County Official Backs Plan to End Some Welfare

Financially strapped Los Angeles County could save $210 million by eliminating its general relief welfare program and should support legislation that would give it the option to do so, the county’s top administrator said in a memo sent to the Board of Supervisors on Friday.

Chief Administrative Officer Sally Reed is recommending that the board lobby for legislation that would allow sweeping reductions and restrictions of general relief, including scrapping the program.

Her proposals drew immediate fire from Legal Aid attorneys who said Reed is attempting to make poor people pay for the county’s budget woes.

General relief is the only county-financed welfare program and the program of last resort for adult poor people who cannot support themselves. More than 92,700 people were enrolled in the program at last count.

State law mandates that counties support indigent or disabled adults who do not qualify for other kinds of public assistance, but Reed is asking the board to support a bill pending in Sacramento that would allow counties to make general relief discretionary. Gov. Pete Wilson’s proposed 1995-96 budget would also make the program optional.

The general relief program has cost the county about $210 million this fiscal year and, with the Sheriff’s Department and health services, is one of the largest uses of the county’s general fund.

Reed estimates that the county faces a budget deficit of up to $1.2 billion in the 1995-96 fiscal year, and she argues that the board must consider a drastic reduction in the program to avoid Draconian cuts in other departments.

“We’re facing cuts of 20% or more in (most) other departments and money savings are going to be very difficult to achieve,” Reed said. “We’ve got to find some other way to cut costs over current levels.”

Reed said the county must seek as much flexibility as possible in administering general relief and at the very least should try to restrict service to the neediest.

She is proposing that the county pursue legislation that would deny assistance to the able-bodied and to people who are employable. The county’s Department of Public Social Services estimates that this restriction would save the county $128 million annually.

Reed is also seeking a change in rules that would allow the county to limit able-bodied, employable adults from receiving assistance for more than 90 days a year and a restriction that would disqualify people from aid for 60 days if they failed to comply with program requirements.

“It is no doubt that these would be very significant steps and that there would be a number of people who would be denied assistance,” she said.

Legal Aid attorneys said that Reed’s proposals would obliterate the last vestiges of the public’s social safety net.

“These are the people who have no other place to go,” said Richard Rothschild, an attorney with the Western Center on Law and Poverty. “She is saying, in effect, that she doesn’t care if people have no means to support themselves.”

Rothschild said the proposals are the latest in the county’s attempt to eviscerate the general relief program and that social welfare groups would fight to keep them from being implemented.

Last month, the 2nd District Court of Appeals--in a case argued by Rothschild--overturned the county’s 1993 reduction of monthly general relief cash grants from $285 to $212, ruling that the cuts were illegal. The county is appealing the ruling. But if the decision restoring the grants is allowed to stand, officials estimate that could add $78 million to the annual costs of the program.

The supervisors will consider Reed’s recommendations at Tuesday’s board meeting.

At least one supervisor, Mike Antonovich, said he supports Reed’s proposals.

“This is a necessary step toward averting bankruptcy for the county,” said Antonovich. “With two-thirds of the (county’s) $14-billion budget going for health and welfare, this action is necessary to ensure funding for public safety.”

However, although a majority of the board may support gaining more control over the county-run program, it is less certain that Reed could secure the three votes needed to move forward with a drastic overhaul.

“There could well be majority support for legislative authority for a greater degree of control,” said Joel Bellman, a spokesman for Supervisor Zev Yaroslavsky. “But once you get that control, there is the policy issue of how far you go. I don’t think we know all we need to know before we can make those kinds of decisions.”