Newsom Threatens to Redirect County Funds Over CARE Court Rollout, Sparking Debate on State Control and Local Implementation
Governor Gavin Newsom warned 10 California counties he may redirect funds for slow implementation of CARE Court, citing low petition rates and state data; the move ignited debate over state control, local discretion and mental health outcomes.
- Benchmark and accountability: Newsom set a benchmark of about 6.2 CARE Court petitions per 100,000 residents, and named 10 counties the “CARE ICU” for falling short (Source).
- Program uptake so far: The state reports 3,817 petitions filed, 893 approved voluntary treatment agreements and court-ordered plans for 32 people since launch—well under earlier projections (Source).
- Counties and pushback: Ten counties were labeled the “CARE ICU” while 10 others were praised as “CARE Champions”; several county leaders disputed the single-metric approach and defended local work (Source).
- Public tracking and funds: The state launched accountability.ca.gov and tied targeted housing awards (Homekey+ and HHAP) to CARE and homelessness work; any fund reallocation would require legislative approval in the May revised budget (Source; Source).
What is CARE Court?
CARE Court — the Community Assistance, Recovery, and Empowerment program — was announced by Governor Newsom in 2019 to use civil courts to connect people with severe mental illness, addiction or chronic homelessness to treatment. The program began in pilot counties in 2023 and was rolled out statewide by 2025. The state describes the model as an effort to avoid criminalization and reduce reliance on long-term conservatorship while increasing access to housing, medication and supportive services. (Source; Source)
Newsom’s warning and the “CARE ICU”
At a March 2 press conference at a Bay Area behavioral health site, Newsom expressed frustration with counties he says have been slow to adopt CARE Court. He labeled the 10 lowest-performing counties — Fresno, Kern, Los Angeles, Monterey, Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino, San Francisco, Santa Clara and Yolo — the “CARE ICU”, and warned he was “out of patience.”
“I’m happy to redirect every damn penny in these programs to the counties that are getting things done, period, full stop,” — Governor Gavin Newsom
Any redirection of funds would require changes in the May 2026 revised state budget and legislative approval. (Source; Source)
State data and program results
State-collected figures show 3,817 petitions filed, with judges approving 893 voluntary treatment agreements and issuing court-ordered plans for just 32 people since CARE Court launched statewide. The state also reports more than 4,000 referrals redirected to other services. These totals fall far short of earlier models that projected between 7,000 and 12,000 potentially eligible people, and they underpin the governor’s argument that counties must increase identification and enrollment of eligible individuals. (Source)
County leaders push back
Several county officials named to the “CARE ICU” defended their approaches. Orange County noted it has the fifth-highest number of CARE petitions statewide and reported 79 residents in housing receiving medication and services through the program. Santa Clara County Executive James Williams said his county is a leader in treatment and housing and criticized reliance on a single metric. San Francisco officials highlighted record-low encampments and growing shelter connections and said they welcome state help rather than punitive measures. (Source)
Critics warn about the metric-driven approach
County behavioral health directors and local officials argue the petition rate is only one indicator and can obscure vital work such as outreach, prevention and service linkages. Michelle Doty Cabrera of the County Behavioral Health Directors Association said a single metric overlooks counties that prioritize CARE Court graduations or other community-based solutions. For example, San Diego led the state in CARE Court graduations but was not listed as a “champion.” Critics say redirecting funds on a narrow metric risks penalizing jurisdictions developing tailored local strategies. (Source)
State accountability and funding tools
To increase transparency the state launched a public tracking dashboard at accountability.ca.gov where residents can review county progress on CARE Court and other initiatives. The governor’s office also announced targeted housing awards tied to CARE and homelessness efforts, including $131.8 million in Homekey+ awards and $159 million from Homeless Housing, Assistance and Prevention (HHAP) funds. Some counties labeled underperforming still received portions of those awards. Any reallocation of money would need budget changes and legislative sign-off. (Source; Source)
Political pushback and legal questions
The issue has political overtones. The California State Association of Counties says counties are following state law as written. Republican state Senator Roger Niello called Newsom’s stance unfair, arguing it ignores operational challenges and funding needs. Redirecting funds raises debate over local control and whether the state should override county priorities when deploying behavioral health policy. (Source)
Human costs and case examples
Advocates and officials point to human consequences that sharpen scrutiny. One cited incident involved a man, Connor Keith, who overdosed 10 days after a CARE Court case was dismissed. Such tragedies heighten urgency in Sacramento to show measurable results, but local leaders warn that hasty or punitive measures could destabilize existing programs that link people to care. The debate remains centered on balancing public safety, access to treatment and civil liberties.
(Source)
Implications for Paso Robles, California
Paso Robles, in San Luis Obispo County, was not named among the “CARE ICU” or “CARE Champions.” Still, the governor’s actions could affect the city in several ways:
- Local priorities and referrals: State pressure to raise petition totals may push county leaders to change priorities, potentially increasing CARE Court referrals and demand on local legal and social services in Paso Robles.
- Funding shifts: If Sacramento redirects Homekey+ or HHAP awards, regional housing projects and shelters could see changes in funding, either gaining or losing dollars.
- Operational expectations: Law enforcement and first responders may face new expectations about when to file CARE Court petitions, affecting local policing and EMS procedures.
- Political scrutiny: Conservative residents in Paso Robles are likely to scrutinize potential state overreach, raising questions about local control and fiscal responsibility at Board of Supervisors meetings.
- Public accountability: Residents can monitor county performance on accountability.ca.gov, increasing pressure on local officials to either improve metrics or push back against perceived unfair measures. (Source)
What to watch next
Counties named in the “CARE ICU” are publicly defending their work while Sacramento has signaled it will provide support to improve implementation before taking funds. Any actual reallocation would require legislative approval in the May revised budget. Local leaders, law enforcement, behavioral health providers and Paso Robles residents should track county updates on the accountability.ca.gov dashboard and watch for budget moves in Sacramento that could change funding or program rules. (Source; Source)
Key documents and coverage: For further reading, see the state dashboard at accountability.ca.gov and reporting on implementation and statements from the administration. (Source; Source)
