Court Ruling Halts Cuts to Welfare Recipients : Benefits: Judge blocks plan that would limit payments to three months out of the year to ‘employable’ adults receiving General Relief.

More than 2,000 San Diego County welfare recipients scheduled to lose at least some of their benefits will continue to receive payments at least through January, an appellate court ruled Friday.

The state 4th District Court of Appeal issued a stay preventing the county from implementing a plan limiting payments to three months out of the year to “employable” adults receiving General Relief, the last-chance welfare program.

Robert D. Newman, an attorney with the Western Center on Law & Poverty in Los Angeles, said, “We are obviously quite pleased.”

“Assuming the county abides by the order, the clients will continue to receive benefits,” he said.

The stay came after attorneys representing all of the able-bodied adults in the General Relief program asked the appeal court to prevent the cutoff authorized to take affect Tuesday after a recent court battle.

At the conclusion of a three-week trial, Superior Court Judge Judith Haller ruled Sept. 1 that the county was required to give employable, non-disabled adults only three months of benefits during the year.

The judge made the decision while acknowledging that members of this group would be unlikely to find work during the nine months they would not receive their monthly checks of $291.

The request for the stay was filed Monday by the Legal Aid Society of San Diego and the Western Center on Law & Poverty.

Haller ruled that welfare payments can be cut because the county cannot afford to pay benefits without compromising other vital programs.

This finding of “fiscal impossibility” violates two key laws that require governments to provide aid to indigent people, the appeal states, echoing the plaintiffs’ claims made during trial.

Anson B. Levitan, a Legal Aid Society attorney writing for the plaintiffs, argued that the fiscal impossibility defense has been overturned in every appellate court case.

The petition had asked for a stay by Monday because county officials had planned to begin dropping recipients from the General Relief program Tuesday.

In a letter brief sent Thursday to Presiding Justice Daniel J. Kremer, the county counsel maintained that the plaintiffs have not met the standard to obtain a writ and have not established a probability that Haller made an error during a bench trial.

The General Relief program--the last-ditch place for the indigent to receive money--costs the county about $3 million a year. Officials note that the county only managed to balance its fiscal year 1991-92 budget by slashing $60 million, and was forced to make similar cuts in the current budget.

In her ruling, Haller found that only 10% to 20% of the able-bodied adults who are set to lose aid will be able to find work.

“Succinctly stated, the evidence shows the county is facing a fiscal crisis,” Haller wrote in her 18-page opinion. “Extraordinary efforts have been made and must be continued to save revenues in all areas and money cannot be taken from other programs without manifestly injuring the health, safety and welfare of this county.”

Newman, the attorney with the Western Center on Law & Poverty, said that appeal of the lawsuit has been placed on an expedited list. Legal briefs are due throughout December, and oral arguments in the case are scheduled for Jan. 20.