Talk:California Mental Health Services Act

Psychology Low‑importance

	Psychology portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Psychology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Psychology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PsychologyWikipedia:WikiProject PsychologyTemplate:WikiProject Psychologypsychology articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article has been marked as needing an infobox.

California Low‑importance

	California portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject California, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of California on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CaliforniaWikipedia:WikiProject CaliforniaTemplate:WikiProject CaliforniaCalifornia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article has been marked as needing an infobox.

Law Low‑importance

	Law portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Spending edit

Latest comment: 16 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Is anyone sure how the funding was allocated in AB 131? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Feralfeline (talk • contribs) 00:09, 12 August 2007 (UTC)Reply

This article is frozen in time edit

Latest comment: 7 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Warning to readers: This article treats the subject as if it is frozen in time. While MHSA is about funding, to be sure, there is much talk in this article of stakeholder meetings and changes. Exactly what has happened since 2006 or 2007? Is there anything substantive that has occurred to California's Lanterman-Petris-Short mental health framework as a result of MHSA or is the applicable law essentially that of the 1990s? Presumably the last four years have brought cuts in funding, but this article does not reflect them. It is certainly unclear what the large committee, meticulously listed in this article, has accomplished between the last update and the present day. And no link in this article is more recent than 2007. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.40.140.69 (talk) 00:27, 9 May 2011 (UTC)Reply

I completely agree. More importantly it reads like a brochure for MHSA. It lists all the positives with none of the criticisms or controversies, such as an investigation by the California State Auditor, the Little Hoover Commission report, or critique by Rose King who helped author the original bill. --Beck8888 (talk) 22:42, 11 June 2016 (UTC)Reply

There needs to be a massive amount of work done on this, and as it's a part of one of the largest states funding, I find it more than a 'low importance' article. The California Department of Mental health doesn't even exist anymore!

Merging? edit

Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Do we really need a "California Mental Health Services Act" and a "California Proposition 63 (2004)" article? No one is keeping either page up to date. The most recent reference from either article is from 2011. This is an ongoing California program receiving/spending multiple billions yearly. The resulting commission responsible has multiple meeting per month. The way it is now, timely information would have to be posted in two places. To avoid duplication, at minimum, the “California Proposition 63 (2004)” article should only give brief mentions (with links) to underlying law and its resulting organizations.

In addition, both pages read like brochures for the California MHSA law. This law has become controversial after receiving over $15 billion since 2004. As I already mention on one Talk page, both articles list all the positives with little of the criticisms or controversies, such as an negative investigation by the California State Auditor, extremely critical Little Hoover Commission report, or statements by Rose King who helped author the original bill (who isn’t even mentioned in either article). These are only a few of the controversies. --Beck8888 (talk) 04:57, 12 June 2016 (UTC)Reply

External links modified edit

Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on California Mental Health Services Act. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100515013421/http://www.dmh.ca.gov/Prop_63/MHSA/default.asp to http://www.dmh.ca.gov/Prop_63/MHSA/default.asp

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:16, 29 July 2017 (UTC)Reply

External links modified edit

Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 7 external links on California Mental Health Services Act. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:59, 14 January 2018 (UTC)Reply

Add topic