Our Vision Statement: Disability Rights California will create individual and family supports, chosen and directed by the person with a disability

Disability Rights California

December 16, 2008

Disability Rights California’s update on proposed mental health cuts, plans to raise levies to close budget gap

In a hearing held by the Senate Budget subcommittee on health, human services and labor, Margaret Jakobson-Johnson of Disability Rights California, Rusty Selix of Mental Health Associates and Pat Ryan of California Mental Health Directors Association testified against redirecting the Proposition 63 funds for mental health services.

The hearing focused on responses to the proposal of the Republican
leadership to address the growing budget gap. This new proposal outlines $15.6 billion in cuts and $6.5 billion in revenues. However, $3.9 billion of the revenue is supposed to come from Prop 63 funds which are being shown as unspent. The advocates testified that these funds were specifically raised for proven mental health services that reduce homelessness and are obligated to be spent on these programs.

The Capitol is buzzing with activity, as each new iteration of the budget or news conference brings forward activists and advocates to make sure that Californians who are already experiencing hardship are not required to bear disproportionate cuts.

One of Disability Rights California’s legislative advocates, Deborah Doctor, was active in the December 16 all-day meeting of the In-Home Supportive Services coalition to develop approaches to convince the legislature anew of how invaluable these services are. Due to the aging baby boomers, the caseload for these modest services is growing, yet they are critical to keeping people safely in their homes and avoiding nursing homes.

On the evening of December 17, the Senate and Assembly will vote on measures to increase gas, sales and income taxes slightly to help close the budget gap. Loopholes in the law allow for raising levies with a simple majority vote rather than the two-thirds majority needed to pass the budget as a whole.