Local News

SAN FRANCISCO (BCN) ― A U.S. appeals court announced it won't rule Monday and instead will hold a telephone hearing later this week on the city of San Francisco's emergency bid to restore a key element of its health plan.

The announcement means that a requirement for employers to contribute financially to the health plan won't go into effect on Wednesday as originally scheduled.

The spending mandate was part of the city's pioneering health care program, enacted in 2006 to provide health care to the 73,000 uninsured residents who aren't covered by other government programs.

The plan, known as Healthy San Francisco, would be paid for with a combination of city funding and financial contributions from businesses with 20 or more workers.

Last week, a federal trial judge, acting in a lawsuit filed by the Golden Gate Restaurant Association, overturned the employer spending requirement.

The city then filed an emergency appeal asking the 9th U.S. Circuit Court to reinstate the requirement until the court has ruled on the city's full appeal. City Attorney Dennis Herrera had asked a three-judge panel of the court to act today.

But at midday the panel announced it will delay ruling and will hold a telephone hearing later this week. The date and time of the hearing has not been set.

Healthy San Francisco executive director Tangerine Brigham said that although there is no indication when or how the court will rule, the announcement suggests "the court is looking at the case closely."

Brigham said "we're going forward" with an expansion of the program beginning on Wednesday with city, state and federal funding, but said the expansion will be limited if the employer spending is not reinstated.

Brigham said the program has already enrolled 7,352 people whose income is at or below the federal poverty level of $10,200 for an individual.

She said that without the employer contribution, the expansion will be limited to people with incomes below three times the federal poverty level, or about $30,600 for an individual.

That would result in enrollment of about 47,000 people within two years, but would leave another 26,000 without coverage, Brigham said.

The funding mandate would require businesses with 20 to 99 workers to spend $1.17 per hour per employee and those with staffs of more than 100 to spend $1.76 per hour, either on their own plan or on payments to the city.

U.S. District Judge Jeffrey White overturned it on the ground that it conflicts with the federal Employee Retirement Income Security Act, or ERISA, which regulates employee benefit plans.

City Attorney Dennis Herrera argued in the city's emergency appeal Thursday that the mandate didn't conflict with the federal law because employers have a choice of whether to participate in a federally regulated plan or make payments to the city.

Herrera wrote that without a stay of White's ruling, "tens of thousands of San Francisco residents and workers will be deprived of critically necessary health care services for uninsured people."

But in an opposition brief filed Monday morning, the restaurant association contended it would be "contrary to the public interest" to grant the emergency appeal.

The group said that instead of creating a possible "on-again, off-again" situation, it would be better to leave White's ruling in place until the appeals court rules on the full appeal in five or six months.

The group argued that the spending mandate would "create a patchwork of local regulation and impose serious ongoing administrative and financial hardships for employers."

(© CBS Broadcasting Inc. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed. Bay City News contributed to this report.)