Social, Health Program Funds Must Remain a Budget Priority

While most everyone agrees that public safety should have a high priority in the allocation of our tax dollars, this funding should be balanced by an investment in the social fabric of a community.

It gives little comfort to citizens to be safe from violence while having their quality of life deteriorate in other ways. Many social and health programs provide a “safety net” for vulnerable groups, and they represent an insurance policy for better advantaged people who ultimately have to pay the financial and human costs for the failures of society.

Funding for prenatal care, childhood immunizations, mental health treatment, alcohol and drug prevention services, parenting education, child abuse programs, homeless shelters, services for domestic violence victims and programs that allow our seniors and frail elderly to live independently and with dignity, is far less costly than welfare dependency, the impact of contagious diseases, hospital and emergency room treatment, foster care, jails, the justice system and the impact of dysfunctional families; costs that are ultimately the burden of the taxpayers.

But common sense does not always prevail when it comes to making decisions about preventive programs. Typically, social service and health programs are the first to experience budget cuts because they lack broad appeal of the public safety programs. Orange County always has been behind in its funding for these human service programs, usually dead last when compared to other California counties.

It was no surprise that the Orange County bankruptcy affected those least able to afford it. The Social Service Agency cut 884 jobs, reduced its budget by millions of dollars and eliminated a host of worthy programs. The Health Care Agency lost 279 jobs.

Could we do better now that we’re out of bankruptcy? Could programs be restored? What about the criticism that the county was on a spending binge, returning to business as usual without a commitment to downsizing, restructuring and less government?

In deliberating the 1996-97 county budget, the Board of Supervisors made a valiant effort to respond to these questions in a responsible and compassionate way. First, public safety fared very well. The Sheriff’s Department was the biggest beneficiary, with more than a 10% increase in its budget. The district attorney’s office got a big boost as well, with an 8.3% increase. Even the Probation Department wasn’t forgotten, as 112 additional beds were funded to relieve overcrowding at Juvenile Hall.

But what about social service and health programs? Were there any crumbs left for these worthy programs? You bet. For the first time in years, the board united to make an important statement about the priority of these programs.

At the budget hearing there was a series of motions that allocated over $1 million in additional funding for Orangewood Children’s Home, child abuse prevention programs operated by nonprofit organizations in the community, and planning money for an Orangewood satellite facility. Even an allocation of $125,000 in Community Social Program grants passed 4 to 1.

A quarter of a million dollars was allocated to keep the Veterans Services Office open and a birth certificate surcharge provided an additional $270,000 for programs that would help to prevent the unnecessary removal of children from their families. In order to deal with caseload growth and the uncertainties of welfare reform, the board added 164 temporary positions that were fully loaded for one year with federal and state monies.

The Health Care Agency was supplemented by another half-million dollars, funding drugs and alcohol programs, perinatal services and community clinics serving the health needs of the poor. The most dramatic moment came when the board made a policy decision that set a floor of $28 million earmarked for health services. No more cuts and a promise that as additional “state realignment” funds were made available, programs would be enhanced and expanded to meet many unmet needs.

A spending binge? Hardly, since these departments continue to operate at staffing levels below pre-bankruptcy levels and with additional workloads. Additionally, funding for public safety is provided by Proposition 172, which was the intent of the voters when it was passed, and social and health programs are mostly mandated and funded by the federal and state government.

But was the Board of Supervisors too generous with the social and health program funding? Not if one recognizes that there is a return on investment for these expenditures and the taxpayers avoid paying bigger costs in the future.

The end result was a county budget that is $141 million less than two years ago and has 1,414 fewer positions. It kept public safety as its highest priority while not abandoning the social service and health programs. The board also set aside an additional $26 million to pay off the debt of the bankruptcy early. For this we owe no apologies. The taxpayers will enjoy the dividends of these decisions from an economic, human and personal safety standpoint.