Put up or shut up, County Council Republicans. Here’s a good plan for mental health tax
It’s put-up-or-shut-up time for the Pierce County Council.
For as long as there has been debate about the need to levy a one-tenth of 1 percent sales tax to fund behavioral services throughout the county, there have been Republicans on the council — and, since 2017, in the exec’s chair — who have adamantly argued that we first needed a plan for how the money would be spent.
Charitably, this insistence has helped to prudently ensure the county is prepared to responsibly spend any tax money it might decide to collect from citizens
Skeptically, it’s been a long-running delay tactic that has helped Republicans appease their tax-averse base while providing fiscal cover for all the human suffering the continued inaction has caused.
The good news?
We’ll soon have our answer, one way or another.
Earlier this month, just such a plan was delivered, which means the political ball is now decidedly in the conservatives’ court.
Put up. Or shut up.
At this point, more excuses — even the argument that a new County Council will be sworn in Jan. 1, which might seem reasonable on the surface — will only reveal the truth.
If our elected leaders don’t act now, they never had any intention of doing so. It was all about politics, not helping people.
Perhaps the best news for undecided County Council Republicans — and specifically Dave Morell, who was the latest to call for more study and likely represents the council swing vote — is that the plan includes everything the county could hope for.
Not only does it detail how Pierce County should spend the estimated $10 million in annual funding a behavioral health tax would bring, it provides a framework for measuring results.
It also achieves things that Republicans and, really, all of us should want: collaborations, reductions in administrative costs and a blueprint for maximizing every county dollar spent.
According to Comprehensive Life Resources CEO Kim Zacher, the plan has the potential to re-imagine Pierce County’s siloed and under-performing behavioral health network while providing more responsive care for all of Pierce County residents.
On Wednesday, Zacher said the plan was developed over the course of months by the county’s largely volunteer Regional System of Care Committee, which was unexpectedly tasked with the undertaking after Morell requested a more robust plan for how money raised by a behavioral health tax would be spent back in March.
At its most basic, Zacher said, the proposal has two broad components.
First, it examines the current services and gaps in Pierce County’s patchwork behavioral health network, ultimately building on previous studies and outreach efforts to provide the most detailed breakdown to date of the county’s pressing needs and where additional investments could get the most bang for the buck.
Additionally, the plan calls for a pilot project that would replace the five independent managed care organizations that currently serve Medicaid recipients in Pierce County with one locally governed “accountable care organization,” or ACO, which would partner with the county and its providers and contract with the state Healthcare Authority.
Zacher said this approach — which has been utilized in places like Oregon — would allow local providers to make more holistic decisions on care because they would be able to bill for services and interventions that aren’t currently covered under most existing insurance plans. It also would reduce costs, creating savings that could then be reinvested, and generate system-wide data that could be used to evaluate what’s working and what isn’t, she said.
Zacher described it as a bold vision, full of big ideas and common-sense recommendations.
It should also be more than enough to finally satisfy the Republican-majority County Council and get the behavioral health tax passed, she argued.
Most importantly, it would work, Zacher believes.
“This plan tries to create a community safety net that starts from the beginning of life and goes through our senior years and gives people a way to get their behavioral health needs met at all stages of that life span,” Zacher said.
“If they want something more, they’re just stalling,” Zacher added of the council. “I would say that to their face. There’s nothing left to plan.”
Unfortunately, that doesn’t mean Zacher is brimming with optimism. While she said that COVID-19 is only making the county’s behavioral health crisis worse and the desperately needed funding the sales tax would provide is long overdue, she’s also a realist.
Beyond a discussion next week in the council’s Human Services committee, Zacher knows that no further action is planned.
There are no guarantees, and there remains a strong likelihood that the problem will — once again — get left for the next iteration of the County Council to contend with, she acknowledged.
That would be a huge mistake, Zacher said.
“Frankly, in my view, it’s very negligent that this hasn’t been done yet. It’s leaving us very vulnerable as a community,” she said. “If they don’t pass it this time, then … it may just be that this council can’t get it done.”
That would be a sad indictment but one well-earned.
Republicans demanded a plan.
Now they have one.
The next move is theirs, and it will be telling.
