Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Healthcare topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board orders independent review of Measure B hospital funding amid concerns for safety-net hospitals
Summary
The Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors voted to pursue an independent study of Measure B allocations to assess whether the trauma-funding formula still matches county needs, a motion supporters said aims to protect hospitals such as MLK Community Hospital as federal and state funding changes strain safety-net care.
The Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors voted Aug. 4 to ask for an independent review of Measure B allocations, the parcel tax set in 2002 to support trauma and emergency services across the county. Supervisor Holly J. Mitchell, the item’s author, said the study is intended to determine whether funding distribution still aligns with current health needs and will not itself reallocate funds without a further board vote. "Today's motion will create the opportunity to have a review," Mitchell said during her opening remarks.
Supporters — including clinicians, hospital leaders and community groups — told the board that safety‑net hospitals that treat high volumes of Medi‑Cal and uninsured patients face increasing financial strain and that the Measure B formula has not been comprehensively revisited in 25 years. Representatives from Martin Luther King Community Hospital, Pacifica Hospital of the Valley and other providers described emergency-department volume, payer mix and uncompensated care as central concerns, while hospital CEOs urged caution to avoid destabilizing the trauma network.
Chief Executive Officer (CEO) staff outlined a proposed process for selecting an independent consultant that would rely on a targeted search and invitation‑based interviews rather than a full RFP, citing time constraints in the motion. The CEO's office said the consultant would use tools such as the Portrait of LA County and the Human Development Index to assess community needs. Board members pressed on the consultant selection method and independence; some members asked for stronger assurances that any recommendations would be evidence‑based and not destabilize the existing trauma system.
Public commenters were overwhelming in number and scope: dozens of advocates and providers urged the board to prioritize transparency and to consider hospitals such as MLK that treat large numbers of Medi‑Cal patients. Hospital leaders and worker representatives warned that shifting funds without safeguards could harm established trauma centers; community groups and unions called for clear criteria, stakeholder engagement and attention to equity. After discussion, the board approved the motion and directed staff to return with a scope and selection plan.
The CEO said the review is intended to be comprehensive but limited by the motion's schedule; any changes recommended by the consultant would still require a subsequent board vote.
