HARTFORD, Conn. (AP) - Democratic and Republican state lawmakers joined forces Wednesday to overwhelmingly reject an agreement Gov. Dannel P. Malloy argued would have helped Connecticut forge a new path toward finally ending decades of federal oversight of the state’s child welfare agency.
Legislators from both parties were skeptical of the deal, worried particularly about how it set a minimum budget of $801.2 million for the Department of Children and Families that the General Assembly could not change, without any guarantee of when the oversight would end.
“I’m not going to stand here and lock an $800 million budget with no guarantee that we’re going to get out from under this,” said Rep. Catherine Abercrombie, D-Meriden. She predicted other groups might seek similar arrangements, further tying the hands of the legislature.
Federal oversight issues for the department date to 1989, when a New York-based children’s advocacy group, Children’s Rights, filed a class-action lawsuit on behalf of children in state custody or at risk of entering state custody in Connecticut. The lawsuit, commonly known as the Juan F. case, identified numerous problems, such as children being left in dangerous situations and the state’s failure to move children into adoptive homes.
A federal court monitor has been in place since 1991, setting certain policy and funding levels at the agency.
Malloy, a Democrat, immediately accused lawmakers of letting “politics stand in the way of progress for our most vulnerable children and families.” He said the plan had the support of plaintiffs, the court monitor, advocates, national experts and the state Attorney General’s Office. The new exit plan, ordered by a federal judge in September, would have replaced a previous one filed in 2004. Among other things, it reduced the number of improvement benchmarks the Department of Children and Families must meet from 22 to six.
In exchange, the department was required to maintain certain staffing and spending levels.
“We may not have another opportunity in the near future to exit federal oversight, and it will do us well to remember this fact as we suffer the consequences of this embarrassing inaction,” Malloy said after the final vote.
By rejecting the agreement, DCF Commissioner Joette Katz said the legislature has essentially agreed to allow federal oversight to continue indefinitely, potentially costing the state millions of dollars in continued monitoring and litigation costs.
“We fear that the federal court will interpret the state’s rejection of the revised exit plan as a lack of will to meet the requirements of the exiting federal oversight,” she said.
Three-fifths of each chamber was needed to reject the measure. The House of Representatives defeated it on a bipartisan 100-36 vote, while the Senate rejected it 25-to-8.
Lawmakers voiced various concerns with the deal, such as whether the agency is even ready to be removed from federal oversight. But many expressed concern about the provision preventing lawmakers from changing the agency’s budget for the foreseeable future. Sen. Paul Formica, R-East Lyme called for a new plan.
“Let’s work with the Department of Children and Families, let’s include the Attorney General’s office, let’s include this legislature,” he said. “Let’s together craft a plan that will truly modify the existing outcome measures and help move DCF out of court oversight, which I think is a goal for everybody, but in an equitable way.”
Please read our comment policy before commenting.