Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Mental Health Privatization topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
St. Clair County adopts resolution opposing MDHHS plan to consolidate prepaid inpatient health plans
Summary
The St. Clair County Board of Commissioners approved Resolution 25-16 opposing a Michigan Department of Health and Human Services plan to implement a competitive procurement process for prepaid inpatient health plans (PIHPs), citing concerns about loss of local control and potential impacts on county clients.
The St. Clair County Board of Commissioners voted to adopt Resolution 25-16 opposing a Michigan Department of Health and Human Services plan to implement a competitive procurement process for prepaid inpatient health plans, citing concerns about loss of local control and potential effects on local behavioral health services.
Supporters of the resolution told commissioners the procurement could transfer oversight from local PIHPs to larger, distant entities and reduce transparency and local responsiveness. Commissioner Beaton said the planned changes “take away local control,” noting that under the current system “if someone has an issue with their service provider, they can go to that office. There’s public meetings. There’s citizen wishing to be heard.”
The resolution follows public comments from local mental-health clinicians. Sarah Dombrowski, introduced herself as “a licensed master social worker who works as a mental health therapist here in St. Clair County,” and urged the board to back the measure. Dombrowski told the commissioners she represents clinicians who serve “over 7,000 clients” in the county and said privatization could cause “devastation” to local mental-health services.
Ken Heltman, a licensed professional counselor and certified advanced alcohol and drug counselor, also addressed the board and described county opioid and behavioral-health trends, including overdose statistics and local prescribing rates. Heltman said the county needs accessible local treatment options and expressed skepticism that outsourcing oversight to large nonlocal organizations would improve services.
Commissioners discussed local control, transparency and the risk of turning oversight over to large organizations. After discussion the board took a roll-call vote and approved Resolution 25-16. The motion’s outcome: approved. The board did not adopt any ordinance or directive changing service delivery; the action is a formal statement opposing the MDHHS procurement approach and not a change in local service contracts.
The county health department and EGLE (Michigan Department of Environment, Great Lakes, and Energy) will continue as the technical agencies on environmental and public-health matters; the resolution is a statement of the board’s position regarding the MDHHS procurement process.
