Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Social Services Licensing topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Local commenter urges license requirements, clearer criminal/civil lines for DHS/HHS investigators
Summary
A resident told the Wabasha County Board the county and state mix civil licensing oversight and criminal investigation roles, and urged requiring licensing and stronger oversight of county licensors to reduce liability.
WABASHA COUNTY, Minn. — A resident and former regulatory worker told the county board that confusing roles between child protection/licensing and law enforcement are producing inconsistent practices and potential constitutional problems, and asked the board to consider stronger licensing and oversight for county social services staff.
Robert Johnson, a resident who identified himself at the public forum as having 10 years of military service and experience managing licensed group homes, said he has reviewed complaints brought to him and sees a statewide “disconnect” between administrative licensing investigations and criminal investigations. “If they're investigating criminally, they need to have a warrant for that. They can't just use the civil excuse,” Johnson said, arguing that officers sometimes enter without warrants beyond exigent circumstances and that civil evidence should not be withheld for criminal investigations once those matters are resolved.
Johnson also said county-level personnel who conduct licensing and investigations are not required by the state to hold social-work licensure, which he said reduces an oversight layer that could limit liability and improve consistency. “The counties aren't required to have the social workers be licensed or the licensors to be licensed,” Johnson said. He recommended clearer oversight, training and bonding for county licensors so the county has “less liability” and licensors can be held to professional standards.
Johnson described an example in which an individual did not receive an annual inspection for three years and then was reported as inspected nine months later in 2024, and raised a possible conflict-of-interest concern where an investigator shares a last name with an involved party.
The board did not take action on the comments. Johnson offered to provide written recommendations and follow up with staff. His remarks were made during the public forum portion of the May 20 meeting.
