Seniors' agencies upset over Scott's veto of bill to ease background checks

AARP of Florida and Meals on Wheels expressed dismay on Friday that Gov. Rick Scott has vetoed legislation that would have made it easier for volunteers to work with senior citizens by easing background screening requirements.

The bill would have repealed a mandate that part-time volunteers who work with seniors and other vulnerable populations pass Level 2 criminal background checks that require a fingerprint search against state and national arrest records.

Some organizations have complained that the screenings are too expensive, making it harder to attract volunteers. Other groups are trying to cover the cost of screenings for their volunteers, but say the financial burden is a strain during tough economic times.

Scott, in his veto message released late Thursday, praised Floridians who donate their time to work with those populations. But he said he was concerned about the security risk he believed the bill could pose to vulnerable residents. "That is a risk that is not worth taking."

Passed by the Legislature in 2010, the Level 2 screenings apply to volunteers caring not only for seniors, but for children and adults with disabilities as well.

According to a Senate staff analysis, the 2010 law responded in part to a South Florida Sun-Sentinel investigation that revealed chronic deficiencies in the state's screening system for people working with vulnerable populations. The newspaper found, among other things, that people with criminal records had beaten, robbed and neglected seniors and adults with disabilities in their care.

In response, lawmakers mandated Level 2 checks at a cost of up to $43.25 for part-time volunteers who were previously exempted from screening requirements. Social service employees and volunteers who previously had to clear a Level 1 check of their name against state records must now pass a Level 2 screening as well.

Among those affected are Meals on Wheels, churches that deliver food at the holidays and family members of seniors who receive a small stipend from the state to care for their relatives.

The law also mandates the screenings for law enforcement officers working or volunteering with youth in summer camps, even if they have already passed such a check as a condition of their employment.

Supporters of the 2011 legislation called it a "glitch bill" designed to lift the screening mandate for those groups and individuals.

Stephen King, director of Meals on Wheels in Tampa, said the veto came as "a shock."

The group has 700 to 800 volunteers bringing food to about 600 homebound area residents, most of whom are senior citizens.

"Getting all of [our volunteers] up-to-snuff in terms of a level 2 background check is going to be costly for our organization," King said. "And of course, you're aware of everything that's going on now with nonprofits; funding is difficult already."

King said the group has no plan to require its volunteers to pay for the screenings themselves, though they will invite those who can afford to cover the cost to do so.

"Obviously, if we have a $30,000-$40,000 impact on our organization, that's taking a lot away from meals," he said. "We're going to find a way to provide them -- we're not going to let anyone go hungry -- but it's a significant impact."

Spring Hill Rep. Robert Schenck, chairman of a legislative committee that sponsored the House bill rescinding the requirements, said the governor warned him prior to vetoing the measure that he had concerns.

Schenck, a Republican, said he understood Scott's reasons for rejecting the legislation and was "OK with it."

"I believe we vetted it thoroughly," the lawmaker said. "But when you're talking about our elderly, you can never be too careful."

Valrico Republican Ronda Storms, who chairs the committee that sponsored the bill in the Senate, said she is a strong supporter of background screenings and has filed bills in past sessions to bolster the requirements.

But such requirements should be better targeted, she said, commenting that the impact on Meals on Wheels in particular is "inordinate" and "disproportionately affects seniors."

Storms, who said she had little advance warning from the governor's office about the veto, said she heard no objections to the bill during the spring legislative session. Scott, she predicted, will get an earful from churches and other groups that will have "a conniption fit" over the veto.

In his veto message, Scott noted the "unrestricted access" that social service volunteers can have to seniors, children and the disabled. "I feel strongly that we have an obligation to ensure that these vulnerable members of our communities are protected, especially in their homes."

AARP of Florida leaders called the veto "baffling."

"No one wants older Floridians exposed to abuse," Jeff Johnson, AARP's interim state director, said in a written statement. "However, we believe the vetoed legislation struck a balance between protecting the clients of community service agencies and the capability of those agencies to provide needed services."

cwhittenburg@tampatrib.com

(850) 222-8382