Compromise on Family Planning May Be Near

Assembly Speaker Willie Brown said Tuesday that counties--rather than the state--may be asked to administer family planning programs under a compromise plan aimed at restoring $24 million vetoed from the programs by Gov. George Deukmejian.

But Brown said the governor wants to release the money in such a way that none of it would be used for abortion counseling.

The San Francisco Democrat, who met later in the day with Deukmejian and other party leaders from the Assembly and Senate, also disclosed during a Capitol news conference that a compromise plan aimed at overhauling state solid waste disposal programs is coming together.

Senate President Pro Tem David A. Roberti (D-Los Angeles) confirmed after the meeting that the governor and key legislators “seem to be almost at the point of settlement” on a major plan to meet California’s growing problem of solid waste disposal.

General Agreement

Sources close to the negotiations said there is general agreement on legislation to revamp the California Waste Management Board and set a goal that would require local governments to reduce garbage by 25%, in part by placing a greater emphasis on recycling.

Legislative leaders have been meeting with Deukmejian in an effort to negotiate agreements on family planning and solid waste disposal, as well as workers compensation system reform, health insurance and other issues before the Legislature adjourns for the year on Sept. 15.

As for family planning, Brown’s comments confirmed reports circulating in the Capitol for several weeks that the governor and legislators had warmed up to the idea of allowing counties to disperse grants to finance family planning programs.

No Abortion Counseling

“There seems to be some desire by the governor to restore the family planning funds, but to do it in such a way that none of the monies can be used for abortion counseling,” Brown said.

Kevin Brett, the governor’s press secretary, was noncommittal. “The governor has indicated he is willing to discuss the subject of additional funds for family planning but he hasn’t made any promises,” Brett said.

The family planning programs, administered by nonprofit agencies such as Planned Parenthood, were set up to dispense birth control information. In recent years, they have been drawn into the fight over abortion. Critics contend that along with birth control information some agencies also provide abortion counseling. In some cases, critics say the money goes to agencies that also operate clinics that perform abortions.

Supporters say the programs help prevent unwanted pregnancies before women are faced with a decision on abortion. They also say the clinics provide poor women with an array of health services, including screening for cancer and sexually transmitted diseases.

Basically, the idea behind the proposed compromise is to turn a political hot potato over to counties.

Counties in the past have opposed such proposals. But county officials now believe that taking responsibility for the programs may be the only way to save the $24 million.

Larry E. Naake, director of the County Supervisors Assn. of California, said counties still believe that the state is best suited to administer the program. But Naake said his agency’s executive committee decided Monday to accept responsibility for the program as long as the family planning funds come to counties with minimal strings attached. He said counties want to be free to decide which agencies will receive the family planning grants.

On the question of solid waste disposal, Brown said there were only three major issues that remained to be resolved--at least from the perspective of Assembly Democrats.

Issues Identified

The Speaker identified the issues as decisions on the composition of the proposed new solid waste management board, the levying of additional fees to finance the new program and who will have overall responsibility for the solid waste program.

Sources said a legislative task force composed of Republican and Democratic legislators has basically agreed to eliminate the current nine-member California Solid Waste Management Board, which lawmakers believe has been ineffective in dealing with the problem of solid waste disposal. The present board has been criticized for emphasizing landfills and incinerators for disposing of garbage, without placing enough importance on recycling.

Deukmejian, however, has talked about placing added emphasis on incineration, as long as it does not result in a net increase in air pollution.

While lawmakers are talking about requiring local agencies to reduce the amount of waste by 25%, they are not yet considering a mandatory curbside recycling program that would force Californians to separate their garbage prior to collection. Deukmejian has said he would support requiring garbage separation. Legislators believe that the 25% reduction requirement, in effect, would require curbside recycling in many areas.