RUE'S VIEWS ON ISSUES
Mental Health Crisis in Sonoma County
by Rue Furch
Are we really going to toss all the people with addictions and mental illnesses into the county jail? That uncomfortable question is challenging the Sonoma County Board of Supervisors right now.
Those who have a family member with mental illnesses got a terrible Valentine's present this year when Santa Rosa Memorial Hospital announced its intention to close its in-patient mental health unit. It was yet more proof that the Board of Supervisors' June 2007 decision to allow the Norton Psychiatric Center (formerly known as Oakcrest) to close without an adequate replacement was penny-wise and pound-foolish.
These withdrawals of mental-health services will cause more harm -- including runaway costs -- than anyone is really talking about. The National Alliance for Mental Health has stated that there are 26,000 family members impacted by mental illness in Sonoma County. Abandoning these facilities is certain to result in more police action, more homelessness, and more violence.
Following hard on the heels of these closure plans came reports that the County of Sonoma is proposing to close the Orenda Center residential and outpatient programs. The Orenda Center has been providing crucial help to people with alcohol and drug addiction for the past 37 years.
The supervisors can rationalize their current irresponsibility on mental health issues by reminding their constituents that most funding for mental health facilities has come from the state. No money, no services, they can tell us. But it’s not that simple.
For almost half a century California has been shifting delivery of mental health services from the state to the counties via the Short-Doyle Act, and then through “State-Local Program Realignment” funded partly through increased state sales taxes and motor vehicle license fees. Now the counties continue to participate financially through a Maintenance of Effort (MOE) requirement.
Unfortunately that Realignment requirement is directly affected by economic cycles. When the economy slows and the counties have to deal with lean times, mental health funding drops too, unless sufficient Realignment reserves have been set aside. While there is no question that the budget woes in Sacramento are putting financial stress on the counties, the counties still have responsibilities that do not hinge on state funding. As the Supervisors look at the options, they need to acknowledge, for example, that the Orenda Center is a facility the county owns and can afford to keep open -- especially when the alternative is likely to be more expensive incarceration of addicted people in the county jail.
Our Board of Supervisors cannot be allowed to throw up its hands and shrug off responsibility for maintaining a mental health safety net in our county. Sonoma County residents have no trouble remembering that massive closure of California's mental health hospitals immediately caused an increase of homeless people on the streets.
Voters have already acted to make sure that not all state funding for mental health care would disappear. In 2004 California voters passed Proposition 63 to make sure funds exist to support inpatient mental-health care at the county level. This measure came about because of the success of so-called AB 34 programs pioneered in three California counties in 1999 to serve homeless people, parolees and probationers with serious mental illness. These programs have already been credited with saving millions of dollars by heading off hospitalization and incarceration costs. As other Sonoma County mental health services have been cut back, the Sheriff has taken the initiative in finding funding to train his deputies in crisis intervention. This is an important step and I applaud it. But we cannot rely on sheriff's deputies as our only safety net for providing counseling to people in acute emotional distress. The Board of Supervisors needs to give the sheriff and all law enforcement the resources they need to deal with mental health emergencies. When traditional funding sources shrink, our elected county officials cannot be released from their responsibility to find the best available alternatives.
As I look at what we can and should be doing to maintain mental health services in Sonoma County, I do not see the necessary leadership from a majority on the Board. We deserve better. The Supervisors are responsible for closure of the Norton facility and the proposed closure of the Orenda Center. I promise to do everything possible to reverse those closures. Throwing addicts in the drunk tank simply perpetuates a pointless cycle. And when a mentally distressed young woman stops taking her medications and has a psychotic episode, her parents should not have to call the county jail to find out how she's doing.
I'd love to hear your ideas and perspectives.
I want to hear from you.
I´ll listen.
