County Budget Cuts to Affect the Poor Most

Slashing reductions in some county services, combined with sharply higher fees to cities and other public agencies, have allowed officials to balance this year’s county budget--but not without painful cuts in services to poor people.

After months of review, county officials released a final budget adoption proposal Friday, and the Board of Supervisors will vote Wednesday on the $3.39-billion document. It is not expected to be a pleasant task.

“Everybody’s going to feel this,” County Administrative Officer Ernie Schneider said, “poor people, and even middle-class people, people who need to get into an emergency room or need assistance. It’s a tough year all over.”

None of about 16,000 people who work for the county are likely to be laid off.

County health and social service programs will take the deepest cuts, especially in medical services for indigents. Programs for homeless people, food stamp recipients and poor people needing legal services are scheduled for sharp slashes.

In short, that means the poor, the sick and the homeless will probably bear the brunt of this year’s cuts, if they are enacted by the supervisors.

The largest single proposed reduction, for instance, is to the county’s Indigent Medical Services program, which partly reimburses hospitals for caring for the county’s working poor. A $13.6-million cut is proposed, a startling 54% reduction from current funding.

“I’m tremendously worried about the IMS program,” Health Care Agency Director Tom Uram said Friday. “The IMS people (local hospitals and doctors) act like it’s my cut. It’s the state cut, and I’m the one stuck with passing the buck.”

Other health programs, such as those providing mental health care, will be allowed to continue operating at current levels until the end of the year. If no money can be found before then, however, those services would be in line for deep reductions.

“It’s bare-bones business as usual,” Uram said. “There will be no cuts until January.”

But because of increasing demand for public health services, he said: “The lines may be longer (at public clinics), the waits may be longer. But the clinics will be open, with the same employees serving at least as many people as before.”

There were a few notes of good news, however: Five local programs that provide shelter and emergency services for troubled youths were rescued from eminent closure by a related proposal. County officials in recent weeks had put them on 30-day notices of termination, but after protests, officials agreed to fund them until January.

Varied other programs and services--among them acquiring new helicopters for the Sheriff’s Department, building a new county warehouse and making the central courthouse safe in an earthquake--also are either being deferred or dropped from the proposed county budget.

Many of the county programs hit with deep reductions were victims of the state budget, which passes money on to counties. Combined, the state cuts trimmed more than $40 million from county funding, and the county was already $25 million short of what it would have to have to expand programs to meet current needs.

As county officials struggled to make up the gaping shortfall, they turned in part to new fees that the state gave counties permission to levy as a way of dealing with their cuts.

Two fees combined to make up the bulk of that revenue: A property tax collection charge and a jail booking fee, both of which will be passed on to cities, school districts and other government agencies.

The property tax collection fee will go into effect Jan. 1, and the booking fee, though still the subject of negotiations between the county and cities, will probably take effect at the same time.

“Without those fees, we could not have come up with a budget that avoided layoffs,” said Ronald S. Rubino, associate administrative officer for management and budget. “They save us.”

The fees have angered cities and school districts, however, because the charges will leave those agencies with more than $16 million to account for in their budgets. Cities have protested, and school districts are threatening legal action against the state.

“It’s going to be difficult for a lot of cities,” said Bill Hodge, executive director of the League of California Cities, Orange County division. “These came in at the 11th hour, and we certainly weren’t prepared for it.”

Though sympathetic, county officials argue that there is little they can do if they hope even to preserve their programs at existing levels in the face of rapidly growing demand.

“There are lots of negatives in this budget that we’re having to deal with,” Schneider said. “There’s not much to be happy about.”