Council orders 30‑day report after warnings that budget cuts could close detention medical clinics
Summary
Council members pressed city staff about proposed budget cuts to medical services at three city detention facilities and approved a motion requiring a follow-up report on alternatives and costs within 30 days; staff said seven vacant medical positions were removed from the budget and existing funds could sustain services for roughly six months.
The Los Angeles City Council on June 27 asked city departments to produce a report within 30 days on alternatives and costs after staff said proposed budget cuts eliminated seven vacant medical positions that support clinics inside three city detention facilities.
"Closing these clinics is unacceptable," a council member said while urging colleagues to preserve continuity of care for people held in city facilities. "There are thousands who depend on this medical attention."
Balaika Phillips of the Department of Personnel told the council that personnel funding for medical professionals in the city's three detention facilities had been reduced during this year's budget process and that seven vacant positions had been removed. Phillips said the department expected to be able to preserve onsite medical services at the three centers for about six months under current resources while the city develops alternatives.
"We contracted medical staff to provide this care," Phillips said. "In the process of the budget this year, seven vacant positions of these medical professionals were eliminated ... we can estimate that we will be able to maintain these medical centers in the three detention centers for approximately six months before our funds to provide this medical care run out."
Council members said transfers between facilities and interrupted continuity of care could create medical risks for detained people and place additional burdens on other city services. Several members argued the city should not curtail medically necessary services in interim detention sites that often hold people for days pending court appearances.
Councilmember John McCusker (name as recorded in the transcript) was thanked by colleagues for placing the motion on the agenda; colleagues joined in urging the city to find ways to avoid cuts to clinical care. The council voted to approve the motion requesting a report on options and costs; the meeting record shows the item (listed as item 25) passed with 13 votes in favor.
The motion asks city departments to produce an informational report with alternatives to the proposed staffing and budget reductions and to include cost estimates and possible timelines. Council members requested the report also address which departments should be responsible for elements of care and whether police or county systems could be used to mitigate impacts.
What happens next: City staff committed to return an options and cost report within 30 days and to coordinate with police and other departments for portions of the report outside the Personnel Department's scope.
