assembly and Senate Budget Committee Action: both full budget committees of both houses will review all actions by their respective subcommittees. IF either committee's action is different, then the issue could end up going to "conference committee" where ANYTHING could happen. Read More Archived News Stories AB896 General Human Interest Litigation State Budget
CASH/PCR is a nonprofit public benefit corporation and is not organized for the private gain of any person. It is organized under the California Nonprofit Public Benefit Corporation law for public and charitable purposes. |
 |
|
 |