In the past couple of weeks I’ve written columns dealing with the county’s (and the state’s) 50 years of failed mental health practices, programs, and policies. I’ve also shared with you my opinions and analysis of the county’s appalling financial fiasco.
Summarizing my thoughts on the mental health issue, I said: The Lanterman–Petris–Short Act (LPS Act) a so-called “bill of rights” for those with mental health problems passed the Democratic-controlled Assembly 77-1. The Senate approved it by similar margins.
It was co-authored by California State Assemblyman Frank Lanterman, a Republican, and California State Senators Nicholas C. Petris and Alan Short, both Democrats. LPS went into full effect on July 1, 1972.
I recently read a piece by Vern Pierson (El Dorado County District Attorney), and learned something I was not aware of: The movement of the “de-institutionalization” of the mentally ill started in the 1960’s. This movement, started in Europe, was supported by President John Kennedy and ultimately was complicated by a U.S. Supreme Court opinion and civil liberty concerns over forced treatment. Pierson has my respect, he’s one well-rounded D.A.
Anyway, the California bi-partisan law came about because of concerns about the involuntary civil commitment to mental health institutions in California. At the time, the act was thought by many to be a progressive blueprint for modern mental health commitment procedures, not only in California, but in the United States.
The LPS Act emptied out the state’s mental hospitals but resulted in an explosion of homelessness. Legislators never provided enough money for community- based programs to provide treatment and shelter.
Lanterman later expressed regret at the way the law was carried out. “I wanted the law to help the mentally ill,” he said. “I never meant for it to prevent those who need care from receiving it.”
But that’s exactly what has happened for the past five decades
As I’m always saying, problems just don’t happen, people make them happen. But the history of mental health practice and policy in this state is one of abject failure caused by well-intentioned reformers back in the late 60s-early 70s who unknowingly unleashed something that no one envisioned or wanted.
The primary action to cure this ill has always been right in front of us. But it’s been blocked from both view and implementation by a brick wall of political correctness combined with government capitulation to the Homeless-Mental Health Industrial Complex.
Here in Mendocino County think “Schraeders” and you’ll know everything you need to know about what I’m saying.
The solution?
You have to re-introduce a meaningful, no-nonsense, balanced level of compulsion into the system so that we are not, as Assemblyman Lanterman so aptly put it many years ago, “preventing those who need care from receiving it.”
Absent that action, you’re left with what we have now: Decades of chaotic failure where the only success found is on the bottom-lines of the balance sheets of the Homeless- Mental Health Industrial Complex. Now that is true craziness.
County Finances
Here’s a summary of my thoughts on county finances, one of the main arguments I’ve made for the past two years:
So what appears to be high on the County’s lists of concerns?
One item for sure is the creation of a Department of Finance. Everyone is familiar with the background on this non-issue, issue, so I’m not going to re-flog it. Two years ago, by a 4-1 vote (Haschak no), the BOS consolidated the previously independent elected offices of Auditor-Controller and Treasurer-Tax Collector, thus structurally weakening essential internal financial controls.
There’s two bottom lines to this “concern.”
- There’s no indication that this idea has any traction at all with the public. It’s been cut out of whole cloth by the Board of Supervisors (Haschak excepted).
- There’s every indication to believe that the overwhelming majority of citizens would never entrust the responsibility of financial control to the Board of Supervisors, or any creature office or department under its influence. If this proposal would ever go to the ballot, it would a wipeout.
As I’ve suggested, as well as Supe Haschak and I believe Supe Gjerde also, the Board should call in former officials responsible for fiscal matters (Treasurer-Tax Collector, Auditor- Controller, Assessor, and CEO) and interview/question and, hopefully, learn from them how they did their jobs. This is critical information the BOS admits it is lacking.
This process would include but is not limited to such things as assessments of their responsibilities and how they performed their duties, how they exercised fiscal oversight and the identification of internal financial controls, systems that were utilized (manual vs. electronic/software, etc.), staffing levels (classifications and job descriptions) narrative descriptions of interdepartmental and third-party (ex.: outside, independent audit) working relationships detailing scope of work and information disclosed and received.
Since no one has explanations or answers to what caused the ongoing, untenable fiscal mess the county is in, you need to conduct an inquiry and start finding answers to all of the current unknowns prior to launching a substantially, momentous alteration to your organizational structure with this idea of a Department of Finance.
As you are aware, at a recent Board of Supervisors meeting you asked County Counsel Curtis, “Can you assure us we have accurate (financial) information now, that we can trust this data we have now?”
Curtis succinctly responded, “No, that’s something the Board will have to take up.”
Well, it appears that one of the things the “Board will have to take up” is finding out how you got from where the County once was to where it is now.
As Supervisor Glenn McGourty has aptly noted several times recently, “It’s difficult to do business when you don’t know how much money you have in the bank.”
By the way, when the suggestion was made at that meeting to open an inquiry by calling in former county financial officials to provide this much-needed information, it was cut off by Supervisor Mulheren, who complained, “We shouldn’t take another elected official to task, that’s something for the Grand Jury.”
That’s utter nonsense. Mulheren apparently disagrees with County Counsel’s advice that straightening out the financial disorder is “something the Board will have to take up.”
By the way, if the Board does decide to hold an inquiry, it won’t be necessary for former officials to attend in-person. That’s the beauty of zoom meetings.
Not sure you are aware, but why I pushed for Ms. Scott was the culture of fear instituted by our late county counsel with the Brown Act. I will not tell the actual events unless needed but the BHAB of last year is well aware. We in particular seemed in my opinion to have been targeted and passed even then CC’s rigid interpretations. I was unable to even ask questions about the position I was put into on the BHAB. I am thankful we(the BHAB), are trying to think with the board so small and restructuring, how to make it easier for more public involvement so we can all learn. Until the new board is seated, we will likely get no new members with almost a third of the seats open, including the chair.
I will always do my best to keep the public aware of the BHAB’s ongoings, but I tell you now, the problem is getting people together at all. Our board has yet to come up with a pointed agenda on any issue. How can there be a Brown Act violation when even at board meetings, there are no issues to discuss other than the monthly sign offs? Pretty much all we show up for is to sign off on the director’s activities. If I had any issues even with the consolidation, you would be hearing about them. So far, I am impressed. And, I give credit to our current providers for not running scared when I directly stated during the last BHAB meeting I expected to see better.
Great history lesson on both issues. Thank you. Up to us, the people, to refocus the mental health funds. The people, I am learning, are the problem. Until it affects us, we will literally walk around someone down on the ground, out of fear. THAT is why we are where we are at now on both issues. Has anyone even shown up to support Chamise? They will say they have no time. People make time for what matters.