Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Comment Medicaid topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Walsenburg resident tells Huerfano commissioners he was denied notice of Medicaid termination, alleges county misrepresentation
Summary
At the April 22 Huerfano County commissioners meeting, resident Kevin Shepherd said a client he represented was terminated from Medicaid without receiving a notice of action and alleged county staff misrepresented facts to law enforcement and a judge. Shepherd cited federal and state regulations and court precedent during public comment.
Kevin Shepherd of Walsenburg told the Huerfano County Board of County Commissioners during public comment on April 22 that a client he represented had been terminated from Medicaid without receiving a required notice of action.
Shepherd said that federal rules and Colorado regulations require agencies to provide a notice of action at least 10 days before terminating or reducing Medicaid services. He cited federal regulatory language by number (42 CFR 431.211) and a Colorado regulation (identified in the meeting transcript as 10 CCR 2505-10, section 8.057.2.a) while arguing the failure to mail notice denied the client due process rights. Shepherd also cited the U.S. Supreme Court decision Goldberg v. Kelly, saying it established that individuals have a property interest in public benefits and are entitled to notice and a hearing before termination.
Shepherd additionally said he was wrongfully trespassed from a county building while assisting the client and alleged county staff had told law enforcement the client and Shepherd were not entitled to copies of the notice of action and that they were causing a disturbance by filming. He referenced a federal appellate decision he identified as "Azeri versus Yeehaw" while asserting the public has a First Amendment right to record public officials in public spaces when not interfering with their duties. He also cited Colorado criminal statute language regarding willful disruption of a public building as the standard for lawful removal.
Shepherd said the department had misrepresented facts to a judge in a hearing request by claiming nonreceipt of documents despite Shepherd's assertion that he had documented proof of submission. He characterized the actions as undermining public institutions and due-process protections.
The board record does not show any formal action taken on Shepherd's allegations during the meeting. Commissioners and staff referred members of the public to state or federal administrative processes and court remedies for challenges to benefit determinations; the transcript contains a remark that resolving questions about benefit administration and federal versus state expense allocations is beyond the county's immediate authority and that those matters typically are addressed by state agencies or federal authorities.
No vote or staff directive resolving the specific allegations was recorded in the meeting minutes or transcript during the April 22 session.
