1. Governor
Yersy
Yersinian
P.O.
Box
30013
Lansing,
MI
48909
Phone
517.373.3400
Fax
517.335.6863
www.michigan.gov
MEMORANDUM
TO:
The
Honorable
Governor
Yersy
Yersinian
P.O.
Box
30013
Lansing,
MI
48909
FROM:
Curtis
Healy
P.O.
Box
30013
Lansing,
MI
48909
DATE:
June
3rd
,
2015
RE:
State
of
Michigan
Health
Department
Budget
Cuts
__________________________________________________________________________________________________
Governor
Yersy
Yersinian,
In
my
professional
opinion,
the
goal
of
this
budget
committee
and
our
criteria
to
follow
was
to
do
the
least
harm
within
our
rural
Midwestern
state
in
regards
to
the
upcoming
budget
cuts
from
the
State
of
Michigan’s
Health
Department
budget.
The
role
of
government
is
difficult
at
times
and
the
committee
and
myself
recognize
that,
but
the
concern
and
our
duties
are
to
the
people
of
the
great
state
of
Michigan.
We
are
all
public
servants,
aiming
to
assure
our
constituents
and
fellow
Michiganders
that
their
daily
life
will
not
be
plagued
with
health
issues,
monetary
shortcomings,
and
mental
downfalls.
We
aim
to
serve
the
people
and
prevent
the
negative
aspects
of
this
world
that
take
away
from
the
beauty
of
life.
With
that
said,
I
have
a
more
expansive
view
of
our
government
as
well
as
the
“do
the
least
harm”
mentality,
thus
I
understand
why
political
pragmatism
is
always
important.
But
the
political
feasibility
was
lower
on
my
criteria
scale
for
coming
to
this
decision.
Thusly,
I
am
saddened
to
transmit,
on
behalf
of
my
senior
leadership
and
staff
at
the
State
of
Michigan’s
Health
Department,
that
the
final
results
and
complete
findings
from
countless
budget
meetings
have
been
completed
and
yield
results
for
your
review.
I
have
spent
time
consulting
with
members
of
my
staff,
and
reviewing
all
pertinent
documents
prior
to
coming
to
a
final
decision
based
on
their
recommendations
and
perspectives.
As
I
am
in
agreement
with
the
proposed
initial
cuts
proposed
by
my
staff
and
senior
leadership
in
Table
1,
I
have
included
those
items
below.
My
reasoning
is
that
they
followed
my
least
harm
done
criteria
with
low
regard
for
political
feasibility.
I
respectfully
request
your
consideration
in
regard
to
proposed
budget
cuts
for
the
period
of
FY
2014-­‐
15.
The
specific
budget
cuts
that
the
budget
committee
has
proposed
to
make
following
key
findings
in
our
report
are
as
follows
(which
includes
the
budget
cuts
I
have
suggested):
Department
/
Program
State
Tax
Revenue
Portion
not
Expended
Initial
Staff
Cuts
Final
Cuts
WIC
Program
$2,000,000
$1,000,000
$175,000
$300,000
Hospital
&
Nursing
Home
Inspection
Program
$500,000
$250,000
$90,000
$90,000
Food
Safety
Inspections/
Regulations
$550,000
$275,000
$10,000
$10,000
Health
Education
/
Promotion
Programs
$3,000,000
$1,500,000
$300,000
$300,000
Commissioner’s
Office
$1,415,000
$707,500
$250,000
$250,000
Migrant
Health
Clinics
$150,000
$75,000
$75,000
$75,000
Family
Planning
$65,000
$32,500
?
$32,500
Communicable
Disease
Control
and
Vital
Records
$2,500,000
$1,250,000
$30,000
$50,000
Primary
Care
$1,200,000
$600,000
$30,000
$30,000
Local
Health
Department
Liaison
Services
$1,500,000
$750,000
?
$450,000
Arthritis
Prevention
Program
$1,800,000
$900,000
?
$600,000
Oral
Health
$500,000
$250,000
$40,000
$100,000
Other
Misc.
Programs
(First
Lady’s
State
$130,000
$130,000
?
$30,000

2. Governor
Yersy
Yersinian
P.O.
Box
30013
Lansing,
MI
48909
Phone
517.373.3400
Fax
517.335.6863
www.michigan.gov
Autism
Project)
Totals:
$15,310,000
$7,720,000
$1,000,000
$2,317,500
My
addition
to
the
proposal
above
was
to
build
on
the
already
proposed
cuts
as
well
as
to
create
additional
cuts.
These
additional
cuts
came
in
the
areas
highlighted
in
yellow.
These
cuts
totaled
out
to
$525,000.
The
budgets
that
were
left
blank
following
the
initial
cuts
that
received
cuts
upon
my
review
are
highlighted
in
green.
These
cuts
totaled
out
to
$1,112,500.
Due
to
the
additional
$17,500
of
additional
cuts,
the
budget
has
some
wiggle
room
to
be
able
to
aid
the
First
Lady’s
State
Autism
Project
or
other
budgets
that
are
in
dire
need.
This
additional
cut
was
to
have
a
discretionary
budget
to
help
curb
the
impact
of
the
budget
cuts
and
their
potential
negative
side
effects.
My
framework
and
approach
for
deciding
how
to
allocate
the
budget
cuts
were
keeping
full
funding
in
important
health
topic
areas
and
cutting
all
non-­‐essential
programs
and
administrative
/
marketing
costs.
The
mentality
of
doing
“the
least
harm”
is
what
I
attempted
to
follow
in
order
to
assure
my
staff
and
senior
leadership
that
the
gap
in
services
provided
will
be
the
smallest
and
the
magnitude
of
the
consequences
the
least.
This
criteria
was
more
important
to
me
than
just
political
feasibility
and
ease
of
cuts
to
be
made
(such
as
administrative
and
review
board
for
hospital
certification
and
local
restaurant
inspections).
Another
aspect
to
consider
was
the
political
pragmatism
of
cutting
the
Arthritis
Prevention
Program,
which
already
has
state
medical
university
funding
and
political
friends
in
Congress.
Our
overall
proposed
solution
for
these
large
proposed
budget
cuts
comes
from
further
review
and
logical
reasoning
for
cutting
these
particular
budgets.
The
reasoning
for
each
budget
cut
is
listed
in
itemized
form
below:
1. WIC
Program:
$300,000
(30%
cut)
a. Cut
due
to
less
need
for
marketing
to
women
and
having
the
ability
to
advertise
through
different
channels
(churches,
groups,
current
users
of
program).
2. Hospital
&
Nursing
Home
Inspection
Program:
$90,000
(36%
cut)
a. Cut
the
reimbursements
for
traveling
and
lodging
of
inspectors
&
administrative
costs
of
non-­‐vital
furniture
and
equipment.
3. Food
Safety
Inspections/
Regulations:
$10,000
(36%
cut)
a. Cut
due
to
administrative
costs
of
non-­‐vital
furniture
and
equipment.
4. Health
Education
/
Promotion
Programs:
$300,000
(20%
cut)
a. Cut
due
to
less
need
for
marketing
and
administrative
costs
of
non-­‐vital
furniture
/equipment.
5. Commissioner’s
Office:
$250,000
(35%
cut)
a. Cut
due
to
less
need
for
marketing
and
administrative
costs
of
non-­‐vital
furniture
/equipment.
6. Migrant
Health
Clinics:
$75,000
(100%
cut)
a. Cut
due
to
the
ability
to
advertise
through
different
channels
(churches,
groups,
patients,
etc.)
7. Family
Planning:
$32,500
(100%
cut)
a. Cut
due
to
lack
of
traction
with
the
Male
target
population
(results
negligible).
8. Communicable
Disease
Control
and
Vital
Records:
$50,000
(4%
cut)
a. Cut
due
to
need
to
cut
from
another
budget
without
crippling
another
program
or
department.
9. Primary
Care:
$30,000
(5%
cut)
a. Cut
due
to
need
to
cut
from
another
budget
without
crippling
another
program
or
department.
10. Local
Health
Department
Liaison
Services:
$450,000
(60%
cut)
a. Cut
due
to
local
health
departments
being
able
to
alter
their
own
fees.
11. Arthritis
Prevention
Program:
$600,000
(67%
cut)
a. Cut
due
to
the
lack
of
cohesion
of
this
program
with
the
department’s
mission,
kept
due
to
political
ties.
12. Oral
Health:
$100,000
(40%
cut)
a. Cut
due
to
this
being
a
newer
program
and
less
field-­‐tested.

3. Governor
Yersy
Yersinian
P.O.
Box
30013
Lansing,
MI
48909
Phone
517.373.3400
Fax
517.335.6863
www.michigan.gov
13. Other
Misc.
Programs-­‐
First
Lady’s
State
Autism
Project:
$30,000
(23%
cut)
a. Cut
due
to
this
being
the
first
year
of
the
program.
After
final
review,
the
budget
committee
has
discovered
that
the
proposed
budget
cuts
and
reasoning
for
those
cuts
above
are
stout
and
resilient
to
all
harassment
by
both
the
public
opinion
and
the
political
opposition.
The
impact
of
the
proposed
budget
cuts
could
be
detrimental
in
various
health
topic
areas
and
political
areas
for
your
administration.
The
budget
committee
and
myself
have
delved
into
this
and
discovered
that
the
areas
of
highest
impact
are
as
follows:
1. Short
term
damage
to
knowledge
of
programs
provided
by
the
Department
of
Health
&
the
WIC
Program
2. Long
term
damage
to
Arthritis
Prevention
Program,
LHD
relations
&
capabilities
3. Loss
of
internal
political
support
due
to
cutting
funds
from
the
Arthritis
Prevention
Program
4. Overall
loss
of
political
support
due
to
cuts
being
made
and
lack
of
state
tax
revenue
to
supplement
the
budget
and
lowered
overall
employee
morale
due
to
distrust
for
administration
All
of
these
possible
impacts
are
concerning,
minor
or
major.
But,
the
best
method
to
get
through
this
tough
time
is
to
encourage
more
unity
within
the
workforce
and
hear
the
constituents
and
employees
out.
This
means,
creating
plans
for
the
future
of
programs,
an
action
plan
to
mitigate
this
situation
from
re-­‐occurring,
and
other
ways
to
prevent
the
same
situation
to
occur
in
the
future.
When
people
feel
that
their
voices
are
heard
and
action
is
being
taken
beyond
just
listening,
there
will
be
less
push
back.
In
order
to
mitigate
these
consequences
stated
above,
the
budget
committee
and
myself
have
come
up
with
the
following
alternative
strategies
for
reducing
the
impact
of
the
cuts:
1. WIC
Program:
$300,000
(30%
cut)
a. Use
current
users,
churches
&
other
free
venues
to
advertise
about
the
program
and
benefits.
2. Health
Education
/
Promotion
Programs:
$300,000
(20%
cut)
a. Use
current
users,
churches
&
other
free
venues
to
advertise
about
the
program
and
benefits.
3. Migrant
Health
Clinics:
$75,000
(100%
cut)
a. Use
current
users,
churches
&
other
free
venues
to
advertise
about
the
program
and
benefits.
4. Local
Health
Department
Liaison
Services:
$450,000
(60%
cut)
a. No
solution
needed
as
cuts
were
necessary,
in
order
to
keep
politicians
from
both
standpoints
happy
(Arthritis
Prevention
Program
Congressmen).
b. Explain
justification
and
create
better
avenues
of
communication.
Seek
out
other
grants
and
funding
opportunities
to
aid
the
program
and
supplement
their
budget
for
the
future.
5. Arthritis
Prevention
Program:
$600,000
(67%
cut)
a. No
solution
needed
as
cuts
were
necessary,
in
order
to
keep
politicians
from
both
standpoints
happy
(Arthritis
Prevention
Program
Congressmen).
b. Explain
justification
and
create
better
avenues
of
communication.
Seek
out
other
grants
and
funding
opportunities
to
aid
the
program
and
supplement
their
budget
for
the
future.
6. Other
Misc.
Programs-­‐
First
Lady’s
State
Autism
Project:
$30,000
(23%
cut)
a. No
solution
needed
as
cuts
were
justified
and
this
program
is
in
its’
first
year.
b. Explain
justification
and
create
better
avenues
of
communication.
Seek
out
other
grants
and
funding
opportunities
to
aid
the
program
and
supplement
their
budget
for
the
future.
7. Create
an
action
plan
for
the
future
budgets
in
order
to
prevent
this
situation
from
re-­‐occurring.
Upon
vast
research
and
reading
through
all
pertinent
documents,
the
budget
committee
and
myself
believe
that
the
solutions
listed
above
are
the
best
alternative
strategies
to
mitigate
the
various
consequences
in
order
to
reduce
the

4. Governor
Yersy
Yersinian
P.O.
Box
30013
Lansing,
MI
48909
Phone
517.373.3400
Fax
517.335.6863
www.michigan.gov
impact
of
the
proposed
budget
cuts.
In
conclusion,
using
a
“do
the
least
harm”
approach
while
being
conscious
of
political
pragmatism,
every
budget
that
the
committee
has
chosen
to
cut
funding
from
are
as
follows:
1. WIC
Program:
$300,000
(30%
cut)
a. Cut
due
to
less
need
for
marketing
to
women
and
having
the
ability
to
advertise
through
different
channels
(churches,
groups,
current
users
of
program).
2. Hospital
&
Nursing
Home
Inspection
Program:
$90,000
(36%
cut)
a. Cut
the
reimbursements
for
traveling
and
lodging
of
inspectors
&
administrative
costs
of
non-­‐vital
furniture
and
equipment.
3. Food
Safety
Inspections/
Regulations:
$10,000
(36%
cut)
a. Cut
due
to
administrative
costs
of
non-­‐vital
furniture
and
equipment.
4. Health
Education
/
Promotion
Programs:
$300,000
(20%
cut)
a. Cut
due
to
less
need
for
marketing
and
administrative
costs
of
non-­‐vital
furniture
/equipment.
5. Commissioner’s
Office:
$250,000
(35%
cut)
a. Cut
due
to
less
need
for
marketing
and
administrative
costs
of
non-­‐vital
furniture
/equipment.
6. Migrant
Health
Clinics:
$75,000
(100%
cut)
a. Cut
due
to
the
ability
to
advertise
through
different
channels
(churches,
groups,
patients,
etc.)
7. Family
Planning:
$32,500
(100%
cut)
a. Cut
due
to
lack
of
traction
with
the
Male
target
population
(results
negligible).
8. Communicable
Disease
Control
and
Vital
Records:
$50,000
(4%
cut)
a. Cut
due
to
need
to
cut
from
another
budget
without
crippling
another
program
or
department.
9. Primary
Care:
$30,000
(5%
cut)
a. Cut
due
to
need
to
cut
from
another
budget
without
crippling
another
program
or
department.
10. Local
Health
Department
Liaison
Services:
$450,000
(60%
cut)
a. Cut
due
to
local
health
departments
being
able
to
alter
their
own
fees.
11. Arthritis
Prevention
Program:
$600,000
(67%
cut)
a. Cut
due
to
the
lack
of
cohesion
of
this
program
with
the
department’s
mission,
kept
due
to
politics.
12. Oral
Health:
$100,000
(40%
cut)
a. Cut
due
to
this
being
a
newer
program
and
less
field-­‐tested.
13. Other
Misc.
Programs-­‐
First
Lady’s
State
Autism
Project:
$30,000
(23%
cut)
a. Cut
due
to
this
being
the
first
year
of
the
program.
I
look
forward
to
discussing
this
further
with
you.
Please
feel
free
to
contact
me
or
I
will
call
your
office
next
week
to
discuss
your
preferences
in
this
matter.
Thank
you
for
your
consideration
of
our
request.
Very
truly
yours,
Curtis Healy
Curtis
Healy,
DrPH
Health
Commissioner
State
of
Michigan
Health
Department
P.O.
Box
30013
Lansing,
MI
48909
Phone:
517.335.7858
|
Email:
curtis.healy@michigan.gov