City of Lawrence, KS

Community Commission on Homelessness

June 12, 2006 Minutes (City Commission Room, City Hall)

MEMBERS PRESENT:	Katherine Dinsdale, Jane Faubion, Phil Hemphill, Loring Henderson, Shirley Martin-Smith, Robert Mosely, Sara Taliaferro
MEMBERS ABSENT:	Ed Brunt, Kim Gouge, Helen Hartnett, Barbara Hogue
STAFF PRESENT:	Lesley Rigney and Margene Swarts
PUBLIC PRESENT:	Hilda Enoch

Faubion called the meeting to order at 8:40 am.

Introductions

Members introduced themselves.

Approval of the agenda and the May 9, 2006 minutes

Mosely moved to approve the agenda and the May 9, 2006 minutes. Hemphill seconded the motion, which passed unanimously.

Discuss Co-Chair/Chair

Martin-Smith stated her concerns regarding the lack of cohesiveness with which homeless issues are handled within city processes. The CCH should not have to watch TV, read the paper, etc. to find out what is happening regarding homeless issues – she wants to let the City Commission (CC) know what the Community Cooperation Committee (CCC) is doing and to ask the CC to give the CCH authority to monitor these situations. She moved to draft a letter to the CC asking for inclusion regarding discussions around UPR and site plan conditions and to let them know the CCC has been formed and is empowered to keep communications open and to help arrive at solutions.

Dinsdale seconded the motion and suggested issuing the letter to service providers. The City needs to know about the CCC’s authority and service providers should know that in order to receive city support in the future they will need to participate in the process set forth by the CCC.

Martin-Smith clarified that her motion was simply asking for inclusion in dealing with homeless matters.

Henderson said it may be a separate issue but at the last CC meeting and during a recent Salvation Army (SA) discussion with neighbors, there was no mention of the CCH or the CCC. This needs to be included in the language of the letter and requiring agencies to participate in the process would be helpful to the SA as well – to have community support when making decisions.

Taliaferro suggested sending a letter from the CCC saying that they are putting together a plan and listing elements of the plan. They are also forming an observer corps and would like to be asked formally to participate in any matters concerning homelessness in Lawrence.

Dinsdale said this is an enormous issue. A simple letter such as Taliaferro stated is one thing, but having this body empowered for decision-making in the community and giving the CCH power to approve or disapprove certain things including funding is another thing completely. The TF put limitations on the CCH’s authority regarding this issue. It was never said that in order to receive city funding one had to deal with the CCH.

Henderson was only suggesting that they be involved in the discussions. It is not just delicate, it is vague.

Hemphill said to go back to the Study Session where the CC said that the CCH is in charge but they did not give us the authority. We should ask how the CC sees us accomplishing our goals. Unless it comes down to the CC saying to some service provider we are no longer involved with that you have to go see the CCH – there is no point. He then read a letter that he received regarding the Affordable Housing Conference and wondered what that was.

Swarts said it is an effort between the Living Wage Alliance, the Lawrence Association of Neighborhoods (LAN) and the League of Women Voters regarding affordable housing issues. At the time that the Housing Needs Task Force (HNTF) was appointed, the Joint Housing Commission (these groups) started planning the conference.

Henderson suggested having the draft letter ready for CCH approval for the next meeting.

Faubion suggested approving it via e-mail prior to the next CCH meeting.

Dinsdale said that the book Strategies for Preventing Homelessness that staff provided is an excellent resource and in the cities that are discussed, there is always a coordinating body. There should be a letter to the CC stating this.

Martin-Smith clarified that her motion had nothing to do with service providers. She is asking for clarification from the CC about whether they will empower the CCH to deal with these issues. The second part of the motion is to let them know that the CCH is empowering the CCC to do what they need to do.

The motion failed.

Taliaferro moved that members work through emails to write a letter to the CC asking for authority to do our job including specific language that will be worked out in the future. Hemphill seconded the motion.

Hemphill asked if they could approve the letter by e-mail.

Faubion said it is a common vehicle to do work.

The motion passed unanimously.

Faubion asked Taliaferro to draft something initial for members to work with.

Taliaferro agreed and said the CCC wants to organize an observer corps and moved to draft a letter to Dave Corliss to ask to be invited to meetings regarding homeless issues including neighborhood meetings that the Mayor may arrange. She wants CCC members sitting in all meetings in order to hear what the community is saying.

Henderson said he appreciated the efforts of the CCC but somehow there has to be good communication between the CCC and the CCH, otherwise CCH members will need to attend CCC meetings. How is that going to happen – how are observers going to communicate info from meetings they attend to the CCH?

Dinsdale asked that observers always submit notes to the CCH.

Faubion suggested that due to the absence of several members, the discussion of Chair/Co-chair should be tabled until the July meeting. She is comfortable remaining the Chair at this time. The group concurred.

Subcommittee Reports

Faubion asked subcommittees to forward reports to her so she can compile notes and distribute to the rest of the group.

Funding Requests

Henderson said that going back to what Taliaferro said – that there be established a funding committee of the CCH. It sounds like a good idea. Regarding her statement about the current competition between agencies – there is actually very little sense of competition but rather cooperation among agencies. With money like ESG and CDBG – agencies get together and have amicable discussions about where the money is going to go. There is much more secretiveness and much less collaboration surrounding public money (general fund requests).

Faubion said she would talk to Hartnett about writing a description for the funding committee. She read the staff e-mail regarding review of funding for outside agencies and alcohol funds.

Swarts passed around the results of preliminary recommendations from the alcohol fund committee. There was not yet a preliminary recommendation for outside agencies. The CC is looking for guidance from the CCH, however the CCH is on the tail end of the process this year and she suggested that next year should have a different face and the CCH can contribute more. There was a SS last week around the budget – ‘homeless initiatives’ is the request from this body. She asked if the group wished to comment on that request.

Taliaferro said without some descriptor how will they know what agencies are asking for?

Dinsdale said Swarts noted that the CCH is behind in this process and the group should come up with who in the City can brief them on this and who can give a sense of what each of these funds is designed to do. This could be done for the 2008 process.

Swarts said the Budget Manager, Casey Liebst and Debbie Van Saun can attend a meeting next year to talk about those processes.

Dinsdale also suggested attending Study Sessions. The CCH should get someone on board who has city budget expertise.

Martin-Smith said a funding committee would be helpful but she wants to talk about the response to the CC. For the CCH to be asked to make recommendations regarding funding, they should take the opportunity to communicate that they will learn about agencies and funding for 2008. They are extremely interested in this funding and what might be in there that can address homeless recommendations.

Taliaferro said she agrees with Martin-Smith and with Swarts’ suggestion on just commenting on the homeless initiatives section at this time. She only came up with one question when she reviewed the applications. The Haskell Foundation asked for money in 2002 and then never followed up. She wonders if they serve homeless.

Faubion said that might have been a special initiative, but it doesn’t seem appropriate for the CCH to get involved with that.

Enoch requested that public comment be allowed since she had to leave.

Faubion agreed that it would be acceptable to make an exception.

Public Comment

Enoch said even though the Saturday Affordable Housing Conference is being called without CCH knowledge, it is important for the CCH to attend. The alcohol tax money is extremely involved with getting people off the streets and having the CC ask for CCH approval of this funding is exactly what the group is asking for. When there is no drug/alcohol treatment center in town, it is important to be in on this funding.

Funding Requests (cont.)

Faubion suggested recommending that the homeless initiatives request should be funded at 100%. Should the group recommend that LCS’ second request from the alcohol fund be funded?

Martin Smith suggested stating that the CCH does not feel qualified to comment on other agencies, but asking the funding committees to pay special attention to those agencies who serve street homeless.

Taliaferro also suggested including information about to-date success of case managers.

Dinsdale said that regarding LCS’ request for Coordination funding out of the Special Alcohol fund should be funded since the cornerstone of what the CCH does is coordination. With the Good Neighbor Policy, etc. we are saying whip yourselves into shape but we are not going to give you any more money to do it. We should recommend this be funded.

Three points were confirmed for inclusion in the memo:

Fund LCS 20K – collaboration is cornerstone

Homeless Initiatives – fund at 100%

Pay close attention to agencies serving street homeless (be general)

Adjourn

The meeting adjourned at 10:05.