Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Protective Services topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commissioners question cost of guardian protective services; council cites legal costs
Summary
A commissioner said the county is "paying way too much per person" for guardian protective services; senior‑levy staff and board members responded that court‑appointed guardianship includes legal fees and higher per‑person costs and provided client counts for context.
During discussion of the senior‑services contract awards, a commissioner raised concern that guardianship/protective services may be overpriced on a per‑person basis and suggested paying for services on a per‑case basis rather than via a standing contract.
"It was brought up to my attention that it'd be cheaper just to go 1 at a time as we need it instead of a contract," one commissioner said. Senior‑services coordinator Diane responded that guardian protective services are assigned by the court and include lawyer fees and other legal costs, explaining that those factors raise per‑person cost: "You're dealing with lawyer fees, and that's why the cost per hour is higher." Diane and other board members said Guardian Protective Services had served roughly 77 clients while the ombudsman program had served about 135, figures offered to explain scale and cost drivers.
Commissioners and the board discussed whether changing the RFP mid‑cycle would be feasible; staff said that would require declining awards and reissuing solicitations. The council and public commenters emphasized the protective role of guardians and ombudsmen in preventing asset exploitation and addressing neglect in nursing‑home settings.
The item remained a discussion point for the senior levy review; no vote to change contracting approach occurred during the meeting.
