Placer supervisors authorize State Bar CARE Act funding agreements to support public defender representation
Loading...
Summary
County staff won board approval to accept CARE Act pass-through funding and contract with local public‑defender firms to represent people in Care Court proceedings, while acknowledging Placer has not yet claimed the funds and program enrollment has been slow.
Placer County supervisors on Feb. 3 approved agreements that will allow the county to receive and pass through state CARE Act funding to support public defender representation in Care Act and Care Court proceedings. Amanda Glow of the County Executive Office told the board the state agreement covers the period July 1, 2025, through June 30, 2028, with the first payment of $164,380.40 and a total not‑to‑exceed amount of $499,000 for the State Bar contract; a separate contract with Copeland Associates Inc. carries a matching not‑to‑exceed amount of $499,000.
Glow said the CARE Act (signed by Gov. Newsom in September 2022) created new pathways for mental-health and substance-use services and a court program known as Care Court. Placer has received CARE Act funding since 2024 with the intent to pass the dollars to the county’s primary public defender. She told the board the county received the state agreement only a few weeks ago and staff recommended backdating it to July 1, 2025, to preserve claim flexibility and avoid gaps between separate agreements.
Supervisors pressed staff about whether the county has used any of the funds yet. Glow said Placer has had a slow ramp-up: staff have received many petitions but many were closed when petitioners proved ineligible or declined to participate. “We have not claimed any of these funds yet,” she said, but added staff expect to begin claiming some funds in the upcoming quarter as program referrals increase.
A member of the public raised questions about the backdating and about how residents learn whether they qualify for the program. Glow directed callers to the State Bar of California website for eligibility rules and reiterated that the funds pay for representation services (to public defenders) rather than direct payments to program participants.
The board moved, seconded and voted to approve the agreements. Supervisors also authorized minor contract clarifications (insurance and indemnity language) that staff had requested before final execution. The agreements now proceed to county execution upon final review by county counsel and risk management.
