Alameda County Board of Supervisors Should Reverse Decision to Cut General Assistance

The Tuesday morning Alameda County Board of Supervisors meeting may be their last opportunity to reverse a decision made last year, on a 3-2 vote, to make extensive cuts to the county’s General Assistance program. 

General Assistance (GA) is a last resort safety net cash program for indigent adults without dependent children who have little or no savings or other source of income.  GA is technically a loan, and must be repaid if the recipient later returns to work or qualifies for Social Security or SSI disability benefits.  The maximum grant in Alameda County is $336.  Last year the county imposed several deductions from the cash grant, including a $40 medical care deduction for those who are uninsured and rely on the county medical center for health care, and a further deduction for those in shared housing. 

The County has also imposed an additional deduction for people whose grant is now less than their rent, which is the subject of pending litigation.  Under that policy, someone who rents a room for $300 per month, and previously received $336 in GA, would now lose the entire housing portion of their grant solely because the $40 medical care deduction reduced their grant to $296, $4 (four dollars) less than the monthly GA grant.  While all of these cuts are irrational, and harmful to the recipients and our community, the most troublesome cut is the imposition of a three month time limit for “employable” recipients that is set to take effect on April 1, 2010.

7,000 Indigent People Will Lose All Cash Assistance, and Likely Will Become Homeless, on April 1st Without a Change in Policy

In 2008 the Alameda County Board of Supervisors approved a 6 month limit on the receipt of GA for so-called employable individuals.  This policy was suspended by the Board of Supervisors after a law suit was filed by Bay Area Legal Aid and the Public Interest Law Project challenging the county’s definition of employable.  Although that law suit was initially successful, the Court of Appeals reversed in a 2-1 decision, and the California Supreme Court refused to hear an appeal.  In 2009, along with the other cuts described above, The County reduced the time limit for employable people to three months in any twelve month period.  The county defines employability be presuming that everyone is employable unless they have a particular form signed by a doctor indicating that they are unemployable.  This definition excludes consideration of any other factors, such as education, literacy, work experience, or the labor market, as well as consideration of age prior to age 64. 

Even for those people with severe mental or physical disabilities, getting the form completed properly can be difficult.  Most people on GA are uninsured and have little access to medical care, let alone disability assessment.  Despite the $40 medical care deduction, most people who rely on the county medical care system have difficulty accessing any health care. 

Most county clinics are not accepting new patients, and mental health care for the uninsured is often limited to those who are a danger to themselves or others.  Many people can only access care by going to the emergency room at Highland Hospital where they often have to wait hours to be seen.  Finding a doctor who might even consider completing a disability assessment form can be difficult.  Even when a form is completed, most people with disabilities that limit their ability to work are categorized by the county as “employable with limitations”.  The county has not demonstrated that these people’s disabilities are accommodated in any way, and they will lose their aid entirely on April 1.  In total, approximately 7,000 people, or 70% of the GA caseload is categorized as “employable” or “employable with limitations”. 

Los Angeles and San Francisco, two counties with large GA programs and no time limits, categorize 50% or more of their caseload as unemployable.  Advocates insist that at least 50% of the GA caseload should be categorized as unemployable, and many are applying for VA or Social Security disability benefits and have no real potential to obtain employment.  Many of the 7,000 who would lose aid on April 1st will likely become homeless.

Cuts to GA Will Cost The County More in the Long Term

Yolanda Baldovinos, the Alameda County Social Services Agency Director, has publicly stated that the cuts to GA are bad social policy, but fiscally necessary.  In fact, the cuts to GA will merely shift costs and make the county budget worse.  Alameda County, like the State of California, the City of Oakland, and other counties, is struggling with a budget deficit.  GA is state-mandated, but county administered with mostly county funds.  It is an easy target when trying to balance the county budget on paper in the short term.  Within the Social Services Agency, which provides services to families with children, foster youth, seniors, and people with disabilities, GA – a cash program for adults without dependent children - is a relatively easy target.  Nonetheless, cutting GA payments to achieve $10 million or more in budgetary savings, does not consider the impact of these cuts on other parts of the county budget.

Various studies, including a recent study in L.A. County have demonstrated that the societal cost of caring for a homeless person is approximately $40,000 per year.  This includes costs for shelter, healthcare, emergency services, and incarceration.  Many people who lose GA will end up on the streets, arrested for sleeping or drinking in public, in a shelter or in the emergency room.   The County budget assumes savings from cutting people off GA, but does not include the predictable costs that will increase within the Health Care Services Agency, the Sheriff’s Office, and other county offices.  Just as the Governor’s proposed cuts to In-Home Support Services would result in increased costs, rather than savings, because it would shift costs to nursing home care or other more costly institutions, cuts to GA result in substantial cost shifting. 

Furthermore, cash assistance programs like GA or Food Stamps are effective as economic stimulus. Every dollar provided in GA gets spent locally, primarily on housing.  Those dollars are then likely to spent by the landlord or sublessor, and so on.  By contrast, cuts to GA not only hurt the GA recipient, but also place a burden on their former landlord or sublessor, and on their friends or family who they may turn to for assistance, further depressing economic activity.  In fact, the County Welfare Directors Association and California State Association of Counties, of which Ms. Baldovinos and Alameda County are members, have made this precise argument to the state legislature to lobby against cuts to other programs.

Alameda County has also begun to increase their investment in Social Security and SSI advocacy for GA recipients.  SSI is a federal disability benefit for people who are unable to work as a result on a medical condition or combination of conditions.  Social Security also considers other employability factors, such as age, limited education, and lack of work experience in determining eligibility.  Advocates estimate that about 50% of the GA caseload could qualify for SSI, but many need assistance to establish eligibility and there are not sufficient resources available to assist them all.  Nonetheless, despite the current budget deficit, increased investment in SSI advocacy would be wise social and fiscal policy.  When a former GA recipient qualifies for Social Security, SSI, VA or CAPI disability benefits, the county can seek reimbursement for any GA that was provided while that application was pending.  More importantly, SSI is linked to Medi-Cal, and the county Health Care Services Agency can seek reimbursement for care provided to the formerly uninsured patient.  Thus, investment in additional SSI advocacy has been shown to result in a return on investment of 5:1, or $5 recovered for every $1 invested.
Please Contact Your County Supervisor or Come to the Board of Supervisors Meeting on Tuesday, February 23rd

The Alameda County Board of Supervisors will meet on Tuesday, February 23, 2010, at 10:30 a.m., at 1221 Oak St., 5th floor, and will have an opportunity to listen to public comments and to reconsider this inhumane and ill-advised policy.  Supervisors Keith Carson and Nate Miley need to hear that they were right to oppose these cuts, and Supervisors Gail Steele, Scott Haggerty, and Alice Lai-Bitker need to hear why it’s so important for them to change their votes.  A coalition of advocates will be rallying outside of the County Building beginning at 9:00.  Please come out to join us and express your opposition to this regressive policy.  If you cannot come to the meeting on Tuesday, please consider contacting your Supervisor’s office directly:
District 1: Scott Haggerty, (510) 272-6691, scott.haggerty@acgov.org
District 2: Gail Steele, (510) 272-6692, gail.steele@acgov.org
District 3: Alice Lai-Bitker, (510) 272-6693, alice.lai-bitker@acgov.org 
District 4: Nate Miley, (510) 272-6694, nate.miley@acgov.org 
District 5: Keith Carson, (510) 272-6695, keith.carson@acgov.org

TAKE ACTION

For More Information Go to the Facebook page or Contact:

Bay Area Legal Aid, Steve Weiss, (510) 663-4744 x5206, sweiss@baylegal.org

Building Opportunities for Self-Sufficiency, Janny Castillo, (510) 649-1930 x221


East Bay Community Law Center, John Engstrom, (510) 548-4040 x356


Homeless Action Center, Patricia Wall (510) 540-0878 x301, pwall@homelessactioncenter.org