After felony arrest, Rochester's Judge Astacio suspended with pay

ROCHESTER, NY (WROC) - Despite arrests, jail time and not showing up for work, Leticia Astacio continues to hold her position as a Rochester city court judge.

But, following her latest arrest, she has been suspended with pay by the Court of Appeals.

Astacio was arrested Tuesday after deputies say she attempted to buy a gun at Dick's Sporting Goods in Henrietta. Under the terms of her probation, Astacio is restricted from owning a firearm.

She is charged with attempted criminal purchase or disposal of a weapon -- a felony. Astacio has previously served jail time following a drunk driving conviction.

As result of the felony charge, News 8 is told the state Court of Appeals has the authority to suspend the judge without pay.

Astacio takes home a six-figure salary, recently got a mandated raise and continues to collect her paycheck despite not showing up for work. According to Judge Craig Doran, who is Astacio's supervisor, she has only been in the Hall of Justice once since August 31.

Judge Doran says he has done everything he can do in his power to deal with the situation. But, Astacio can only be removed from her ten-year term by a decision by the state Commission on Judicial Conduct.

BREAKING: Judge Leticia Astacio has been suspended with pay by the Court of Appeals. pic.twitter.com/J2WFwp5R7i

— News 8 - WROC-TV (@News_8) April 11, 2018

 Full Article & Source:
After felony arrest, Rochester's Judge Astacio suspended with pay

Former Georgia judge charged with exchanging favorable rulings for sex

A former Georgia probate judge has been indicted for soliciting sexual contact in exchange for favorable rulings in traffic and driving under the influence charges, the Justice Department announced.

Bobby Joe Smith, 77, of Hartnell, Georgia, a former probate judge for Hart County, was charged with one count of bribery and three counts of civil rights violations. He will appear before a federal judge in the Middle District of Georgia on April 25.

Between May 2013 and May 2014, Mr. Smith met with three different women in his office regarding DUI and other traffic offenses, according to court papers. Prosecutors allege that during these meetings, he kissed and groped the women, exposing himself to one of them.

He is alleged to have called a judge in another county where one of the women had a speeding ticket and falsely claimed the women was his granddaughter, the department said, adding that none of the women consented to his sexual advances.

Full Article & Source:
Former Georgia judge charged with exchanging favorable rulings for sex

Special Report: How to protect your elderly family members as financial abuse rises

Click to Watch Video

More scammers are taking advantage of your loved ones in Wisconsin. The number of financial abuse cases against the elderly is on the rise.

Milwaukee resident 86-year-old Lawyer Story is just one of thousands of elderly who have become a victim of financial exploitations. Story got a phone call from a scammer saying he won millions but had to pay the taxes on his winnings, but the call was a scam.

“’Didn’t no one put a gun to my head, but I thought it was true,” Story said.

The scammers convinced Story to deposit over $20,000 into several specific accounts at a local bank.

“People don't know how it makes you feel when you work hard for your money and you see someone else got it,” Story said.

The Wisconsin Department of Justice reports 5,101 seniors were financially exploited between 2013 and 2016. There have been several cases in the area including a Milwaukee couple that officials say got their elderly neighbor to sign over her house and took control of her $2M in savings.

In West Allis, a woman was being investigated for writing checks up to about $52,000 from her elderly neighbor’s checkbooks.

But, many cases are not reported. According to the Department of Justice, only one in 44 cases is reported.

“It's disheartening to see folks who have worked all their lives, to make sure they're protected in retirement fall victim,” said Liz Oettiker of the Milwaukee Department on Aging, Elder Abuse Unit.

Milwaukee Department on Aging has seen a 20 percent increase in financial abuse cases from 2016 to 2017.

“What we find is that elderly folks who are isolated, family might be far away, or they're developing cognitive or physical or cognitive impairments and are more reliant on others, they're at significant risks for these types of exploitation,” Oettiker said.

The problem could continue to grow. Wisconsin state officials estimate that 115,000 people had dementia in 2015 and by 2040 that number could grow to 242,000.

“More seniors are online. They're having Facebook accounts, they're using email and they're on places where scammers and crooks can get access to them,” Attorney General Brad Schimel said.

Attorney General Schimel has launched an elder abuse task force bringing multiple agencies together to combat the problem.

“We're all working together to see how can we make the laws function better, how can we improve the ability of the criminal justice system,  to investigate and prosecute when seniors are being taken advantage of,” Schimel said.

One of the goals of the task force is to speak up when people see someone being taken advantage of.

"Elderly parents, grandparents, it's important to stay connected with them. Talk with them about what's happening, about their relationships and things like that,” Schimel said.

The state has established a hotline to report abuse at 1-800-488-3780. Officials also suggest the best way to prevent financial exploitation is making yourself or someone close to you a power of attorney.

Oettiker suggests looking out for these warning signs:

• A sudden new caregiver or friend that spends a significant amount of time with them
• Missed bill payments
• Large ATM withdrawals
• A significant number of checks made out to cash
• Deed transfers
• Abrupt increases in credit card activity

Milwaukee residents can also call the Aging Resource Center of Milwaukee County: (414) 289-6874 to report abuse, in addition to the state hotline.

Full Article & Source:
Special Report: How to protect your elderly family members as financial abuse rises

In a Rare Step, Commission Recommends Removal of Queens Judge

A judge’s pet peeve about lawyers saying “O.K.” was one of several reasons the state Commission on Judicial Conduct recommended on Wednesday that he be removed from his seat on the New York City Civil Court in Queens.

In a rare decision, the commission found that the judge, Terrence C. O’Connor, the son of a former district attorney, habitually mistreated lawyers, abused his power and failed to follow the law.

Beyond those infractions, the commission cited the judge for failing to cooperate with its investigation, refusing to take an oath to the tell the truth to investigators and then failing to show up to a disciplinary hearing.

“Judges are obliged to cooperate with official disciplinary inquiries into their behavior,” the commission’s administrator, Robert H. Tembeckjian, said in a statement. “Failing to cooperate, and acting in a manner intended to thwart an ethics inquiry, is itself misconduct, often more serious than the underlying behavior. Judge O’Connor was removed from office for his intransigence.”

Judge O’Connor, who was elected in 2009 and whose term ends in December, has a month to appeal the decision to the state Court of Appeals. The high court has the final say on whether Judge O’Connor remains in office, but is required to follow the commission’s determination if he does not appeal.

Judge O’Connor did not respond to a request for an interview emailed to his work address.

Judge O’Connor is a former prosecutor and private lawyer. He also served as a commissioner on the city’s Board of Elections. His father, Frank D. O’Connor, was the Queens district attorney for nine years until 1966, when he was elected president of the City Council.

Monday’s decision was not the first time Judge O’Connor has run afoul of the conduct commission. In 2013, he was censured for handling the affairs of incapacitated people while he was a full-time judge.

According to a document made public on Wednesday, Judge O’Connor, who sits in Housing Court, berated at least two lawyers for saying “O.K.” to witnesses at the end of each answer. The judge then accused the lawyers of leading the witnesses, struck the testimony from the record and dismissed the cases for lack of evidence.

In nine cases, the commission also found Judge O’Connor had ordered a plaintiff to pay the lawyer’s fees of a defendant in a lawsuit he had thrown out, even though neither side had requested the payment.

The commission also found the judge was withering in his criticism of lawyers, accusing them of being ignorant and rude. In one case, a new lawyer, one year out of law school, arrived late to court and announced he was not ready for a trial involving a tenant he was representing.

The judge ordered the trial to start anyway, telling the lawyer, who was texting this turn of events to his employer: “Is there some course in law school now on how to be discourteous and how to be rude? Because if there is, you must have gotten an A in it.” The tenant lost the case.

Full Article & Source:
In a Rare Step, Commission Recommends Removal of Queens Judge

Protecting special needs inheritances

I had a client come in this week who was the Social Security payee for her disabled daughter.

Her daughter was on Social Security Disability, Medicare and Medicaid. The father of her daughter recently passed away and was leaving a sizable inheritance to daughter. Mom wanted to know about her daughter's options for the inheritance.

After the consultation, I said this would make a great topic for this week's column and mom agreed. So today, we will be discussing the various options that special needs individuals will have upon the receipt of inheritance from their parents or other loved ones.

No planning.

If the family did no planning, upon receipt of the inheritance, daughter would be immediately disqualified for Medicaid because she had too many assets. The inheritance generally would not affect daughter's Social Security Disability since there are no asset limits with Social Security Disability.

However, had daughter been on Supplemental Security Income instead of Social Security Disability, the inheritance would have disqualified her from Supplemental Security Income since she would also have too many assets.

Once off of Medicaid and Supplemental Security Income, daughter would have to use up the inheritance on medical and other expenses until it is spent down to the asset limits, typically $2,000. Once the inheritance is spent down, daughter could then reapply for Medicaid and Supplemental Security Income.

Financial power of attorney.

In this case, daughter never had a guardian or conservator. Daughter was not deemed mentally incapacitated, but didn't manage her own finances.

Between mom as Social Security payee and daughter's abilities, all of daughter's financial and medical needs have been met and decisions made without the necessity of court approvals of a guardian or conservator. And if daughter has enough capacity to understand who her family is, what assets she owns, who she wanted to benefit, and that a financial power of attorney allowed someone else to handle her finances, she would be able to execute a financial power of attorney. This would allow mom to handle daughter's finances, collect her income and pay her bills.

However, there are three big disadvantages to using a financial power of attorney in this situation. First, it doesn't stop daughter from acting as her own financial agent and accessing the accounts and spending the funds. Since daughter lacked money management skills, this could be very tempting.

Second, daughter can revoke the financial power of attorney at any time. It lacks any type of permanent protection; if daughter revokes it, she no longer has a financial agent and is then in charge of her own finances which is what would offer a little protection for daughter.

Last, just like with no planning, daughter would be disqualified from Medicaid and Supplemental Security Income until the assets were spent down to the asset limit level and then she would have to reapply for Medicaid and Supplemental Security Income.

Conservatorship.

Mom could petition the probate court, with or without daughter's consent, for a conservatorship to manage daughter's finances. This would have a high likelihood of being granted because daughter lacks the ability to manage her own finances, which would be dissipated if daughter took control. Mom and the court would be in control.

Although a conservatorship does offer great protections for the funds and finances for daughter, the conservatorship also has more disadvantages and more restrictions on the funds than most of the other options we are discussing today.

First, the conservatorship hearings and files are generally open to the public at the probate court. Anyone can watch the hearing or review the file.

Second, the conservatorship would generally be supervised by the probate court for daughter's lifetime so long as there are still funds unspent. The conservator must file annual accounting with the probate court for its review. It is not uncommon for the probate court to place restrictions on the amounts that the conservator may spend without court approval, such as no more than $200 per month or $1,000 per year over and above the normal monthly recurring expenses. If mom wanted to buy some new appliances for daughter's home or fix daughter's roof, mom would have to file a petition with probate court and ask the judge for permission for those expenditures.

Last, just as with no planning and a financial power of attorney, daughter would be disqualified from Medicaid and Supplemental Security Income until the conservatorship assets were spent down to the asset limit level and then she would have to reapply for Medicaid and Supplemental Security Income.

First-party special needs trust.

Mom could take some action before daughter receives the inheritance from dad's estate. Mom could set up what is called a first-party special needs trust. This is called a first-party special needs trust because it uses a special needs beneficiary's own assets.

Although this trust can be set up directly by certain relatives, we usually use the probate court to set up these trusts in order to get court approval and give notice to the world that we are seeking this type of protection.

Once set up and funds deposited, mom as trustee and her co-trustees, if any, are the only ones who are authorized to handle the trust funds for the benefit of daughter. Daughter has no power to revoke the trust without petitioning the probate court.

In most instances once the trust is set up, there's no longer any court supervision. However, annual accountings are still needed to be provided to at least the beneficiary. In addition there annual trust tax returns because it is considered a separate tax-paying entity. The trustee or trustees have full access to the funds to be used for the benefit of the beneficiary.

The biggest advantage of a first-party special needs trust is that the assets in the trust do not disqualify daughter from Medicaid, Supplemental Security Income or most other governmental benefits that have an income or asset test.

There is, however, one big downside of a first-party special needs trust, if there's anything left in the trust after the death of daughter, it must be paid back to the governmental entities providing Medicaid or other governmental benefits. This is why this first-party special needs trust is sometimes referred to as a Medicaid pay-back trust.

Pre-planning for gifts and inheritances with a third-party special needs trust.

If mom wants to make a current gift or leave an inheritance to daughter she could have her cake and eat it too. Mom can make a gift or leave an inheritance to daughter in a third–party special needs trust without disqualifying daughter from Medicaid, or other income or asset-based governmental benefits such as Supplemental Security Income. This is called a third-party special needs trust because it uses a third-party's assets, not the special needs beneficiary's own assets.

A third-party special needs trust has all the benefits of a first-party special needs trust. Once set up, mom as trustee and her co-trustees, if any, are the only ones who are authorized to handle the trust funds for the benefit of daughter. Daughter has no power to revoke the trust without petitioning the probate court. There's no court supervision. The assets in the trust do not disqualify daughter from Medicaid, Supplemental Security Income or most other governmental benefits that have an income or asset test.

The biggest benefit of a third-party special needs trust is that if there's anything left in the trust after the death of daughter, it does not have to be paid back to the governmental entities providing Medicaid and or other governmental benefits. Mom can leave it to anyone she wants.

What to do?

In most instances, the best protection for your special needs loved one is a stand-alone first-party or third-party special needs trust that only provides for your special needs loved one. This stand-alone special needs trust should not be included within your revocable living trust and would have only the minimum provisions required to prevent the trust assets from being considered for any income or asset-based governmental benefits, but still provide for your special needs loved one.

With a special needs trust, you can have a happier special needs loved one, enrich his or her life and make it more enjoyable and fulfilled.

Matthew M. Wallace is an attorney and CPA with the Wallace Law Firm, PC in Port Huron and can be reached at 810-985-4320, matt@happylaw.com or www.happylaw.com.
 
Full Article & Source:
Protecting special needs inheritances

Responding to 4 Common Dementia Accusations: Stealing, Poisoning, Being Held Prisoner

What to say when you’re being falsely accused

 

People with Alzheimer’s or dementia commonly accuse people close to them of theft, mistreatment, or other terrible things. 

Cases of true abuse do exist, but more often, these accusations are completely false and are caused by dementia paranoia or delusions. 

It’s important to keep reminding yourself that your older adult isn’t saying these things on purpose to hurt you. The damage in their brain has caused them to strongly believe things that we know aren’t real.

We explain why responding to false accusations with logic and reasoning won’t work. We also share suggested responses for 4 common dementia accusations: stealing money and things, poisoning, and being held prisoner.

Avoid reasoning and logical explanations

For each of these common accusations, don’t use reason to explain why it’s not true or try to show proof that they’re wrong. 

What works better is to validate and redirect or distract. Focus on validating the emotion behind their words. Let them know that you understand how they feel and that you want to help resolve the situation. Then, solve the problem if possible, redirect them to another activity, or distract them with something they’re interested in.

We share a variety of suggested responses as a starting point for your own creative answers. Each situation and each person with dementia is different, so you’re the best judge of which responses are more likely to work. 

It may take a little experimentation to get the hang of the validation and redirection technique, but it gets easier with practice.

Suggested responses to 4 common dementia accusations

1. You stole my money!
 
Having dementia means giving up control over their own finances. That loss of control, combined with paranoia or delusions, can cause them to think people are stealing their money.

Suggested responses:

• Oh no, is your money missing? I can see why you’re upset. Don’t worry, I’m going to help you look for it. Let’s start by checking this drawer…
• Oh no, is there money missing? That can be very upsetting. Let’s check your bank statements to make sure it’s all there.
• Oh no, it sounds like we need to look into this. Let’s go to the bank tomorrow when it’s open to get it straightened out. Since the bank is closed right now, let’s do (an activity they enjoy).

How to help them feel more in control:

• Give them a checkbook (fake/old) to help them “track” their money
• Let them keep a wallet with a small amount of real money (lots of dollar bills) or realistic-looking fake money
• Keep files of very old bank statements for them to review when they feel anxious
• Let them write checks to pay bills (all fake/old) and secretly shred them later

2. You stole my purse / wallet / glasses / hearing aid / dentures …!
 
Someone with dementia may accuse you of stealing an item when they can’t find it themselves. It’s easier to cope with the changes in their brain by saying that someone stole the item rather than admit they can’t find it.

Suggested responses:

• Is (item) missing? I can see why that would upset you. Let’s look over here, I thought I saw it earlier.
• Oh no, I must have put that in the wrong place when I was cleaning earlier. Let me get it for you.
• Oh no, your (item) is missing? I’m so sorry that that happened. Could I look around one more time? It may have just been put somewhere to keep it safe.

How to help them feel more in control:

• Try to find their favorite hiding places for storing items that are frequently “lost” so you can easily find the items.
• Buy copies of frequently “lost” items (if they’re not too expensive) so you can always “find” it quickly without having to spend time looking for it. 

3. You’re poisoning me! I’m not going to eat.
 
Paranoia or delusions can cause someone with dementia to believe that you’re putting poison in their food or drinks.

Suggested responses:

• I understand that you’re feeling afraid, but I want you to know that I would never let anything bad happen to you. Have you tried this chicken? It’s delicious. Let’s have some together and you can tell me more about (a topic or hobby they enjoy).
• While using this or a similar calm response, eat the same meal together or take a bite from their plate to show that it’s safe.

How to help them feel more in control:

• Ask them to join you in the kitchen and “help” prepare the meal so they can see everything you’re doing.
• If there are cooking tasks they’re able to help with, let them participate in the cooking.

4. You’re keeping me prisoner!
 
Many people with dementia are no longer safe leaving the house on their own. They can easily get lost or injured in an accident. Because they can’t go wherever they want anymore, they may feel like they’re being kept prisoner.

Suggested responses:

• It sounds like you want to go out, where should we go?…Oh really, I love that place too? What do you like best about going there?
• We can go anywhere you like, what did you have in mind?…That’s a great idea! Let’s go after we have lunch. I made your favorite pasta dish, let’s go to the kitchen to eat.

How to help them feel more in control:

• When possible, agree and accompany them when they want to go somewhere.
• If it’s not possible to go out, agree and pretend to help them get ready to go. While pretending to get ready to go out, subtly redirect them to an activity they enjoy.

Full Article & Source: 
Responding to 4 Common Dementia Accusations: Stealing, Poisoning, Being Held Prisoner

Pennsylvania is allowing elderly to be prey for financial scammers | Editorial

Pleading guilty to financial fraud didn’t stop Gloria Byars from supervising the finances of about 100 vulnerable people. She easily became a state-appointed financial guardian in Pennsylvania because the state has such low standards, it doesn’t even require a criminal background check for those who manage the finances of people too incapacitated to take care of themselves.

If Pennsylvania’s government cared enough to require a criminal background check, it would have learned that Byars pleaded guilty in 2005 to defrauding several people in Virginia in a check-cashing scam. She served about two years in federal prison.

Her conviction should have ended hopes for a career in finance  — but not in Pennsylvania, where the courts unwittingly appointed her to oversee the financial survival of scores of incapacitated people. In at least three cases, it didn’t work out very well.

Families of former clients told staff writer Julie Shaw a number of horror stories, including  that Byars hired her husband’s company to clean out the Fox Chase home of a couple in their 80s. She charged them $11,000.

She transferred a 73-year-old  woman from her home in Kensington to a Delaware County nursing home where no one could speak the same languages she did — Vietnamese and Chinese. The woman became isolated and depressed.

Byars failed to pay the bills of a 79-year-old retired Philadelphia cop suffering from dementia. His Wyncote home went into foreclosure.

After learning about these irregularities, Orphans’ Court judges not only removed her from these three clients but from about 100 more in Philadelphia and Montgomery and Delaware Counties.

But taking one financial guardian out of the mix is hardly enough to protect Pennsylvania’s disabled and skyrocketing elderly populations from financial abuse. According to the 2010 census, there were 2.7 million people over 60 in Pennsylvania. The Department of Aging estimates their numbers will reach 3.6 million in just two years. That means Pennsylvania will be dealing with even more people suffering from age-related disabilities, including dementia, making them especially vulnerable to fraud.

The state has long known it must protect them but hasn’t done much. In 2013, a rigorous study by the Philadelphia-based Center for Advocacy for the Rights and Interests of the Elderly (CARIE) recommended training and monitoring financial guardians. In 2014, the state Supreme Court made similar recommendations.

Diane Menio, director of CARIE, wisely suggests the state certify guardians, using a group like the Center for Guardianship Certification. CGC requires financial training, an exam, and continuing education for guardians. Applicants have to submit to criminal background checks. CGC certifies financial guardians in several states as well as Northampton County because judges there apparently care that people under their protection are in fact protected.

It shouldn’t be hard to find the center. It’s in Harrisburg.

The courts or legislature can require certification for financial guardians. Or, county courts, like Northampton’s, can create their own rules if they’re sick of waiting for statewide leaders to do their jobs.

Gov. Wolf, the legislature, and Supreme Court have an obligation to protect our parents, our relatives, and, eventually, us.   This is easy.

Full Article & Source:
Pennsylvania is allowing elderly to be prey for financial scammers | Editorial

Judge Astacio facing felony gun charge

Rochester City Court Judge Leticia Astacio was arrested and arraigned on Tuesday in connection with her attempted gun purchase last week.

The official charge Astacio is facing is attempted criminal purchase or disposal of a weapon, which is a class E felony.

She appeared before Judge William Kocher at the Hall of Justice before she was released on her own recognizance. She is due back in Henrietta Town Court on May 3.

News10NBC was first to break the story.

The judge, who has been on probation in connection to a DWI conviction in August 2016, allegedly tried and failed to buy a gun at the Dick's Sporting Goods store in Henrietta. That prompted a report with Monroe County Probation. On a Facebook video that has since been taken down, Judge Astacio claimed it was her sister who tried to purchase the weapon.

"I don't play with guns, I've never had a gun, I've never touched a gun," she said.

In addition, in a Facebook post of her own, her sister- Felicia Astacio, said she had never been to Dick's to buy a gun.

According to court paperwork, Astacio attempted to purchase a Maverick 88 .12 gauge shotgun from the Dick's Sporting Goods, despite the fact that she is prohibited from possessing firearms, rifles or shotguns because of a prior conviction. The allegations are based on information and belief by the Monroe County Sheriff's Office and signed depositions from Dick's Sporting Goods employees. Court paperwork says that Judge Astacio had identified herself with her driver's license to the employees.

According to a statement in court paperwork from an assistant store manager at the Dick's Sporting Goods in Henrietta, they had learned from their counterpart at the Greece location that Judge Astacio had been in that store, only to be denied the purchase of a shotgun. The Greece assistant manager said that the Astacio had seemed very distraught and upset and that they had not felt comfortable selling her a gun. Once the sale was denied, Astacio told them that she was going to go and buy it at a different store.

At around 6:30 p.m., a store employee called the Henrietta assistant manager to report that they had seen Astacio enter the store. Shortly after, the assistant manager went to the gun counter at the request of Astacio, who asked why her purchases were being denied. According to the paperwork, Astacio felt it was her right to be able to purchase a gun, and it was explained several times that it was company policy to reserve the right to sell a gun to anyone, and that the denial extended to all stores.

The statement in the paperwork says that Astacio told the Dick's employees that she did not really want a gun, but felt she needed one.

Astacio has been barred from hearing cases since she violated the terms of her DWI conviction, and has only reported to work at the Hall of Justice once since August 30. In several broadcasts on Facebook she has said that her work arrangements are bad for her health and beneath that of an elected judge.

The New York State Commission on Judicial Conduct, the only entity in the state that can punish and remove an elected judge, is investigating Judge Astacio.



Full Article & Source:
Judge Astacio facing felony gun charge

Bexar commissioners OK guardianship funding with plans to include program in 2019 budget

Bexar County commissioners this week approved about $116,000 to fund five months of the probate courts’ guardianship program for people with incapacitating mental or physical conditions, carrying the initiative through the end of the fiscal year.

Judge Kelly Cross, who runs one of the county’s two probate courts, said that while the program still lacks adequate staffing to meet the county’s guardianship needs, she was pleased commissioners approved the funding.

“Any kind of help is good help, so you know what they say, beggars can’t be choosers. I’m OK with it,” she said. “We’re powerless.”

About 96 percent of the funding goes toward the salaries of four guardianship employees: the program manager, an office assistant and two guardians. David Marquez, executive director of the Bexar County Economic & Community Development Department, recommended adding a third guardian in the fiscal 2019 budget.

“That funding could be requested from the (county budget’s) general fund, or we may approach the probate court to see if they would be willing to fund some, or part, or all of the additional guardian capacity that we would add,” Marquez told the commissioners Tuesday.

The money approved Tuesday brings the guardianship’s total funding to about $255,000 for the final 11 months of the fiscal year. In October, the court approved $139,000 for six months of the program, from November through April, after initially omitting the program from its annual budget.

The fund that the probate judges administer had covered costs in October, the first month of the fiscal year. Marquez acknowledged in an interview Monday that the funding exclusion was a “funding miscue” and “misunderstanding on my part,” as he was new to overseeing the program.

Marquez added that the program would be funded through the county’s fiscal 2019 budget next year, conditional on the commissioners’ approval. Commissioners Court makes the county’s budgetary decisions, and they set a $1.76 billion budget for the 2018 fiscal year.

Cross and the county’s other probate judge, Tom Rickhoff, have complained of poor communication with the commissioners, even claiming that they weren’t made aware the commissioners planned to consider the funding until Monday.

Otherwise, Cross appeared to see two aspects differently than Marquez and the commissioners: the appropriate caseload per guardian, and whether the program should be designated as one of “last resort.”

The 2014 “memorandum of understanding” establishing the guardianship “pilot program,” signed by Bexar County Judge Nelson Wolff, several other county officials and both probate judges — Rickhoff and then-Probate No. 1 Judge Polly Jackson Spencer — signifies the program “will be a Guardianship Program of Last Resort.” It also allotted about $291,000 for the 2015 fiscal year.

But Cross said Monday the program is not a “guardian of last resort.”

“That’s very important. What it means is, the court can give you anybody, it can give you an illegal alien, head-injured person, no benefits, no housing, no Medicaid. That’s the guardian of last resort,” she said.

She further added the guardianship program could not feasibly be one of last resort because “we have no ability, except through charitable sources, for someone who is not a citizen of the U.S. and would not qualify for benefits.”

The Texas Judicial Council unsuccessfully recommended in 2014 that the Legislature establish a statewide public guardianship office, which currently does not exist.

“A public guardianship office serves as the guardian of last resort when no other appropriate guardian can be located. Texas currently does not have a guardian of last resort, and judges are oftentimes faced with the difficult task of locating an appropriate guardian for an individual,” the council’s 2016 Elders Committee Report & Recommendations reads.

Some court members, including Wolff and Precinct 2 Commissioner Paul Elizondo, have urged state involvement because the county lacks the resources to adequately provide guardianships for enough people.

In his presentation, Marquez said the program was designed for each guardian to handle 25 wards, and for the program manager to handle 15, for a maximum of 65. But Cross said each guardian should be assigned 20 wards, noting that some cases are particularly “hard and time-consuming.” She also said five guardians would be an ideal amount, not two. The program currently handles 45 wards.

On Tuesday, Wolff pointed to the services the court already contributes funding to, saying the county already is “very much involved” in helping people with mental and physical issues.

“There is an array of services — Meals of Wheels is one of them — that we fund, and I think those wraparound services are important,” Wolff said. “And I think it's important to also understand that that is the key point of helping these people. And we fund a number of those that do that.”

During his presentation, Marquez outlined the duties a guardian performs, including many tasks the guardians are precluded from doing. He said guardians cannot “prevent a ward from making a bad decision,” “use force to make a ward take medication” or “place a ward in a mental health facility.”

Guardians also do not “supervise a ward around the clock” and are not responsible for a ward’s illegal acts or for funding the ward’s expenses, he said.

“I think there needs to be greater clarity about what kinds of cases we can and can’t take,” Marquez said. “These are social workers, they’re not mental health professionals. So they have limitations on the types of cases they can take.”

Full Article & Source:
Bexar commissioners OK guardianship funding with plans to include program in 2019 budget