Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Placement Housing topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee weighs using county-owned houses as limited placement housing for clients with severe mental illness
Summary
Human services staff described a possible use of a county-owned, structurally sound house as a placement option for a small subset of clients with chronic mental illness, noting billing opportunities through CCS if the client remains in community-based services but also significant operational and maintenance costs.
Human services staff presented placement scenarios for clients with chronic mental illness and discussed whether the county might use one or both tax-deed properties as limited placement housing. Staff emphasized the narrow eligibility (not violent offenders, typically clients already served by county case management) and described billing offsets: "If he is put in a facility, he can't be in CCS, and so that wouldn't be billable," a staff member said, while noting that enrolling a client in CCS could be 100% billable.
Committee members raised practical concerns about ongoing maintenance, oversight and monthly operating costs. Staff estimated comparative costs for external placements as high as "70 plus thousand dollars a year" for some placements, while another committee member referenced a roughly "58 or 60,000 a year" figure for county-incurred placement costs depending on the program. Members asked staff to develop cleanup cost estimates and monthly maintenance projections before making any decision about using county-owned property as a placement tool.
