Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Health Department Fees topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board initiates 30‑day public comment on proposed health‑department fees; staff outlines new lab services and fee structure
Summary
The Board of Health voted unanimously to open a 30‑day public comment period on proposed fee changes. Health department staff described new in‑house rapid lead testing, expanded STI testing, antibody titers, and a proposed sliding fee for adult vaccines to match the Vaccines for Children model.
The Summit County Board of Health voted unanimously to begin a 30‑day public comment period on proposed health‑department fee changes, allowing the department to solicit feedback before the board considers final adoption.
During a work‑session presentation, health department staff reviewed several proposed services and associated fees. Key proposals included:
- Rapid in‑house blood lead screening (finger‑prick) enabled by a donated analyzer and an arrangement with a lab; staff proposed a $5 screening fee plus the test cost (estimated total ~$13 per test) to support community screening events and mobile‑clinic use. - Expanded sexually transmitted infection (STI) testing to include additional targets (e.g., Trichomonas) enabled by a new lab partnership. - Measles, mumps and rubella (MMR) antibody titers offered individually or as a panel; staff said titer services are technically possible but not yet offered until the board supports the program and the public comment process completes. - A proposed sliding fee for the Health Department’s adult vaccine program to align with the Vaccines for Children (VFC) sliding fee model: suggested baseline up to $15, with a sliding scale down to $0 for people who cannot pay. Staff said they will not deny vaccines to people because of inability to pay.
Staff stated the donated point‑of‑care lead testing machine carries a one‑time discounted cost of roughly $6,000 and that each test kit includes quality‑assurance materials; ongoing maintenance of the machine is the department’s responsibility.
Board members asked how inability to pay would be assessed; staff said they currently make that determination through a conversation with the client, noting that some programs (women's services, for example) use federal poverty guidelines, but the proposed fees for these services would rely on a conversation‑based approach. Staff also described outreach plans to schools and community groups to use mobile‑clinic capacity for screening.
Procedureally, the board approved a motion to open the 30‑day comment period. After the close of public comment, staff will present public feedback and a final adoption request; if the board approves the fees following public comment, the department could begin offering approved services promptly.
