May 9, 2006 Minutes (City Commission
Room, City Hall)
|
MEMBERS PRESENT: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
MEMBERS ABSENT: |
|
Ed Brunt, Kim Gouge |
|
|
|
|
|
STAFF PRESENT: |
|
Lesley Rigney and |
|
|
|
|
|
PUBLIC PRESENT: |
|
|
Hartnett called the meeting to
order at
Introductions
Members introduced themselves.
Approval of the agenda and the
Mosely moved to approve the
agenda and the
Organizing for Action
Faubion said her invitation to
join subcommittees was an impetus to do work between meetings. She wants each
member to select at least two domains – mental health, emergency shelter, case
management,
Hartnett said it is not the
general community that we are concerned with, it is in relation to the TF Plan.
Faubion said we are getting to an
implementation plan – sometimes the first chunk of money is to plan what they
are going to do and the second piece is for implementation. She sees the first
couple months of months being used to get together a plan – to define what we
need to know to move ahead.
Faubion says she sees a plan for
implementation coming forth – this is our next step.
Martin-Smith said she has felt
for a long time the group needed to break up and examine each component, even
within each component. They need to convene and look at what the TF says they
want and CCH subcommittees need to develop a plan and to identify barriers for
implementation. The jobs component is free-standing; in her mind this
subcommittee will come to the CCH and say “this is what we can implement
immediately” and then if another committee that is working on a new shelter and
brings to the CCH a plan of what should go on, then the jobs component is ready
to go into the plan. The CC asked what to do first and the TF said Case
Managers. Now, it is hard to identify what should come next but if we each look
at our own components we can examine them in greater detail.
Taliaferro agreed with
Dinsdale continues to tell
everyone, the more she listens the less she knows what to do here. She feels
strongly, from the beginning, the goal was not consolidation, but collaboration.
It is frustrating that there is no clear accountability surrounding this issue.
She wants to assign ownership to particular people for particular issues. She
still has a sense that they are going in all different directions and they are
making use of the biggest donors in the community to fund something that is
unknown. There is no clear idea of what is needed. She wants to take each point
under each issue and come up with some schematic where every issue has an
answer person. She remains clueless in the mental health section, but we need
someone to take ownership nonetheless and funding from City should be dependent
on CCH endorsement of programs based on the Plan. There should be a clearer
design.
Hartnett asked for clarification.
Dinsdale said the TF never wanted
to identify specific providers, but plans. But people have to take
responsibility for the Plan. For example, there should be a plan to deal with
someone released from the hospital who has nowhere to go.
Faubion said regarding the person
released to LCS – when you do the environmental evaluation you are going to say
“we do not have the capacity to handle folks who are critically ill.” There are
other resources you need to tap to come up with suggestions for the community
on how to handle different situations. Maybe there isn’t a point person but
there is a point committee. They are coming up with an implementation plan for
implementing that section of the Plan. For instance, “what do I need to know to
talk about the mental health portion of the Plan?”
Hemphill said we need to know
what is happening elsewhere with regard to homeless who are mentally ill. In
Faubion said it is a
reimbursement issue and it is a losing proposition – it will need to be
subsidized.
Taliaferro said she has a
different perspective. Of course they cannot go to anyone and tell them what to
do, but if she were doing mental health piece she would convene the committee
and make a list of who to talk to. She would set up a plan that would include
touching base with those who have been involved up to this point.
Faubion said that is the planning
phase she is talking about. She wants each subcommittee to do that.
Taliaferro said someone does need
to take responsibility but they are not expected to solve it but to answer the
questions - here is what others are doing, here is what is missing and here are
the difficulties.
Martin-Smith said they also have
to consider where it fits in with the TF plan. Expensive components may be a
long time coming.
Faubion said the Plan is talking
about a ten-year plan. There is already emergency mental health intervention –
ER. We need to evaluate it – is it fitting the bill or meeting any of the TF
objectives? It is hard to think out ten years, but we can start with in one
year there should be some concrete suggestions. She is so used to seeing things
on spreadsheets, with timelines and responsible person – it can be a viable
document.
Dinsdale said it is something
they shy away from but the group has to have an evaluative piece to this and we
have never had it. The public needs to know if different agencies are working
toward the Plan. If City is going to be funding work, the public needs to know
what work is expected.
Faubion said they talk about
outputs – what Dinsdale is talking about is outcomes.
Dinsdale said if we are moving
forward in any identifiable way – there has to be evaluation.
Hartnett said part of the reason
we haven’t got to that point is that we have never gotten to a concrete action
plan. There should be a process to say in three months, six months, one year,
etc. Then we can say to the community, this is what we have done.
Dinsdale said as an agency
receiving funds, they can say “this is the Plan and this is where we fit in.”
Hemphill said one of the things
that came out in the SS was the CC’s wish to inventory service providers. He
sent Jane an e-mail afterward saying there should be a subcommittee that goes
out and gets familiar with agencies. He may not be the one but he would be
willing.
Taliaferro agreed with Hemphill
and said it is possible that that falls under the task of the CCC. They should
be clarifying what it is that agencies do.
Faubion said it seems to her that
each subcommittee will do that in each realm.
Martin-Smith asked Swarts if there
is a list of agencies that are serving homeless specifically.
Swarts provided copies of the Funders
spreadsheet that she produced. It is
four pages long but is not comprehensive of every agency in town. She also condensed
to one page agencies that she identified as primary or secondary homeless service
providers.
Taliaferro said what was included
in the TF plan was not all-inclusive.
Hartnett said when the TF tried
to do a local inventory they were considering if an agency was primary,
secondary or just has contact with people who are homeless. There is that
distinction to make.
Faubion said she remembers a
Powerpoint presentation that was on the website – it was a good initial overview
of services provided in town. Also, on page 4 of the TF Plan, there is a list
of 13 appendices which are all valuable resources. Going back to Phil’s
suggestion to have a committee to do interface with agencies; she was thinking
that was what the CCC was doing.
Hartnett said it goes back to that
becoming part of the work of each subcommittee. She could envision herself on the
mental health subcommittee and it would be up to her to get to know agencies that
are providing those services. If she is the point person on that issue, it
becomes her job and there is no need for duplication. That subcommittee will be
the expert in that area. At some point we have to get to a decision on next
steps to take.
Taliaferro moved that as part
of each subcommittee people gather more complete descriptions of various
organizations within that realm, and that CCC will compile all subcommittee
descriptions into one document.
Martin-Smith clarified that if
she is chairing a subcommittee, Sara is suggesting they meet with all agencies
related to that realm. The agency gets a letter from a subcommittee stating
their goal of gathering data and there could be 4-5 committees all asking for
that information. She thinks it seems too complicated. They can ask them to
cooperate, but she does not think the CCH has any authority over agencies.
Disndale asked if subcommittees
could start with the
Hartnett said the CCH is getting
side-tracked. Subcommittees are responsible for looking at the plan and
identifying players – not doing another inventory.
Taliaferro withdrew her motion. Her idea
is that if subcommittees are writing up a plan and meeting with five agencies, they
would have a way of reporting back what they are doing.
Faubion said the group needs to
decide what the subcommittees should be.
Hemphill moved to establish
six subcommittees to match TF Plan components. Taliaferro seconded the
motion, which passed unanimously.
Faubion suggested having at least
two members on each subcommittee.
The subcommittees were organized
as follows:
Emergency and Shelter Services
Subcommittee – Henderson (Chair), Hartnett, Hogue, Mosely and Dinsdale
Mental Health Services –
Henderson, Martin-Smith, Faubion
Case Management – Hogue (Chair), Henderson,
Dinsdale
Housing Program – Mosely (Chair),
Hemphill, Taliaferro
Jobs Program – Martin-Smith
(Chair), Hartnett, Gouge
Quality of Life – Taliaferro
(Chair), Hemphill
It was suggested that Brunt
(absent) would be valuable on the mental health and quality of life
subcommittees and that Gouge (absent) would be valuable on the jobs
subcommittee.
Martin-Smith asked about staff
involvement.
Swarts said if groups want to
share information initially, staff could facilitate that.
Faubion would like to turn subcommittees
loose and hear back from them at the next meeting. This process is going to be
fairly evolutionary and members can talk about stumbling blocks they experience.
She suggested conference calls for subcommittee meetings.
Swarts said if there is anything
staff could do, let them know and she asked if Faubion would contact Gouge and
Brunt.
Martin-Smith said she would
contact Gouge.
Faubion agreed to contact Brunt.
Hartnett clarified that she could
see that each subcommittee would have a report to provide to the CCH and staff.
Staff opinions and advice is important – she wants them in the loop.
Hemphill said it seems like there
are basic items that are fundamental to each committee such as how to start with
the consolidation of services, which came out of the SS.
Taliaferro suggested talking
about it in the subcommittee meetings.
Faubion said that she sees the
second point in the memo as planning a proposal with a timeline for
implementation. Initially, in order figure out how to best implement each
section of the Plan, subcommittees need to do certain things. The very first
thing is to get together a listing of what each committee needs to find out and
know and the next step is to start gathering information.
Hartnett clarified that it is not
about gathering new information, it is about the Plan.
Faubion said she will send a
template for developing a timeline.
Hartnett said at the next meeting
the group is going to elect a new co-chair to replace her.
Faubion said they could discuss
the need for co-chairs. Part of the notion was that if there was a novice it
would be helpful, but she is comfortable doing it solo.
Martin-Smith brought the article
about the reentry effort. She is seeing a disconnect and feels that the CCH is again
being left out of the loop.
Dinsdale said maybe one way they
could approach this is to invite people to say how they are fulfilling the Plan.
Martin-Smith said the TF never
got to the vision of a county-wide program but when she saw this she felt that
the CCH should take a look at it. We should ask someone from the sheriff’s
office to be involved with CCH activities. If there is going to be an
investment in this kind of a shelter we need to be collaborating.
Public comment
Faubion invited public comment.
Sims said he did not hear anyone
mention food and clothing. Please don’t assume Penn House, Jubilee and LINK are
always going to be there. Food is a basic need in the homeless community – it
doesn’t come up for discussion because
Saunny is wondering what the
responsibility of the CCH or the CCC is to the neighborhood response about the
SA shelter. There are neighborhood meetings going on – there is neighborhood
discontent. Should the CCH be involved?
Scraper said it is kind of
discouraging to him when the public comes in and there is an hour and a half
for the meeting and ten minutes for public comment. Last month there was someone
new in town who wanted to get involved but he got cut off because the Committee
ran out of time. What is the reason for them to show up? Some are not eloquent
but they need someplace where they can rant and rave so they know there is
someone paying attention.
Faubion said she would remind the
subcommittees to include homeless individuals in their discussions.
Swarts said public comment does not
have to happen only in this forum, it can happen in written or e-mail form as well
and staff will forward any communication to the CCH.
Adjourn
Martin-Smith moved to adjourn
the meeting. Dinsdale seconded the motion, which passed unanimously. The
meeting adjourned at