The meeting was called to order.
II. Roll Call
Roll call was called and quorum was met. See attached Attendance Sheet.
III. Review and Approval of Agenda
Council Members reviewed the agenda. CM Pugh moved to approve the agenda. CM
Miller seconded. The agenda was approved by consensus.
IV. Review and Approval of Minutes- March 28, 2005
Council Members reviewed the minutes from the March 28, 2005 Planning Council
meeting. Council Support Skot Jonz read a written correction submitted by
CM Simmons regarding his comments on the Archdiocese of San Francisco. Planning
Council Support noted changes.
There were no other changes or corrections to the minutes. With those changes
noted the minutes were approved by consensus.
V. General Announcements
CM Allgaier provided an update to Council regarding the information requested
from the Senate Committee on the reauthorization issue and what personal
information was provided to meet the request. CM Allgaier reported that confidentiality
was being maintained.
CM Thomas changed her conflict to Case Management, not Money Management.
CM Thomas also announced an “In the Groove” art show- postcards
were distributed and she encouraged people to attend.
CM Hume read a memo regarding insufficient number of handouts available during
the funding scenario presentation by the AIDS Office. CM Hume also announced
that Mark Dunlop is being appointed to the Human Rights Commission. CM Hume
had a final announcement regarding his participation in a Project Homeless
Connect and encouraged everyone to participate.
CM Pugh made a brief announcement regarding RAMP.
CM Durio provided an update on the next Community Forum to be held May 19 at
MCC focusing on consumers who live and/or receive services in the Castro. CM
Durio encouraged Council Members to attend. He also added that the COA Committee
is reviewing the way these forums are conducted.
CM Antonetty added a comment regarding Project Homeless Connect and a website
for more information.
VI. Public Comment There were no public comments.
VII. CARE Title I FY2005 Planned Allocation-VOTE
Russ Zellers, Assistant Director, HIV Health Services
Russ Zellers presented a handout to Council Members and suggested that approval
of the budget be moved to the next meeting, as Brenda Walker would like to
be present with specific documentation. Russ stated that he would provide basic
information and suggested that Council Members review in more detail during
the next month. Copies of documents provided at the meeting are on file at
Council Support Offices. Mr. Zellers indicated that this was a very difficult
budget to work with.
CM Booker expressed her appreciation for the level of detail and indicated
that it is very helpful.
CM Kleffner asked to receive copies of the handouts provided at last month’s
Council Meeting.
CM Durio asked about COE’s not beginning in November and asked for clarification
on services in the Bayview District.
CM Byers clarified that existing services will continue, just no expansion.
CM Hume asked about the logistics of rescheduling this agenda item.
CM Allgaier indicated that this delay was anticipated and is now back on schedule.
CM Booker asked for a list of the HRSA categories so that they could be compared.
CM Durio asked how he was to make a vote without further information on the
algorithm used and how to obtain this information prior to next month’s
meeting.
CM Allgaier suggested he go to Steering Committee.
CM DiCrocco asked for an explanation why the COE is not starting sooner.
Mr. Zellers explained that it took some time to prepare the solicitations,
and they want to do a reasonable transition and think things through rather
than being rushed.
CM Booker suggested that Council Members save up questions, send them to Brenda,
and/or wait until next month.
Public Comment on this item: There was no public comment on this item
VIII. Quality Management Presentation
Patricia Sullivan, Quality Management Coordinator, HIV Health Services
*Planning Committee Prioritization Topic
Patricia Sullivan, Quality Management Coordinator, HIV Health Services presented
information on the Quality Management Program. Her PowerPoint presentation
was accompanied by handouts (copies available on file at Council Support Offices).
After the presentation, several Council Members had specific questions for
Ms. Sullivan regarding the information contained in her presentation.
Public Comment on this item: There were no public comments
IX. Minority AIDS Initiative Presentation
Marshia Herring, HIV Health Services, AIDS Office
*Planning Committee Prioritization Topic
Marhsia Herring, HIV Health Services, AIDS Office presented on the Minority
AIDS Initiative with several handouts accompanied by a PowerPoint presentation.
(Copies of documents available at Council Support Offices.
Public Comment on this item: There were no public comments on this issue.
X. Dinner Break Yum yum ?
XI. Marin County Prioritization/ Allocation
Presentation- VOTE
Sparkie Spaeth (Marin County), Cam Keep and Elyse Graham (Marin County Co-chairs)
*Planning Committee Prioritization Topic
Sparkie Spaeth introduced the co-chairs of the Marin County Council, Cam Keep
and Elyse Graham who provided a review of their prioritization/allocation process.
Cam reviewed documents provided to all Council Members and others present (copies
of documents on file at Council Support Offices).
CM Pugh inquired about the service category of Oral Health.
CM Allgaier commented on county epi-presentation at a prior Council meeting,
and suggested that the transgender community was not addressed and how this
fit into the process.
CM Graham indicated it is an ongoing process and would be addressed in the
future.
CM Hume commented on the work of the Marin County Council and acknowledged
their progress.
CM Simmons reiterated CM Hume’s comments, thanking Marin County presenters
for their work.
CM Booker commented on hard-to-reach communities and amount of consumer input.
CM Spaeth explained that the Needs Assessment Survey revealed that the epi-data
shows that the epidemic in Marin Co. is primarily affecting the white community,
although the consumer input brought in different information. She added the
service delivery model is being modified as well as the development of a “Reggie-like” system
for tracking. She stated that great strides have been made in listening to
the concerns of the community.
CM Graham added that the goal is to find the more diverse communities, and
hard-to-reach people. CM Graham thanked CM Kleffner for her voice at the table
in helping to address these issues. She indicated that Wade Flores on the Marin
Council has also been very helpful.
CM Booker stated that the Marin Council has done a great job. [Applause]
CM Kanios directed a question to CM Spaeth regarding outreach.
CM Spaeth provided information regarding the prevention activities in Marin
County.
CM Kleffner commented on the high amount allocated to case management. CM Kleffner
also asked about issues regarding the lifetime cap on dental and a comment
on the Needs Assessment Survey regarding the effectiveness of services.
CM Hume commented positively on the shifts in the prioritization of Marin County.
Public Comment on this item: No public comments.
Roll Call vote – all in favor. The motion to approve the budget was passed.
[See Column 3 on Attachment A]
XII. San Mateo County Prioritization/ Allocation
Presentation-VOTE
Ellen Sweetin (San Mateo County)
*Planning Committee Prioritization Topic
[Council was ahead of schedule, this item moved to follow QM Presentation and
before Dinner Break]
Ellen Sweetin presented information on the recent Prioritization/Allocation
results from San Mateo County. She indicated that they accepted the priorities
of the Planning Council, and what her handout demonstrates is how San Mateo
allocated those dollars within those priorities. She reviewed the handout with
Council members (handout on file at Council Support Offices). Several Council
Members had specific questions regarding Ms. Sweetin’s presentation.
Public Comment on this item There were no public comments on this item.
Regarding the vote, CM Booker stated that she did not recuse herself because
the program she works for in San Mateo County does not receive Title I funding.
CM Blum abstained from voting since he works with San Mateo AIDS Service providers.
Roll-call vote -- all in favor of approving the budget only. SEE COLUMN 2 on
Attachment A.
XIII. Campaign to End AIDS Discussion and VOTE
Laura Thomas and Anne d'Adesky
The Council will discuss and vote on endorsing the Campaign to End AIDS.
[Since Ms. D’Adesky was not yet present, this item moved to follow agenda
Item XIV below].
CM Thomas introduced Anne d’Aadesky who is the director of the local
affiliate for the Campaign to End AIDS. Anne (who indicated that she would
like to be known as Anne-Christine) provided some background on her experience
and involvement with AIDS, activism, and advocacy. She is the ED of AIDS Medicine & Miracles,
Executive Director in San Francisco. She also works with an organization in
Rwanda. She provided an overview of the Campaign to End AIDS, her involvement,
and to encourage the Planning Council to endorse the program. Ms. D’Adesky
reviewed handouts provided to Council Members and others present (copies on
file at Council Support Offices). She discussed an upcoming caravan to converge
on Washington DC this summer that will help bring more organizing around this
campaign – AIDS Watch May 2-5, with a Youth Institute. Summer Organizing
seminar to train and recruit for internships. Caravans arrive to D.C. on October
8, leaving a few weeks earlier. Ms. D’Adesky encouraged Council Members
to endorse this campaign and welcomed questions.
CM Booker asked about the website.
Ms. D’Adesky informed Council of the following website: www.endaidsnow.org
CM Allgaier asked if this effort is nonpartisan. She stated that it is nonpartisan.
CM DiCrocco asked if she is in a paid position, and Ms. D’Adesky said
that she is not. He added that it is not within the mission of the Council
to endorse this program, and sets an uneasy precedent for future endorsements
of other campaigns, and doesn’t fit within the scope of the work of Council.
CM Kleffner asked for contact information with Ms. D’Adesky.
Ms. D’Adesky indicated that Oakland has had a much stronger response
in organizing these events than San Francisco has been.
CM Hume reiterated CM DiCrocco’s comments about exercising caution around
endorsing this. He said that he does see a direct correlation with the work
of the Council and supports endorsing the campaign. He also added that it was
appropriate to check in occasionally to ensure that the Council is doing its
work.
CM Hume moved to endorse the campaign. CM Anderson seconded.
Opened for discussion:
CM Pugh – spoke in support of the motion.
CM Anderson – spoke in favor of the motion. Says he believes this makes
a statement, and that he did not join the Council to accept things the way
they are.
CM Durio –spoke against the motion as there is not a strong enough platform.
CM Thomas – spoke in favor of the motion and supporting the campaign.
She indicated that it has a direct effect on Ryan White funding, and the work
of the Council and services available to people in SF are related to what happens
in Washington, D.C. She believes there is a role to play in endorsing this,
and she knows that other Planning Council’s across the country have endorsed
it.
CM Allgaier spoke in favor of the motion, and added comments about his organizing
efforts with the SF AIDS Foundation, and recalled the difficulty in getting
people involved when things look discouraging. He stated that the campaign
seems to relate directly to the work of the Council and securing funds for
services.
CM Kleffner highly supports the motion, and commented on her involvement with
the Oakland efforts with regard to this campaign.
Motion called. Motion passed with a hand vote of 17 in favor, 3 against.
Public Comment on this item : There were no public comments on this item.
XIV. Severe Need & Eligibility Criteria Definition Discussion
Laura Thomas *Planning Committee Prioritization Topic
CM Thomas discussed the Eligibility Criteria for Title I, and the Severe Need
and Special Populations Definition. CM Thomas indicated that the Planning Committee
reviewed and agreed not to make any changes to these criteria and definition
this year. CM Thomas suggested that Council review and discuss the documents
provided to Council Members and others present. (Copies of these documents
on file at Council Support Offices).
Several Council members discussed the ambiguity in the item regarding “recent
criminal justice history” and CM Thomas indicated that the Planning Committee
would review this at an upcoming meeting.
Council also asked specific questions with regard to defining homelessness.
CM Thomas suggested that this would also be taken back to Planning for review.
CM Allgaier agreed with the sentiments, and added that the various definitions
of homelessness from DPH and HUD need to be reviewed before the Planning Council
can create its own definition for purposes of defining “severe need.”
CM Blum thanked Planning Committee for their work on this project, and suggested
more clarity on the mental health issue, and believes this is an amazing start.
Russ Zellers commented on how some of these definitions were arrived at, and
changes and additions made to defining severe needs, and explained how community
input played a role.
CM Durio asked how “active substance abuse” is defined.
Russ Zellers indicated that this involved a long discussion and explained how
it was finally defined by having the primary care physician identifying it
in the medical chart, another way is through an assessment from a mental health
counselor or case manager, using an Addiction Survey Index.
CM Pugh offered suggestions for making these definitions more usable for laypeople
by offering some thumbnail descriptions of the various mental health diagnoses,
and it would also serve as a way to educate Council Members on the issue.
CM Blum reiterated the need for clarification, otherwise just about anybody
qualifies as severe need.
CM Pugh asked who reported the mental health issues on Reggie.
Celinda Cantu from Reggie explained that this would be an objective analysis
from the case manager could make a notification on Reggie and it would be supported
by the client records.
CM DiCrocco asked if someone has the dual diagnoses of substance abuse and
mental health will they get a higher ranking as a more severe need than with
just one diagnosis, and if this would provide an advantage for someone to obtain
more services.
CM Thomas indicated that the care providers will determine what services are
needed. She indicated that she would take the matter to Planning to review
the issues around incarcerated individuals and the homeless definition.
Public Comment on this item: There were no public comments on this item.
XV. Membership- VOTE
Membership Committee The Committee would like to recommend the following new
Council Membership Candidates for appointment to the Council: Robert Oropeza,
Kim Pickens, Clarence Smelcer, Ellen Sweetin
CM Hume reviewed the summaries of new candidates for council membership forwarded
from Membership Committee.
With a hand vote all in favor of approving the new candidates for membership
to the Council.
Public Comment on this item: There was no public comment on this item.
XVI. New Business/ Next Agenda
XVII. Adjourned The meeting adjourned at 7:25 pm.
Home |
Community Outreach & Advocacy
Committee
| Policy & Evaluation Committee | Evaluation
Committee
Membership
Committee | Planning
Committee | Steering
Committee