Committee Members Present: Randy Allgaier, Charles Siron, Ayisha Benham, Laura
Thomas, Mary Lawrence Hicks, Brad Hume, Don Soto
Committee Members Absent: Anita Booker, Wilfredo Ortiz, Kim Pickens, Charlene
Pugh, Catherine Geanuracos, Walter Miller
Other Council Members Present: Dorothy Kleffner
Others Present: Will Carter, Michelle Long
Council Support Present: Jack Newby, Leah Crask, Skot Jonz
1. Introductions
Co-chair Siron called the meeting to order and those present introduced themselves.
2. Review/Approve Agenda
Committee reviewed the agenda. CM Benham moved to approve the agenda. Without
objection the agenda was approved by consensus.
3. Review/Approve Minutes
Committee reviewed the minutes from the Steering Committee meeting on August
15, 2005. Council Support Leah Crask made two minor changes to the attendance
lists. Council Support noted change. CM Siron moved to approve the minutes.
CM Thomas seconded. Minutes approved by consensus. Michelle Long provided
additional minor change to page 6 after approval of minutes. Council Support
noted.
4. Announcements
Council Support Leah Crask announced that she is leaving her position as Planning Council Support Administrative Coordinator at the end of the month. Committee moaned in unison and thanked Leah for all her hard work and added that she would be missed very much.
CM Hicks announced that she must leave the meeting early.
CM Benham announced that she must leave the meeting early.
5. Public Comment
No public comments.
6. Committee Check-in
Discuss any issues coming up at the different Committees, communication between
Committee Co-chairs, and ensure linkage of Committee activities to the Full
Council.
• Update on HOPWA Loan Committee Representatives
• Update on Needs Assessment Working Group
• Update on Housing Working Group
• Update on Comprehensive Plan Working Group
• New Committee Assignments
I&P: Co-Chair Benham mentioned that the committee is working on policies and procedures.
Planning: Co-Chair Soto mentioned that Susan Strong was in attendance and the committee discussed the two-day summit. The meeting did not have quorum. There was also discussion about deciding on how to handle a greater than 10% funding cut. He added that there was discussion about the Comprehensive Plan Working Group which meets tomorrow.
Membership: Co-chair Hume mentioned that most of the meeting involved interviews of new candidates, and added that the discussion was very thorough. There are still pending items for the policy and procedure manual that needs to be worked on. There are three new candidates who will be presented before the Council for a vote at the September Full Council meeting. Co-Chair Hicks also added that the new Committee Assignments was discussed at Membership Committee. This item is on the agenda for discussion at this meeting.
Evaluation: Co-Chair Allgaier reported on activities of Evaluation Committee, one of which is deciding on the evaluation of Director of Council Support. He added that there is a lot of work to do and the committee desperately needs members.
COA Committee: Council Support Crask reported that the co-chairs were unable to attend tonight. She updated committee on the activities of COA Committee which will be meeting later this week.
HOPWA Loan Committee Representatives Update: Co-Chair Thomas reported that she and CM DiCrocco have been officially appointed as the HOPWA Loan Committee Representatives. Co-Chair Hume provided additional background and process information.
NEEDS ASSESSMENT WORKING GROUP Update: Council Support Jack Newby provided an update on the upcoming meeting of the working group which will review the final report of the Needs Assessment Report to be sent to members of the working group ahead of time. Hard copies will be available at the October Planning Council Meeting. Jack encouraged Council Members to attend the upcoming working group. Comments to Harder + Co. are also welcome.
HOUSING WORKING GROUP Update: Co-Chair Hume mentioned that the working group is still in limbo due to hospitalization of the consultant. He added that there is not much to report. Council Support added that the Housing Working Group meeting has been cancelled for this week, and no further meetings are being scheduled until further notice.
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN WORKING GROUP Update: Co-Chair Thomas clarified that she is not the co-chair of this working group. She distributed a document listing an outline of the goals of the working group (Document on file at Council Support Offices). She mentioned that values and goals will be reviewed by the working group and they will be developing objectives. She added that the working group meets tomorrow morning.
Committee discussed briefly the latest developments on rollover funds, mentioning that there is a rider to a Hurricane Katrina Relief Bill pending that specifies rollover CARE funds not reported to HRSA by the deadline may be used for Katrina relief.
NEW COMMITTEE ASSIGNMENTS: Committee reviewed the list of committee assignments beginning in October. All Council Members have selected and been assigned to a home committee except for CM Banks. The list (on file at Council Support Offices) takes into consideration the recent resignations of CMs Sallee, Geanuracos, and Hume. CM Byers is not assigned to a committee. CM Hicks announced that she will change her home committee from Membership to Evaluation. The three new nominees (pending an approval vote by Council) will have 30 days to select a home committee. Committee briefly discussed where new Council Members might best fit in. Committee discussed committee membership, specifically the need for members to participate on Evaluation Committee.
ACTION: Council Support to update Committee Assignments list with change requested by CM Hicks.
7. Counties Working Group Proposal- VOTE
The Committee will review the Proposal (Structure of Relationship Between Counties
and the Planning Council) from the Counties Working Group and vote on accepting
the proposal. If accepted the proposal will then move to the Full Council
for a vote.
Co-Chair Siron announced that the other official co-chairs of the Counties
Working Group are not present at tonight’s meeting. Since he is a co-chair
of the Counties working group he presented the document up for review and approval
by Steering Committee. Document entitled: “Relationship Between Planning
Council, Marin and San Mateo Counties” is on file at Council Support
Offices. Committee members reviewed the document. Committee discussed the proposal
which is a consensus of the Counties working group which is being forwarded
to the Steering Committee and the Full Council.
Will Carter asked Steering Committee members for their support of this document and indicated that every point in the document was discussed at length and represents a consensus of the group. He added that Marin County needed a blueprint and a road map and this has already resulted in remarkable changes in Marin County. He added that Planning Council obligations to the counties are spelled out, which will help to resolve future conflicts. He commented further on examples of how this document will help the relationship.
Co-Chair Allgaier agreed with Mr. Carter and indicated that much of the process was difficult in completing this document. He expressed being impressed by the work done.
Co-Chair Allgaier made a motion for Steering Committee to approve the relationship document and forward to Full Council for a vote.
CM Hume seconded.
Discussion on Motion:
CM Kleffner commented that the document being reviewed is a compromise document and elaborated on difficulties in the process, providing an example of the Department of Health double-speak at the prioritization meetings. She stated that this document is like a down payment on the full work that needs to be done. She elaborated on the many conflicts of interest in Marin County.
Co-Chair Hume spoke in favor of the document and stated that the most amazing thing about the document is that it is a compromise document. CM Hume asked about the revision noted to Section V.2 which states: “Council Support shall also provide reasonable financial assistance to the Counties for consumer-related and general advisory group activities.” Committee discussed that this has already been figured into the budget and does not really amount to a lot of money.
CM Thomas asked about whether San Mateo voted against this document. Committee discussed that the San Mateo co-chairs were at first oppose to the document primarily because it seemed to be too directive, but later conceded that they were already doing everything outlined in the document. CM Thomas spoke in favor of the document. To echo CM Kleffner’s comments, she indicated that some issues remain in the purview of the County grantees and this document doesn’t address that and isn’t intended to.
Co-Chair Allgaier added that because of the legislation of the CARE Act there needs to be one advisory body responsible. He agreed there are many problematic issues that need to be dealt with, but not totally convinced that these issues are the responsibility of the Planning Council. He supports future conversations on these issues and agreed with CM Kleffner that this is a good beginning.
CM Kleffner disagreed that there was any structure in place and without her and others pushing, things would return to the way they were.
CM Hume called the question.
Committee voted to approve the relationship document: 8 in favor, 0 opposed. The motion to forward the proposed document to Full Council passed.
ACTION: Cancel the upcoming Counties Working Group meeting.
ACTION: Planning Council Relationship to Counties proposal added to the September Full Council agenda for a vote.
8. AIDS Partnership California Statement- VOTE
CM Allgaier discussed in detail the background and purpose and content of this
statement document. Other EMAs are presenting this to their councils and
will be forwarded to State Congress. He added that the fact everyone is in
agreement is huge. He reviewed the document entitled “Consolidated
Statements on Ryan White CARE Act Principles for Reauthorization from the
US Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) dated July 27, 2005” (Document
on file at Council Support Offices). Also presented were draft cover letter,
and another document entitled “Impact of HHS Ryan White CARE Act (RWCA)
Reauthorization Principles on California: A Consolidated Statement of the
Nine California RWCA Title I Planning Councils”.
Committee discussed.
CM Hume made a motion to recommend approval of the statement and forward to
the Full Council.
CM Thomas seconded.
Committee discussed.
Committee voted on the recommending approval of the AIDS Partnership California Statement to the Full Counil. 7 in favor, none opposed. Unanimous. The motion passed.
ACTION: The item of AIDS Partnership California to be discussed and voted on at the September Full Council meeting.
9. Discussion of the Steering Committee Function/ Purpose Statement
The Committee will begin to develop a policy on their function and purpose
statement. (This will be forwarded to the Infrastructure &Policy Committee
in November).
Jack Newby provided background on why this item is on the agenda.
CM Hume proposed putting aside the specific names such as Executive Committee
and focus on the distinct function of the Steering Committee.
Committee discussed the various misconceptions of the function of Steering
Committee, its roles and purpose. Committee discussed that Steering Committee
does need to have the authority to make urgent decisions when there is no time
to take before the Full Council.
CM Allgaier discussed that this is a decision-making process that affects the
entire Council and needs to be spelled out in the bylaws.
CM Hume suggested that one function should continue to be committee check-ins.
Other functions identified by committee include:
Monitoring activities and progress of committees
Development of agenda
Overseeing and monitoring activities and progress of working groups (such as
Comprehensive Plan)
Who sets up working groups? In Committees or at Steering?
Review of Council Support
One big issue discussed was decision-making.
CM Hume made a motion that the Steering Committee have the authority to make
decisions consistent with previous Planning Council decisions.
If Steering making a decision on behalf of Full Council there needs to be 2/3rds
rule rather than 50%+1.
Council agreed that this will all require a bylaws change.
CM Hume called the question. Committee voted all in favor.
10. Review Policies and Procedures
Jack Newby reviewed the draft policies drafted by Council Support for Steering
Committee to review and approve for inclusion in the Council Policies and
Procedures manual.
Steering Committee Membership. Committee reviewed and made recommendations for change. Council Support noted.
Council Decision Making Matrix. Committee reviewed and made recommendations for changes. Council Support noted.
Requests for Letters of Support. Committee reviewed the draft policy and discussed
that the Council should only support issues that relate directly to CARE funded
issues. The other category of letters of support received by the Council include
those for grant funding. In the past, the co-chairs sign those letters. This
should be included in the policy. Council Support noted.
One recommended addition to this policy included:
As long as the activity falls within the overall goals of the PC, the co-chairs
have the authority to write a letter of support.
Development of Full Council Agenda. Committee reviewed and made recommendations for changes. Council Support noted.
ACTION: Council Support to make requested changes to the policies for inclusion in the Policies and Procedures manual.
11. Review Council Meeting Agenda
Review and finalize next Council meeting agenda-September 26, 2005.
Committee discussed the draft agenda for the upcoming Council meeting scheduled
for September 26, 2005 and made recommendations for changes that were noted
by Council Support.
After the discussion regarding the Counties proposal tonight, this item will
be added to the agenda. Council Support discussed the time to include this
on the agenda.
ACTION: Council Support to make Steering Committee recommended changes to
the draft Full Council agenda.
ACTION: Committee asked for a note to be posted to remind Council Members to
be respectful upon arriving at the joint Council meeting to not disturb the
Prevention Council meeting.
Jack Newby had one final announcement regarding the final Summary Evaluation Report on the Prioritization and Allocation Summit from August 26 and 27. The document was available to all Committee Members and is on file at Council Support Offices.
CM Allgaier made an additional announcement recognizing Leah Crask for her dedication and hard work.
12. Next Meeting Date and Agenda Items
The next Steering Committee meeting is scheduled for October 17, 2005.
The following items were requested to be added to that agenda: None noted.
Co-Chair Siron adjourned the meeting at 6:46 p.m.
The Steering Committee of the HIV Health Services Planning Council is made
up primarily of the co-chairs of the Council's other committees. The primary
responsibility of the Steering Committee is to oversee the work of all of the
Council's active committees and ad hoc committees, as well as interface with
representatives from the Department of Public Health HIV Health Services office;
it is also responsible for creating and finalizing the agenda for the upcoming
Council meeting.
Meeting Minutes are considered to be in DRAFT form until reviewed and approved
by Council attendees.
Home |
Community Outreach & Advocacy
Committee
| Policy & Evaluation Committee | Evaluation
Committee
Membership
Committee | Planning
Committee | Steering
Committee