II. Roll Call
Council Support called roll. See
Attachment A, Column 1. Quorum was met.
III. Review and Approval of Agenda
Council Members reviewed the agenda.
The agenda item for Housing Consultant was taken off the agenda
Move Item #XII before dinner break to replace #VII.
IV. Review and Approval of Minutes- May 23, 2005
Council Members reviewed the minutes from the May 23, 2005 Council Meeting.
The following changes were noted:
CM Allgaier requested a change to the item on Page 3 where CM Allgaier commented about AIDS Office staff being guests to reflect that this was actually a comment made by Michelle Long.
No other changes were discussed. With those changes, the minutes were approved.
V. General Announcements
• Reminder for Council Members to Complete Meeting Evaluation Forms
• Need for San Francisco Co-Chair of Counties Working Group
•
Welcome new Co-Chairs of Community Outreach & Advocacy Committee
• Council Member Banks will read a letter
CM Allgaier welcomed back CM Hicks after her time in Africa. He reminded Council Members regarding the birth of Council Support Leah Crask’s baby. He congratulated Anita on receiving her MPA. CM Allgaier’s final announcement reminded council members about a GAO report that had been emailed earlier regarding the Coburn Hearing on the CARE Act.
CM Sallee announced that she was leaving the SF Community Consortium Clinic and moving to Kaiser Community Benefits Program, and will no longer be representing Title II. The Consortium will put forth a nomination, probably a provider at the clinic. She has made a request to Council Support and Membership to continue her term on the Council, as well as her involvement with the Needle Exchange Program.
CM Hume made an announcement regarding the HOPWA Loan Committee, and asked for Council Members interested in filling the vacant seat. Interested parties should contact Council Support, with a process for approving someone in the July Council meeting and to the mayor’s office for final appointment.
CM Molnar announced the upcoming self-care mini retreat called “time out”, coming up on July 15, from 8:30-5:00 pm. This is part of the Shanti California Peer Educator Project (CPEP) Learning Series. CM Molnar made flyers available (and on file at Council Support offices).
CM Allgaier made an announcement regarding the need for a San Francisco chair for the Counties Working group.
CM Durio announced that CM McMurray’s departure from the Council leaves an opening for the Prevention for Positives representative, and suggested that anyone interested should contact Council Support to be available at the next committee meeting. CM Durio also introduced the new co-chairs of the COA Committee, Wilfredo Ortiz and Raymond Banks.
CM Banks chose not to read his letter as indicated on the agenda, and instead commented about the need to look at developing a policy regarding acquisition of documents. He elaborated on the disparity of the matter, and explained how he sees some Council Members having access to documents and other Council Members do not. He suggested a policy that fosters a sense of inclusion rather than exclusion.
VI. Public Comment
Michael Patrella distributed a flyer about the declining HIV rate (copy on
file at Council Support Offices). He mentioned that all the rates are down
and expressed concern that nothing is being announced to the community. He
suggested that the gay community needs some positive reinforcement. He announced
other issues regarding inaccurate reporting of statistics. He requested that
the document be made available to all Council Members.
Commissioner Jim Illig, following up on his earlier meeting with the co-chairs,
mentioned his concern regarding the budget of the Health Commission. He provided
testimony about his concerns, primarily that the City Budget has been cut 43%
and the Planning Council has not been cut anything close to that. He suggested
that with the 5% Ryan White cut the Council should cut 5% across the board.
The Health Commission looked at an increase in Council Support expenses, and
suggested that other programs are being closed at the Health Department. His
point was that decisions made by the Planning Council have ramifications far
beyond this room. He wants the Council to look at Council Support and think
about services being cut. He concluded with additional comments regarding decreasing
the need for Council Support.
VII. HRSA Consultant Recommendations
Harold Phillips, HRSA Consultant
Mr. Phillips will present his recommendations to HRSA regarding the Length
of Stay Proposal, and will answer questions from Council Members.
[This item removed from the agenda since Mr. Phillips was not present due to illness.]
VIII. Grantee Quarterly Report
Michelle Long, Director HIV Health Services
Council Members will be presented with a Quarterly Report from the Grantee.
Michelle Long distributed a document: 1st Quarterly Report to the HIV Health Services Planning Council FY 2005-06 (March-May 2005) dated June 27, 2005. (Copy on file at Council Support Offices). She reviewed and discussed the information contained in the document, including: Contract Status Report; Monitoring Process; Solicitations; Conditions of Award and other program terms met March 2005-June 2005; Quality Management; and Coburn Hearing on the CARE Act. She addressed questions from the Council on each of these items.
CM Allgaier added a comment to the record that he was misquoted. He explained correctly that Title I funding is not used to purchase clothing, but vouchers are made available for household goods.
Michelle explained a new policy that involves the Health Commission reviewing all contracts.
Council discussed issues with regard to the Health Commission reviewing contracts developed by the Health Department, and they have the authority to ask questions, and request additional information. Michelle stated that there is no history of the Health Commission refusing to approve any contracts brought forward by the AIDS Office.
CM Siron announced a meeting on July 19 at the Health Commission that will be looking at the Planning Council budget. CM Allgaier added that the SF EMA is the lowest per capita award of any EMA, and among the lowest spent on Council Support.
CM Thomas provided more specific information regarding the Senate hearings on reauthorization.
Public Comment on this item
Michael Patrella commented that money received in San Francisco may be cut
because of excesses and inappropriate spending. He suggested honest evaluations
of the numbers being manipulated by the Health Commission. He further commented
that agencies should work together and merge to avoid closure of additional
programs.
IX. Prevention Update
Israel Nieves-Rivera and Gayle Burns, Community Co-Chairs of HIV Prevention
Planning Council (HPPC)
A presentation from HPPC will include current issues and priorities in prevention,
new HIV prevention funding, and an update on rapid testing.
Israel Nieves-Rivers and Gayle Burns provided an update on Prevention, and answered questions from Council Members.
Public Comment on this item
Michael Patrella reiterated his comments earlier about manipulating the numbers,
and emphasized that the gay community has done a lot to bring down the infection
rates of STDs and HIV and the community should be praised and acknowledged
for this achievement. He added that the gay community has been demonized
for too long and there needs to be some effort to address these positive
achievements.
? Dinner Break
X. Removal for Cause and Member Discipline Policy - VOTE
Brad Hume, Membership Committee Co-Chair
Council Members will vote whether to approve the Removal for Cause and Member
Discipline Policy for inclusion in the Planning Council Policy & Procedure
Manual.
CM Allgaier introduced the policy and explained the reasons it has been developed. CM Hume added that the draft policy has been on the table for over two years and due to the efforts of many Council Members and increased Council Support the policy actually has come to fruition. He further explained that this is not new, and there have been multiple drafts through the Membership Committee and other Council Members who have participated. CM Hume thanked Jack Newby and Council Support for doing research on other EMAs and Planning Councils to get a sense of what is appropriate. He mentioned that the Prevention Council has a similar policy.
There will be a motion to adopt this policy. Since it came from a Committee there is no need to second.
Council Members reviewed the policy. CM Hume indicated that the only additions from the City Attorney’s office are highlighted on the attached document, and he read aloud, which includes additional language not seen and approved by Membership or Steering Committees. He explained the process that is incorporated into the document, and gave examples of why the policy would be needed to remove a Council Member.
CM Hicks followed up with comments regarding the months-long process involved in creating this document. She explained that there were some concerns expressed by some Council Members that this document was created to get rid of certain people. She spoke to the spirit of the policy, which is to have some process to refer to when needing to address behavioral problems, and it is necessary protection to fall back on when unexpected situations arise.
CM Hume moved to approve the document as amended.
CM Sallee seconded.
CM Kanios spoke in favor of the motion as it is a form of checks and balances,
as long as it is not used maliciously. CM Kanios stated how integrity is important.
CM Hume followed up that this issue was discussed with Membership Committee,
and pointed out the item referring to “repeated unsubstantiated allegations”.
CM Banks commented about the monitoring process regarding new convictions, or other items listed in the conduct. He read the definition for “moral turpitude” and expressed concern about who would decide good morals and modesty. He further added a comment from Plato’s Republic that related to his concerns about the Planning Council making decisions. He stated that he has not seen too much disruption take place, and suggested calling 911 when problems arise. CM Banks spoke against the motion.
CM Antonetty spoke in favor of the motion and thanked Membership Committee for doing all the work. She expressed concern regarding the lack of a grievance process. She also expressed some concern about the interpretation of some of the language. She also expressed a concern about anonymous allegations, and whether they would be considered.
CM Miller expressed a concern regarding wording and use of the word “copied” and asked if it meant the same as “forward.” CM Hume clarified that it meant the same.
CM Booker thanked everyone for working on this policy, and agreed there needs to be a process such as this. She expressed gratitude for running this by the City Attorney. She spoke in support of adopting this policy. She explained her desire to have a due process for someone who gets out of control, and the policy is not designed to go after any individuals.
CM Thomas spoke in favor of the proposal and appreciated the work that went into it, as it is a way to hold the group accountable. It is necessary, she added, to have a level of trust among the group. She explained that it is good to have this policy in place now rather than trying to develop one while in the midst of a crisis. One concern regards new conviction of illegal behavior, and explained how the Council seeks out members with a criminal justice history to serve on the Council.
CM Ortiz echoed comments of CM Hicks. He added that the policy is not designed to go after any one individual. This was not thought of recently, but rather has been worked on for over two years. He spoke in favor of the policy and the motion to adopt it.
CM Siron spoke in favor of the motion, and called the question.
VOTE ON CALLING THE QUESTION: By raised hand.
16 in favor; 10 opposed. Calling the question did not pass.
CM Allgaier continued with comments received from the City Attorneys Office. He explained that the Council has not been holding itself accountable, and this is a good way to start. He stated that no policy can cover all scenarios but provide a basic framework. He explained that there are good people on the Council with the right intentions. He spoke in favor of the motion.
CM Durio gave CM Banks permission to vote proxy for him. After announcing to the Council “You don’t want to hear what I have to say” he departed the meeting.
CM Hicks commented that the likelihood of anything happening is low, but the idea behind the policy is to have something in place when the need arises.
CM Graham spoke in favor of the policy, and suggested striking the sentence regarding “new conviction of illegal behavior or crime of moral turpitude.” Regarding II.b. An extra “Chair” in the sentence.
She made a motion to strike that clause. Motion was seconded.
CM Hume indicated that this was a very light policy compared to those used in other EMAs. He spoke against the motion to strike the clause.
CM DiCrocco spoke in favor of CM Graham’s motion to strike the clause.
CM Banks commented that he was neutral on CM Graham’s motion to strike
the clause. He expressed concern that the numerous drafts have not accurately
reflected the language regarding convicted felons.
CM Kanios spoke against the motion to amend the policy and suggested adding terminology reflecting “at the discretion of the council” or two-thirds vote.
CM Hicks added that the removal of the word “felony” was a result of the democratic process and that it had gone through committee, voted on, through steering, and voted on again, where everyone in the room was part of the democratic process. She asked Jack Newby to provide some background about the inclusion of this particular language.
Jack provide history, that Membership Committee asked him to do research on the language from other EMAs, and explained that other policies could remove people for good cause. Much of the language in the policy at hand was adopted from the Ethics Commission, as well as the Austin, Texas EMA. He added that the City Attorneys additions regarding “substantial evidence” is a set standard. He explained the difference between preponderance of the evidence and beyond a reasonable doubt, and explained that this falls in between. His conversations with the Mayor’s office indicated that the Mayor’s office was pleased that the Council was doing this, and added that Membership Committee wanted it passed by Mayor’s Office and City Attorney’s Office.
CM Siron called the question on the amended motion by CM Graham.
CM Hicks seconded.
25 in favor. None opposed to calling the question.
VOTE: To remove the clause proposed by CM Graham: 15 Yes/12 No. (See
Attachment A, Column 2). The motion to remove the clause did not pass.
Discussion continued.
CM Banks indicated that he was still concerned about when the term “convicted felony” was removed, and emphasized that he wants a response to why and when the language was changed.
CM Hicks provided an explanation.
CM Siron called the question for the motion to be adopted. Seconded.
In favor of calling the question: 22y/1 N
VOTE: ON MOTION TO ADOPT THE POLICY: 25 in favor, 3 opposed.
Roll CALL VOTE: See
Attachment A, Column 3.
Public Comment on this item
No public comment.
XI. Respectful Engagement Policy – VOTE
Brad Hume, Membership Committee Co-Chair
Council Members will vote whether to approve the Respectful Engagement Policy
for inclusion in the Planning Council Policy & Procedure Manual.
CM Hume provided background on the policy and thanked Council Support Wilhelmina Parker for her work on developing this policy. CM Genauracos provided an updated version. CM Hume reviewed the document. CM Hume explained that this is common-sense, and suggested that it is a way to help things move smoother.
Motion to accept and adopt the policy, doesn’t need a second.
CM Geanuracos proposed an amendment (distributed to all Council Members present). She explained how there is a balance trying to be built between those who have professional background and those who have more life experience. Necessary to make everyone feel welcome and comfortable to participate. She explained that providers must work harder to make it comprehensible to the public and lay people who come onto the Council. She read the amendment regarding speaking in simple language, avoiding acronyms, etc. She added that not everyone can remember everything that has happened over the years, and it is respectful.
CM Byers seconded.
No discussion on amendment.
Hand vote for amendment. All in favor. None opposed.
Roll call vote regarding adoption of the policy as amended. See
Attachment A, Column 4.
25 in favor; one no vote (by proxy), and one abstention.
The motion to adopt the Rules of Respectful Engagement Policy passed.
Public Comment on this item
None
XII. Prioritization Schedule Update
Laura Thomas, Planning Committee Co-Chair
A brief update on the Prioritization Schedule
[This item moved up on the agenda to replace the item regarding the HRSA Consultant
which was removed from the agenda.]
CM Soto indicated that the preparations are being made for a space. He provided an update regarding interviews of facilitators. He updated Council about the informational binder and agenda being put together. He reminded Council about two Council Meetings in July (on the 11th and 25th). He discussed the two-day August summit, with the first day to focus on information and data, and the second to focus on prioritization and allocation. CM Thomas indicated that the time has not been set. She followed up with the status of the Planning Committee activities, and reported on the work around refining service categories. She explained that the Committee is waiting for recommendations from the Needs Assessment to include in the priority setting. Additionally, information will be available regarding reduced funding scenarios. There will be presentations available so that Council Members are not reading paper all day. She requested for Council Members to inform Planning Committee and/or Council Support regarding any suggestions for information to be included in the binder. It was clarified that the binders would be made available prior to the two-day summit.
Public Comment on this item
Michael asked about the epidemiology reports that would be included in the two-day summit, specifically what exactly would be presented, and how does the public get a copy of what is presented at the meeting. CM Allgaier explained that questions from the public could not be addressed during the meeting but could be answered during the break.
XIII. Working Group Updates
Co-Chairs of Working Groups will present an update of activities and progress.
• Needs Assessment Working Group
• Counties Working Group
•
Housing Working Group – Brad Hume and Margot Antonetty, Co-Chairs
[By consensus, Council agreed to omit this item from the agenda].
XIV. New Business/ Next Agenda
• Council Members will have an opportunity to complete Meeting Evaluation
Forms.
XV. Adjourned
CM Allgaier adjourned the meeting at 7:30 pm.
Home |
Community Outreach & Advocacy
Committee
| Policy & Evaluation Committee | Evaluation
Committee
Membership
Committee | Planning
Committee | Steering
Committee