The recent publication of the County’s long overdue ACFR (Annual Comprehensive Financial Report) for 2021-2022 (covering July of 2021 to June of 2022) is being bragged about by at several County supervisors. They mention no specifics, of course — just the release of the long-delayed report covering the County’s finances from more than a year ago, qualifies as some kind of accomplishment to them. But besides touting its publication, they offer no reasons for why it’s so great.
That’s probably because it isn’t.
From the ACFR:
“Mental Health Treatment Act/Measure B. Total FY 2022-23 projected Measure B tax revenue is $8.2 million, a $1.5 million decrease from prior year. Projected FY 2022-23 expenditures are $23.4 million, a $15.3 million increase from prior year. The voters of Mendocino County passed Measure B on November 7, 2017, for the creation of the Mental Health Treatment Fund, to provide facilities, services, and treatment for persons with mental health conditions, into which 100% of the Measure B tax revenue shall be deposited. For a period of five (5) years, a maximum of 75% of the revenue deposited into the Fund may be used for facilities with no less than 25% dedicated to services and treatment; thereafter, 100% of all revenue deposited into the Fund shall be used for ongoing operations, services, and treatment.” … “The Mental Health Treatment fund had a total fund balance of $34,486,702, with a net increase of $7,535,617, or 28%, during the year. This increase is due to the continued receipt of sales tax proceeds in excess of current year expenditures. While some multi-year mental health treatment projects are complete, many are still in development. Treatment services are still ramping up to meet the needs that can be served by the newly sourced and/or developed facilities.”
These numbers don’t even add up. They don’t include any mention of the $1 million house they built for $5 million.
But the worst part is their admission that “Treatment services are still ramping up…”
Measure B was passed six years ago in 2017. Six years later and not one nickel has been spent on the “treatment services” that are “still ramping up,” [a statement which itself is demonstrably false — no money for services is allocated or planned to be allocated] despite the specific language in the Measure as noted above that “no less than 25% [of the funds be] dedicated to services and treatment.”
Further, Measure B called for an “oversight committee” that was supposed to ensure that the provisions of Measure B were met by the County. That Committee dithered so pathetically for so many years that the County finally eliminated their role and turned the Measure over to the County’s Mental Health Department which has their own internal priorities.
The only person in any authority who has occasionally mentioned this gaping services shortfall called for by the Measure is Ukiah Assistant Manager (and Measure B oversight committee member) Shannon Riley. When she raises the question (and this only in the last couple of years) her fellow committee members nod their heads, but no recommendation or proposal has been forthcoming. No formal statement from the “oversight” committee that the Measure is not being honored.
Even former Sheriff Tom Allman who spearheaded the passage Measure B and touted its “oversight” and “services” language has given up and has become the leading advocate for spending Measure B money on the new jail wing.
The last time the mental health services question came before the Supervisors was in the fall when a proposal was made to allocate some Measure B money to Ukiah’s Ford Street Project. Despite the misleading use of the word “services” in the agenda title, that proposal did not include any services, just some money to help build expanded facilities for Ford Street. Even this proposal was denied by the Supervisors on grounds that they didn’t know how much money was left in Measure B (and still don’t and have never asked) so they were afraid to commit the money to Ford Street.
Nevertheless, a couple of months ago, the Board decided to “borrow” up to $10 million of Measure B money to cover part of the huge overrun of the County Jail expansion project.
Although the “borrowing” was supposed to include a payback plan, no such plan was requested and none has been prepared.
At that time, the Board claimed that the expanded jail facility would be used (in part) for mental health services if and when it ever gets built (currently scheduled for late 2025, but costs continue to rise).
There is no plan for staffing the new jail whether with conventional corrections officers or mental health service providers. Nor has any money been allocated for staffing the new jail wing when it opens.
Cynics expect that the corrections officers for the new wing will probably be funded out of Measure B’s 1/8-cent continuing sales tax increment and nothing resembling “mental health services” will ever be provided.
* * *
WORD CIRCULATING among county employees is that the Services Employees International Union has tentatively agreed to accept a new three-year contract proposal from the Countuy with a 5% raise over the next three years and no increase in health insurance premiums.
* * *
This Tuesday’s Board agenda had items for The Auditor/Treasurer and the Assessor/Recorder to have their own agenda items for a change. Although there’s no information about what their “updates” will or should entail.
The Board is also going to consider forming a Committees Committee. (Count the number of times the word “committee” appears in the following agenda item:
“Agenda Item 4f) “Discussion and Possible Action Regarding Board of Supervisors Standing Committee(s) Including 2023 Final Reports Out of Committee; Approval to Clear Referrals from Committee; and Formation of an Ad Hoc Committee to Further Review Any Matters Previously Referred to a Standing Committee if Necessary.”
Even George Carlin couldn’t parody this stuff. As Fred Allen once said, “A committee is a group of people who individually can do nothing, but together decide that nothing can be done.”
* * *
What Has The County Counsel’s Office Been Doing?
This month’s CEO Report finally (and oddly?) has a section about the County Counsel’s office.
“As of December 1, 2023, the bulk of the County’s active civil litigation (34 cases) is handled in house, with only five cases utilizing the assistance of outside counsel. County Counsel attorneys regularly appear in all departments of the Mendocino County Superior Court, the California Court of Appeal, First Appellate District, and in federal courts, including the Northern District of California and US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. During calendar year 2023, County Counsel attorneys assisted with closing 25 lawsuits filed against the County and have handled 65 bail bond matters.…”
They also report doing other routine functions like supporting other departments, responding to public records requests, reviewing or drafting contracts, appearing in Family Court, dealing with conservatorships, “collaborating with stakeholders,” and preparing for Governor Newsom’s wildly over-hyped “CARE” court.
This month’s CEO Report also finally acknowledges last June’s Board directive that the CEO report include some Assessment statistics. “During the June 20, 2023, Board of Supervisors meeting, the CEO was directed by General Consensus Of The Board to direct staff to publish a progress indicator on how many parcels have been assessed, the total dollar amount assessed, and staffing levels of appraisers in each Edition of the CEO Report, with a goal of closing the gap and reaching 85 percent (currently at or around 70 percent) over the next 24 months.”
The CEO’s description of the Board’s June directive conveniently leaves out the word “monthly,” since that would indicate that they haven’t done anything for six months on the subject. Further, the Report has no assessmenst statistics because: “No information or data was provided from the department.”
The CEO adds: “The Executive Office has contacted the Assessor-Clerk-Recorder-Registrar of Voters to request an update. The Assessor-Clerk-Recorder-Registrar of Voters will provide a verbal update during the Board of Supervisors meeting.”
Translation: Still no report. No report planned. Nobody cares.
* * *
First District Supervisor Candidate Carrie Shattuck:
Re: Last Week’s ‘Whistling Past The Budget Gap’:
As I campaign for Supervisor, speaking to the public constantly, I have not heard one positive comment about our current Board. Many citizens are appalled by the Board’s suspension of our independently elected Auditor/Controller/Treasurer/Tax Collector, especially the lack of notice and opportunity to speak on the day of suspension. This suspension is going to cost the County millions of dollars, and for what? For her doing her job of questioning the use of funds?
I know “they” do not want me in this office. I have consistently spoken about the lack of leadership and direction of our County. I plan to be up front and transparent about where our money is being spent. I will speak and conduct the County’s business independently, without influence from special interests.
Please contact me if you would like me to state your comments at the next Board meeting. I want everyone to have a voice.
If you can, please donate to my campaign for change.
Carrie Shattuck
Redwood Valley
707-489-5178
Votecarrie2024.com
Campaign Headquarters:
367 N. State St, Suite 105
Ukiah, Ca 95482”
Tuesday’s Board meeting agenda item 4e, Discussion and Possible action including review of Board of Supervisor’s directives requiring follow through from County staff and/or other agencies; and deletion of outdated directives as determined by the Board of Supervisors.
This item lasted 2 hours and absolutely nothing was done.
Directives Review (starts at time stamp 1:11:08)
My public comments (time stamp 3:09:44)
“I would just like to say that this agenda item has been extremely painful watching, thank you Supervisor Mulheren for bringing it up. I think that this subject has gone in every direction. Ok, there’s 40 total directives on these lists. 12 directives state, discussion and possible direction to staff regarding a presentation on the Mendocino County preliminary fiscal year 2023-24 budget, we’ve already approved the budget, there’s 12 directives, poof, gone. Ok, there’s 12 that are planning and building, she’s sitting right here, that you could address those 12. That leaves 16, some of them are space needs assessment, short term rental ordinance, like for like re-roofing, we could have had the entire discussion of every single directive and instead we’re veering off in, you know, time tracking and all these different directions, the actual agenda item states: review of Board of Supervisor’s directives requiring follow through from County staff and/or other agencies; and deletion of outdated directives as determined by the Board of Supervisors. You guys are talking about tracking time, and money and JPA’s, just discuss the directives and lets move on. I mean some of these agenda items go on and on and on and we’re taking up precious hours of the Board’s time when we could just be resolving the issues. Thank you.”
These are the Board’s own directives and they didn’t delete a single one, in 2 HOURS!!! There was no leadership, as usual, on this item to stay on task and get something accomplished. This Board puts all the responsibility for their jobs on everyone but themselves. It’s really not that difficult to follow-up with departments heads or the CEO on these items, on an on-going basis. These are THEIR directives, do your jobs!!!
Regarding Mental Health Treatment Act/Measure B
First the state closed the state hospital and promised the county money to make mental health clinics/services available. They failed to do so. The county opened the Puff unit, and when it got into trouble they hired an expert to make it better, she closed it! Second failure. Then we pass measure B and all funds were to be used for facilities and treatment. It’s now almost 2024 and zippo ! Nothing to show for it. I see a pattern here.
First the California state senate passed the Lanterman Petris Short Act in 1967 and took full effect in 1972. LPS Act made it harder to involuntarily institutionalize people.
“LPS Act made it harder to involuntarily institutionalize people.”
A.G.
That was likely a huge mistake, under normal circumstances…
Be well,
Laz
I was working at MSH when Reagan and the legislature betrayed the mentally of California. I left and had another satisfying career in law enforcement,, where I often dealt with many of my former patients. We are still suffering from this poor decision by Reagan and his cronies.
Not one 1st District candidate has attended an entire board meeting. 2nd district candidate, Jacob Brown, was there for the entirety of Tuesday’s meeting.
These 1st District candidates are silent. It shows me that they agree with the current direction , or lack there of, of the Board. Why aren’t they involved now? The outgoing supervisors have one more year left on their terms. My perspective is, that if you are wanting to make it better, you have to know how it is, or isn’t working now, otherwise it’s going to be more of same, which our County cannot afford.
Dedicated, Driven, Determined
Carrie Shattuck
The Board made no resolution or plan on how or when they are going to re-pay the “borrowed” 7 million for the jail. More rob Peter to pay Paul tactics. Once again no assurances to the tax payers that our taxes are going where they are suppose to, even when We The People vote for it.
Most of the recent sales tax hikes have been general fund taxes with an advisory spending ballot, meaning that the monies go into the general funds of county or city but the governing bodies “should” spend them as advised but are not legally obligated to do so. The $ raised by Measures B and P and Y, and whatever, if so voted on in two parts, are more fluid than one might have thought when voting. The California Two-Thirds Legislative Vote and Voter Approval for Fee and Charge Increases Initiative (#21-0042) has qualified for the ballot in California as an initiated constitutional amendment on November 5, 2024. It “Eliminates voters’ ability to advise how to spend revenues from proposed general tax on same ballot as the proposed tax.”
I hate to say I told you so (I’ve lost count on how many times), but I told you so. Vote NO on any and all tax measures regardless of what it funds. Until the spigot is turned off, it will be more of the same.