I. Call to Order
II. Roll Call
III. Review and Approve Agenda
The agenda was reviewed and approved.
IV. Review and Approval of Minutes from July 26th, 2004
The minutes were reviewed.
CM Sanders clarified that under Item 18, CM Durio had nominated CM Siron for
Council Co-chair, not CM Sanders.
With these changes, the minutes were approved.
V. Announcements
CM Allgaier announced that 21 Council members had completed the evaluation
of Council structure, which will closes September 10th on SurveyMonkey.
CM Conley announced his resignation from the Council after 8 years of service.
The AIDS Community Advisory Board will appoint Mary Jane Wood’s successor
as the San Mateo County representative to the Council.
CM Chung announced her resignation from the Council after being appointed to
the Human Rights Commission. She will continue to assist the Community Outreach
and Advocacy Committee with community fora.
CM Sanders declined his nomination for Council co-chair.
CM Hume will be requesting a leave of absence for 2 months starting September
28th due to health reasons.
CM Booker will accept her nomination for Council co-chair.
VI. Public Comment
CM Hume reviewed the meeting code of conduct, which states that members of
the public and Council members are expected to engage the Council in a respectful
manner, and in a way that promotes a positive atmosphere.
Mike Smith from HAPN reiterated their key proposal to set up funding scenarios
that affect service subcategories disproportionately so that no category would
be completely defunded.
Tim Patriarca, director of a facility-based home care agency, stated that CARE
dollars are their primary source of funding and their category should be reprioritized.
Will Carter from Marin County requested more information about how the decisions
of the Planning Council affect Marin County.
Patrick Monette Shaw stated he will miss CM Conley and CM Chung on the Council
and recommended that CM Geanuracos’s leave of absence not be accepted.
Dr. Klefner from Marin County urged the Council to promote communication with
Marin County.
Wade Forrest introduced himself as a new member of the Marin Planning Council.
A representative from Catholic Charities recommended that the Council reprioritize
RCFCI’s, as they are an integral component in the continuum of care.
VII. Meeting Introduction
Council Co-chairs
*Planning Committee Prioritization Topic
The Co-chairs reviewed the Council by-laws section regarding voting.
CM Sallee reminded the council about respectful engagement during meetings,
which also applies to people’s voting decisions.
Public Comment on this item
There was no public comment on this item.
VIII. Membership -VOTE
Mjay Sanders/ Jorge Rodriguez
The Membership Committee recommended the following Council Members for membership
term renewal (September 1, 2004.):
Randy Allgaier
Mary Lawrence Hicks
Lara Sallee
George Simmons
The Council voted. The motion passed.
The Membership Committee recommended the following applicants for appointment
to the Council commencing on September 1, 2004.
Sparkie Spaeth
Devin Anderson
Billie-Jean Kanios
Public Comment on this item
Patrick Monette Shaw recommended that Billie-Jean not be appointed, as he
does not live in the San Francisco EMA.
CM Sallee responded with quote from by-laws which does not require Council
members to live in the EMA if they are employed by a service provider in San
Francisco.
The Council voted. The motion passed.
IX. Review Prioritization Retreat Decisions
John Golenski
*Planning Committee Prioritization Topic
John Golenski reviewed the decisions made regarding values ranking and justice paradigms at the July Prioritization meeting. See handout.
Public Comment on this item
X. Subcategory Ranking in Order of Priority – VOTE
John Golenski facilitated the prioritization of service sub-categories.
The Council discussed using tiers to rank service sub-categories.
CM Pugh spoke in favor of using tiers because they aided in funding scenarios.
CM Chung spoke against using tiers if it they were the same as last year.
CM Sallee made a motion to continue using the tier system as the Council had
used in the last year.
CM Pugh seconded the motion.
CM Hume spoke against the motion, for fear that interrelated services would
be defunded.
CM Durio spoke against the motion and supported CM Hume’s comments.
CM Hicks spoke in favor of the motion and of focusing on core services.
CM McMurray asked if the tiers could be altered.
CM Sallee responded that the motion preserves three tiers.
CM Allgaier spoke in favor of the motion as long as no service subcategories
get cut.
• The Council voted. The motion did not pass. See Attachment A, Column 2. (14/25 in favor).
Mr. Golenski asked the Council if they wanted to substitute the new Centers
of Excellence for the former ISP categories.
CM Thomas stated that yes, the Council had voted to change the name of ISP
categories and specified dollar amounts, so ISP will now be called COE, as
defined at the last meeting.
Mr. Golenski asked if the specific dollar amount voted on in COE Recommendation
9 should stand as specific amount, or be a proportion percentage of the total.
CM Allgaier stated that the motion had included a dollar figure as well as
a percentage figure.
CM Pugh clarified that it was $6.4 million or 25.4%, whichever was greater.
CM Sallee read aloud the original motion from Recommendation 9, which clarified
that the amount was 25.4% or $6.4 million, whichever is greater. See handout.
CM Conley clarified that the amount refers to the San Francisco Direct Services Award, which does not include San Mateo or Marin counties.
CM Byers made a motion to keep the same priority list of service sub-categories,
1-29, with the change from ISP to COE, which would allow the Council to move
into the discussion about how much money to allocate to services.
CM Pugh seconded the motion.
Mr. Golenski clarified that the Council would be making 3 decision points:
prioritization, allocation, then funding scenarios.
CM Shea: spoke against the motion, stating that theoretically the list is different
than allocation, but can be essentially the same.
CM DiCrocco spoke against the motion because it affects funding of service
subcategories at the bottom of the list.
CM Antonetty spoke against the motion, stating that Council members need more
information about process.
CM Pugh stated that there was a distinction, once you have prioritized sub-categories
there are many different ways to allocate money to them.
CM Chung spoke against the motion, stating that once you prioritize, the money
is attached to the service subcategory.
CM Allgaier spoke in favor of the motion, stating that these priorities are
in-keeping with priorities of the past.
CM Perez spoke against the motion and reminded the Council that it has gone
through many changes and to consider on what basis its decisions are made.
CM Simmons spoke in favor of the motion because of time constraints.
CM Ortiz called the question.
Public comment on this motion:
Patrick Monette Shaw stated that the money allocated to COE’s severe
need eligibility requirements would leave single diagnosis clients out in the
cold if there were major cuts.
• Roll Call vote. The motion did not pass. See Attachment A, Column
3, (10/28 in favor).
CM Thomas suggested using the values previously decided on to discuss the
issues.
John Golenski explained that the original intention of prioritization was
to provide a sequential process that listed which services were the most
important to provide, of which the top were usually emergency and life-saving
services. The middle services were usually prevention services. HRSA required
prioritization to be separate from allocation because there might be multiple
sources of funding services after they have been prioritized.
CM Shea stated that often the Council does not know what other programs have
for funding, but they try to allocate Care dollars where they make the greatest
difference.
CM Thomas stated that there was a negative association with tiering services
because this year the bottom tier of service subcategories was cut.
CM Byers stated that the priority list is not always directly proportional
to cuts.
CM Simmons made a motion to prioritize the first 6 categories as they
exist now, which represents almost 50% of our funding. Those 6 in order are:
Primary
care, Emergency housing, Food, COE’s, Residential programs and subsidies,
and benefits counseling.
Cm Ortiz seconded the motion.
CM Antonetty spoke in favor of the motion.
CM Perez called the question.
Public Comment on this motion:
Patrick Monette Shaw recommended that the Adult Day Healthcare category should
be more closely linked to primary medical care.
• Roll Call vote. The motion passed. See Attachment A, Column 4. (19/28 voted in favor).
CM Booker encouraged the Council to move forward with the process.
Mr. Golenski stated that even thought the Council had just voted against using
tiers, it had created a tier when it voted on COE’s. Mr. Golenski suggested
discussing priority order from the bottom up.
CM Thomas commented that 100% of sub-category 29, Outreach, was moved into
COE’s, and it no longer existed as a category.
CM Allgaier reminded the Council which services had been voted as integral
to the success of COE’s: Residential programs, RCFCI’s, Mental
Health, Transportation, Money Management, Benefits Counseling.
Public Comment
Patrick Monette Shaw warned that if the Council created tiers now, they would
use them later on.
DINNER BREAK
CM Sallee made a motion to give John Golenski the authority to facilitate
the motions.
The motion was seconded.
• The Council voted. The motion passed.
John Golenski led the Council through a series of straw polls to identify which service sub-categories Council members wanted to see moved or keep at the same ranking.
Service sub-category 29, Outreach: 25/27 wanted to keep at the same ranking.
Service sub-category 28, Congregate meals: 19/27 wanted to keep at the same
ranking.
Service sub-category 27, Transportation: keep it 19/27 wanted to keep at the
same ranking.
Service sub-category 26, Dental care: 25/27 wanted to keep at the same ranking.
Service sub-category 25, Child care: 19/27 wanted to keep at the same ranking.
Service sub-category 24, Treatment adherence: 24/27 wanted to keep at the same
ranking.
Service sub-category 23, Adult day health care: 12/27 wanted to keep at the
same ranking.
Service sub-category 22, Integrated case management: 10/27 wanted to keep at
the same ranking.
CM Sallee made a motion to keep service sub-categories 24-29 at the same ranked
priority number.
Cm simmons seconded the motion.
Cm Ortiz called the question.
Public comment on this motion:
• Roll call vote. The motion passed. See Attachment A, Column 5. (23/28)
John Golenski addressed the Council, stating that no one wants to make these
difficult decisions, but the Council had agreed to make them.
CM Allgaier made a motion that the current ranking of categories 7-13(see
list), which are those services essential to COE, be the next group from the
top in the same order.
CM Simmons seconded motion.
CM Thomas spoke in favor of the motion, stating that these services are essential
to severe need and special populations, and would be consistent with the ranking
paradigms of distributive justice and access..
CM Pearce spoke against the motion, stating that it would move all Mental Health
categories down to #15 or below.
CM Perez spoke against the motion and warned the Council of clumping categories
together.
CM Hume spoke against motion, stating that if certain programs were defunded,
such as RCFCI’s, there would be no other funding.
CM Byers read aloud COE Recommendation 8, which stated that the services were
not required but should be maintained in the community.
Public comment:
Patrick Monette Shaw urged the Council not to drop the Mental Health categories
down in priority.
• Roll call vote. The motion did not carry. See Attachment A, Column 6. (7/28 voted in favor)
CM Siron suggested reviewing the service sub-categories from the top to the
bottom.
John Golenski led the Council through a series of straw polls to identify which
service sub-categories Council members wanted to see moved or to keep at the
same ranking.
7. Outpatient Mental Health: 18/28 wanted to keep at the same ranking.
8. Direct Emergency Financial Assistance 20/28 wanted to keep at the same ranking.
9. Dental care: 21/28 wanted to keep at the same ranking.
10. Money Management: 11/28 wanted to keep at the same ranking.
11. Transitional Housing: 20/28 wanted to keep at the same ranking.
12. Case Management (separate from COE’s):15/28 wanted to keep at the
same ranking.
13. Crisis Mental Health: 15/28 wanted to keep at the same ranking.
14. Residential Substance Abuse: 9/28 wanted to keep at the same ranking.
15. Residential Mental Health:14/28 wanted to keep at the same ranking.
16. Detox: 9/28 wanted to keep at the same ranking.
17. Facility-based home care: 8/28 wanted to keep at the same ranking.
18. Home-based home Care: 6/28 wanted to keep at the same ranking.
CM Hume made a motion to keep Direct Emergency funding at #8, Centralized
Dental care at #9, and Transitional Housing at #11.
CM Pugh seconded the motion.
CM Hicks spoke against the motion, expressing concern that Outpatient Mental
Health would be moved down too far.
CM Miller asked how people would get to those services, ranked in that order.
CM Pugh clarified that the Transportation category did not include vouchers,
it was only the Shanti van.
Public comment:
Patrick Monette Shaw asked how the Council could move categories and leave
gaps.
• Roll Call vote. The motion passed. See Attachment A, Column7, (20/28 voted in favor).
CM Sallee proposed to delay discussion of funding allocation until the September full Council meeting due to time constraints.
CM Shea made a motion to move Facility-based home care to #7 and Home-based
home care to #10.
CM Ortiz seconded the motion.
CM Shea stated that many severe need patients would not be able to adhere
to treatments without home based home care.
CM Pugh spoke against the motion, stating that there were not other sources
of funding for mental health, which would be moved down too far in priority.
CM Byers spoke against the motion, stating that the Council was moving categories
without substantiation.
CM Pearce spoke against the motion, stating the preventative benefits of funding
mental health.
CM Thomas spoke in favor of the motion.
CM Pugh called the question.
Public comment:
Patrick Monette Shaw requested more information on units of service or number
of clients served in each category.
Tim Patriarca stated he was in favor of mental health, but the motion would
send a message that RCFCI’s are a priority.
• Roll Call vote. The motion did not pass. See Attachment A, column 8.
CM Sallee moved to extend the meeting to 8pm.
The motion was approved.
Mr. Golenski urged the Council to think about which service subcategories
best meet the value rankings it had previously come up with.
CM Pugh reminded the Council of its severe need definition.
CM Graham made a motion to move Crisis Mental Health to #7, Outpatient Mental
Health to #10, Facility-based home care to #12, Home-based home care to #13,
in order to address issues of access, severe need, and units of service.
CM Allgaier seconded the motion.
CM McMurray called the question:
• Roll call vote. The motion passed. See Attachment A, Column 9. (20/27 voted in favor).
CM Thomas made a motion to put Case Management at #14, Money Management #15, Residential Substance Abuse #16, Residential Mental Health #17, Detox #18.
CM Chung against the motion, stating Residential Substance abuse did not produce
enough units of service.
CM Soto spoke in favor of motion, stating that money management helped clients
maintain housing.
CM Pugh spoke against the motion, noting its exclusion of complementary therapies.
CM Blum called the question.
Public comment:
Naomi Prochovnik spoke in favor of the motion, stating that substance abuse
interferes with the capacity for housing and other services, and residential
substance abuse treatment was the one effective treatment.
• Roll Call vote. The motion did not pass. See Attachment A, Column 10. (13/28 voted in favor).
CM Sanders made a motion to move Complementary therapy to #14, Case management
#15, Money management #16, Residential Substance Abuse #17, Residential Mental
Health #18, Detox #19.
CM Byers seconded the motion.
CM Simmons spoke against motion, stating that #14 was too high for complementary
therapy.
CM Chung spoke in favor of the motion, stating that Complementary therapy did
not take a big chunk of contract dollars.
CM Pugh spoke against the motion, noting its exclusion of Legal Immigration
Assistance and Adult Day Healthcare.
CM Siron called the question.
Public comment on motion:
Naomi Prochovnik implored the Council not to prioritize Complementary therapy
over money management.
• Roll Call Vote. The motion did not carry. See Attachment A, Column 11. (3/27 voted in favor)
CM DiCrocco made a motion to put Money Management at #14, Case management
at #15.
The motion was seconded.
CM Perez spoke against the motion, stating it did not make sense to put money
management over case management.
CM Allgaier spoke in favor of the motion, stating case management was part
of COE’s.
Public comment on this motion:
Patrick Monette Shaw stated that there was too much duplication of services.
• Roll Call Vote. The motion passed. See Attachment A, Column 12.(18/27 voted in favor).
CM Sallee made a motion to extend the meeting to 8:30pm.
The motion passed.
CM Allgaier made a motion to make Outpatient Substance Abuse #16, Residential
Substance Abuse #17, Residential Mental Health #18.
CM Thomas seconded the motion.
CM Perez spoke against motion, stating that Legal Immigration Service and Complementary therapy should be ranked higher.
• Roll Call vote. The motion did not carry. See Attachment A, Column 13. (7/27 voted in favor)
CM Hume made a motion to move Integrated Case Management up to #16.
CM Siron seconded the motion.
CM Thomas spoke in favor of the motion, as the category had been previously
defunded.
CM Perez spoke in favor of motion, noting that the absence of the service had
devastated many people’s health care systems, especially people of color.
CM Flood spoke in favor of the motion, as it supported the goal of severe need.
CM Simmons called the question.
Public Comment:
Mark Molinar from Shanti spoke in favor of the motion, as it demonstrated a
commitment to people of color.
• Roll Call vote. The motion passed. See Attachment A, Column 14. (20/25 voted in favor).
CM DiCrocco made a motion to make Legal Immigration Services #17.
The motion was seconded.
CM Graham called the question.
Public comment:
A member of the public spoke against the motion, citing the de-prioritization
of Residential Substance abuse and Mental health.
• Roll Call vote. The motion did not pass. See Attachment A, Column 15. (14/24)
CM DiCrocco made a motion to rank Complementary Therapy at #18.
The motion was seconded.
CM Graham called the question.
Public comment:
Naomi Prochovnik spoke against the motion, as bringing down Residential Mental
Health in priority would severely impact clients.
Russ Zellers stated that Residential Mental Health was a last resort for clients
with dimensia.
• Roll Call vote. The motion did not carry. See Attachment A, Column 16. (6/26 voted in favor)
CM Sallee made a motion to extend the meeting to 9pm.
The motion passed.
CM Simmons made a motion to put Residential Substance abuse at #17, Residential
Mental health #18, Outpatient substance abuse #19, Complementary therapy #20,
Legal immigration assistance #21, Detox #22, Adult day health #23.
CM Ortiz seconded the motion.
CM Simmons spoke in favor of the motions, as many clients start out in residential
treatment programs.
CM Graham spoke against the motion, stating that complementary therapy was
a first line intervention for substance abuse and mental health.
CM Siron called the question.
Public comment:
Patrick Monette Shaw implored the Council to reconsider its process.
• Roll Call vote. The motion did not pass. See Attachment A, Column 17. (16/25)
CM Thomas urged the Council generate a compromise motion.
CM Graham made a compromise motion to put Residential substance abuse at #17,
Residential Mental Health at #18, Complementary therapy at #19, and Legal Immigration
Assistance at #20.
CM DiCrocco seconded the motion.
CM Chung spoke against the motion, noting the low ranking of detox.
CM Antonetty proposed an amendment to the motion, which would make Legal Immigration
Assistance #19, and Complementary therapy #20.
The amendment was seconded.
CM Perez called the question on the amendment.
• Roll Call vote. The amendment to the motion did not pass. See Attachment A, Column 18. (16/26 voted in favor).
CM Perez called the question on the original motion.
• Roll Call vote. The motion passed. See Attachment A, Column 19. (18/26 voted in favor).
CM Hume made a motion to put Detox at #21, Outpatient Substance Abuse at #22,
and Adult Day Health at #23.
The motion was seconded.
• Roll Call vote. The motion passed. See Attachment A, Column 20. (22/25 voted in favor)
CM Byers announced that the Council must prioritize Council Support as a line item, as mandated by HRSA.
CM Byers made a motion to prioritize Council Support at #30.
The motion was seconded.
• The Council voted. The motion passed.
XIV. Allocation to Subcategories-VOTE
This item was not discussed.
Public Comment
XV. Funding Scenario Discussion - VOTE
This item was not discussed.
Public Comment
XIX. New Business
CM Sallee announced that the Council would discuss allocation at the September
Council meeting.
Council co-chair nominations will be open until September 27.
CM Byers requested that for the next meeting, the full process be explained
at the beginning of the meeting.
XX. The meeting adjourned at 9:00.
Home |
Community Outreach & Advocacy
Committee
| Policy & Evaluation Committee | Evaluation
Committee
Membership
Committee | Planning
Committee | Steering
Committee