LA County approves nearly another billion dollars for sex abuse settlement

The Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors has unanimously approved another large settlement for hundreds of people who alleged they were abused as children while in the county’s care.

This $828 million settlement covers 414 cases for alleged sexual abuse in its probation department and the Department of Children and Family Services. This is the second payout for roughly 14,000 claims brought under Assembly Bill 218, a measure that extended the statute of limitations back decades.

The settlements have attracted controversy because of claims of attorney misconduct.

The sign off means the county will shell out close to $5 billion between this and the historic settlement approved earlier this year.

Where will the funds come from?

The hefty payout comes as the county is dealing with the financial fallout of the January fires and facing unprecedented federal cuts.

County officials have formed a finance plan to fund the latest settlement over the next few years. They’re moving $400 million from the Provisional Financing Uses fund to write the first check, due by Dec. 1. That’s a chunk of its $1.9 billion budget that’s intended to supplement future projects, according to county documents.

The rest of the settlement will be factored into the Judgement and Damages fund during the next few years.

This may not be the end of the payments, however. About 2,500 cases still need to be decided, with more expected on the horizon.

“ These settlements are unlike anything I’ve ever seen in my 30 plus year history with the county,” Supervisor Kathryn Barger said at the meeting. “ These settlements will impact the county for decades to come, especially in our mission to serve as a safety net for our residents.”

The problem is more than money

One of the key issues is the way AB 218 was written, which meant the door was thrown open for sex abuse claims going back decades.

Childhood sex abuse is usually an area where officials want to quickly support victims. However, the payouts have been under heavy scrutiny after an L.A. Times investigation alleged plaintiffs were paid to join lawsuits — including with fabricated claims.

County counsel Dawyn Harrison says fraud was anticipated because of the volume of cases, but it was the “unmanageable law” that allowed it to happen at a wide scale.

“This reality is compounded by the fact that this is not like a traditional mass tort case,” she said. “AB 218 allowed for decades-old claims, which means most evidence is not available, nor are the witnesses.”

Two levels of fraud review typically happen in a county settlement that includes reviewing a plaintiff’s claim details and interviews. All AB 218 claims will now go through at least the first level, Harrison said.

A new third level will be for all claims tied to the specific law firm suspected of fraud or for plaintiffs who indicated they were brought in by a recruiter or vendor. That will look into how people were signed up to sue.

Attorneys also have agreed to let the county interview the plaintiffs, which wasn’t allowed previously by court order.

“ The focus now needs to be on fixing the statutory scheme that created these vulnerabilities,” Harrison said. “Not upending the settlement for doing the right thing under impossible circumstances.”

Keeping children safe today

The Board grilled officials for more than an hour before approving the settlement, focusing on other concerns such as ways to prevent future sex abuse.

When the allegations first came out, they spurred a county action plan. One of the changes from that includes a new process for people to step forward via a dedicated hotline. That’s expected to launch by the end of the year. However, the Board questioned whether that and other changes discussed are proactive enough to keep children safe today.

“ When I looked at all the corrective actions, none of it, not one of it was to prevent. It was all after the fact,” Supervisor Janice Hahn said. “ We’re trying to hire as fast as we can, but clearly, that’s also the place we need to lean in vetting people who are coming in to be the caretakers in our juvenile facilities.”

Many of the allegations stem from the county’s juvenile system. Chief probation officer Guillermo Viera Rosa appeared to disagree with her overall assessment, saying robust changes have been made.