In summary
California voters are likely to see a mental health ballot measure introduced in the March 2024 election. Another idea is to issue $6 billion in bonds to create housing for people with mental illness.
A last-minute change to one of Gov. Gavin Newsom’s signature mental health proposals this week shocked advocates for Californians with disabilities, who called the move a He called it a “bait and switch” that could open the door to involuntary facilities.
The dispute centers on more than $6 billion in bonds that will be used to build and support treatment facilities. Housing for people suffering from mental illness or an addiction disorder. This is another proposal likely headed for a vote that would amend California’s 20-year-old Mental Health Services Act by forcing local governments to increase spending on housing the mentally ill and homeless. It is an accompaniment to
This year, the bond was not discussed until the last week of the Legislative Session, but the bill that put it on the ballot was amended to remove language prohibiting the use of funds for involuntary confinement. Ta. The replaced text is Behavioral Health Continuum Infrastructure Programthe $2.2 billion investment has been used to fund shuttered facilities such as acute psychiatric hospitals.
Lawmakers are expected to vote today to put the bonds before voters on the March ballot. Due to procedural prohibitions, further amendments to the bill are not possible.
“We are appalled,” said Samuel Jayne, senior attorney with the California Office of Disability Rights. “At the last minute, the administration … came up with language that completely changed the intent of this bill.”
The bond measure, totaling about $6.4 billion, has been touted by Mr. Newsom as a way to address California’s problems. Severe shortage of mental health treatment beds. The funding will be used to build 10,000 treatment beds and supportive housing, some of which will be set aside for veterans battling mental health and addiction issues.
California disability rights groups have told CalMatters that Newsom officials have said in both private and public meetings that the funds are locked into housing and treatment facilities for people with severe mental illness and substance use disorders. He emphasized that the funds would be used to lift the restrictions. A recent fact sheet from the governor’s office, released before the amendment, states the facility is in a “all unlocked, community-based environment.”
“All of these presentations are misrepresentations of what this bill actually does,” Jain said.
Newsom officials disagree with claims that mental health and disability advocates were misled. Newsom spokesman Brandon Richards said discussions with county behavioral health officials, first responders and families of people with severe mental illness led to the changes.
“There was a clear desire to ensure that the $6.38 billion bond … was used for the full range of behavioral health treatment facilities,” Richards said.
Richards said the change does not reverse the state’s commitment to supporting community-based treatment. The bond still requires states to prioritize funding services in the “least restrictive setting.”
Democratic Rep. Jackie Irwin of Thousand Oaks, who is sponsoring the bill, did not respond to a request for comment by deadline.
Further funding for mental health beds
If lawmakers and voters approve the bond, the amendment would not mean all of the money would be used for locked-down treatment facilities, but the investment would be allowed.
According to state records, at least 16 locked facilities are funded by a 2021 law that sets aside funding for behavioral health beds. However, the majority of grants from this program go toward unrestricted community-based care. Newsom officials also said the secure facility will have an appropriate place for behavioral health care, and patients will voluntarily admit if they are suicidal or believe they may be a danger to others. claims that it can be done.
in policy priority letter Last month, the California chapter of the National Alliance on Mental Illness supported using bond funds for “acute beds” used for psychiatric involuntary holds. Representatives for the group did not respond to requests for comment before publication.
“People are not recovering against their will.”
Kiran Savage Sangwan, California Pan-Ethnic Health Network Executive Director
The Mental Health Alliance, which supports families of people with severe mental illness, was a champion of Newsom’s CARE Act, which passed last year. This law would allow courts to place people with severe mental illnesses into involuntary treatment programs. The alliance advocates community-based and voluntary treatment as a first step and urges states to fund such programs, but its members say court-ordered intervention is sometimes necessary. I believe that.
“We recognize that there are people with severe mental illness who have very advanced and complex needs and whose illness sometimes results in a lack of insight and good judgment about their medical needs. “In these cases, a higher level of care may be required, but it should be a last resort,” the group said in a statement supporting the CARE Act.
Mayors support Gov. Gavin Newsom’s bond
But some advocates for people living with mental illness argue that any form of forced treatment causes long-term psychological harm.
“We are subjecting people to a very traumatic experience of having their agency taken away and not being able to provide effective programming,” said Kiran Savage Sangwan, executive director of the California Pan-Ethnic Health Network. he said. “People are not recovering against their will.”
Savage Sangwan said people of color are disproportionately affected by forced treatment, in part because they have less access to preventive interventions. Instead, Savage-Sangwan said, “intensive day programs, comprehensive support, group therapy and social care coordination” have been shown to be much more effective.
“We know what works, and what works is community-based programs that are self-directed and address a variety of needs,” Savage Sangwan said. “They can be intensive and often need to be intensive. But we know that we need to engage people. If people are self-motivated, then You get better results.”
Many of these groups, which still oppose the bond measure’s sister proposal, told CalMatters that they are not specifically opposed to the bond because it would dramatically expand the state’s capacity for community-based programs. Told. If approved by Congress, both proposals would appear on the same ballot as Proposition 1.
The big city mayors who organized a successful last-minute lobbying effort to increase the bond by $1.5 billion said they were not requesting any other amendments. Rachael Lane, a spokeswoman for San Diego Mayor Todd Gloria and president of the Metropolitan Association of Mayors, said the organization representing the state’s 13 most populous cities still supports the bond measure.
Supported by the California Health Care Foundation (CHCF). People will be able to receive the care they need, when they need it, at an affordable price.visit www.chcf.org You can learn more.
