NOTE: As provided in LFC policy, this report is intended for use by the standing finance committees of the legislature. The Legislative Finance Committee does not assume responsibility for the accuracy of the information in this report when used in any other situation.
| SPONSOR: | Rawson | DATE TYPED: | 01/25/99 | HB | |||
| SHORT TITLE: | Dona Ana DD Program | SB | 144 | ||||
| ANALYST: | Burkhart | ||||||
| Recurring
or Non-Rec |
Fund
Affected | ||||
| FY99 | FY2000 | FY99 | FY2000 | ||
| $ 50.0 | Recurring | GF | |||
(Parenthesis ( ) Indicate Expenditure Decreases)
| Subsequent
Years Impact |
Recurring
or Non-Rec |
Fund
Affected | ||
| FY99 | FY2000 | |||
| $ 0.0 | ||||
(Parenthesis ( ) Indicate Revenue Decreases)
Duplicates/Conflicts with/Companion to/Relates to
SOURCES OF INFORMATION
Department of Health
SUMMARY
Synopsis of Bill
Senate Bill 144 appropriates 50.0 from the general fund to the Department of Health for expenditure in FY 2000 for the purpose of contracting for services for people with developmental disabilities in Dona Ana county.
Significant Issues
At the present time there is a waiting list for services for developmental disabilities clients in New Mexico. The budget request of the Department of Health as well as the recommendations of the Legislative Finance Committee and the Department of Finance and Administration have all increased general fund monies for these clients.
FISCAL IMPLICATIONS
An appropriation of 50.0 for services in Dona Ana county could be matched with Medicaid dollars and would increase the monies to be used to almost 200.0 if all the clients were medicaid eligible. However, the use of these monies exclusively for Dona Ana county residents to the exclusion of all other counties does not meet with Department of Health regulations or with those of the federal government.
ADMINISTRATIVE IMPLICATIONS
Administration of these monies would not cause additional burden to the Department of Health as they presently administer over 18.0 million of general fund monies for the developmental disabled population.
CONFLICT/DUPLICATION/COMPANIONSHIP/RELATIONSHIP
Distribution of these monies exclusively to residents of Dona Ana county residents would not be in accordance with the Department of Health regulations which demand equal treatment of all developmentally disabled clients.
OTHER SUBSTANTIVE ISSUES
The appropriation of general fund monies for clients who reside in only one county and which does not provide equal benefits tho the same type of client in other counties provides an opportunity for advocates of all similar clients to sue the Department of Health on and equal protection basis.
POSSIBLE QUESTIONS
1. How was the 50.0 amount determined?
2. Why was the appropriation made for residents of Dona Ana county alone?
MB/njw