Laserfiche WebLink
~ke Rufftn <br /> county / <br /> <br /> SUBJECT: Alexander vs. Flaharty <br /> <br /> ~ am ~ritinS to confir~ arrantements we have made for a presen~a~ion to <br />Board of Co~issioners on ~y 6 relardin~ ~he Alexander vs. Flaher~y la~ sui~ and <br />prOvide s~e related info~ation. <br /> <br /> ~e are seriously concerned about ~he presen~ si~uation and feel the need ~o talk <br />~i~h the Board about the i~pac~s va are currently experiencin~ and could face in <br />future here in Cabarrus <br /> County. <br /> <br /> ~e me~orand~ ~rom Pagrtce Roesler o~ the Association of County C~issioners <br />to County ~nasers and Board Chai~en dated Narch lt~ 1991 provides an excellent <br /> <br />helpful here to provide some additional back,round info~ation before discussing the <br />curren~ situation and our concems for Cabarrus County. <br /> <br />~istorical Back,round <br /> Alexander v. Flaherty (originally Alexander v. ~ill) is a IonS-standing case <br />~as orisinally ~iled in Federal Dls~ric~ Court by Legal Se~.ices of Southern Pieflmont <br />in 19~5. ~e federal class action ~as filed a~ainst Renee P. Hill, then director of <br />the Division of Social Se~ices, and other named ~efendants, includin~ HecklenburS <br />County Department of Social Se~ices due ~o the failure by county ~epartments of <br />social se~ic~g ~o process Aid ~o Families ~th Dependent ~ildran (A~C) and <br />Hedicaid applica~ions in a timely manner. <br /> <br /> Federal la~ no~ requires the states ~o process such applica~ions ~ithin 15 days <br />and, ~hen disability is involved, as of Janua~ 10, 1990~ ~ithia 90 days. <br />19~I~ ~he federal cour~ for the ~estem District of North Carolina has entered a <br />number of orders 8rantin~ various fo~s of relief, includin8 ~he requirements <br />certain actions involved in processing applications be t~ken ~itbin ~esignated time <br />periods and tha~ c0un~ies failins to process applications for ~C and ~edicaid in a <br />C~ely manner pay to the affected applicant a penal~y of ~50 for e~ch reek or pa~ of <br />a reek of delay. As of January 3~ 1990, ~he counties and the state had paid <br />in penalties~ no~ countinS loss of federal financial participation estimated ~o be <br />$100,987. <br /> <br /> Dopaflmoat of ~clal <br /> <br /> <br />