City of Lawrence

Task Force on Homeless Services

November 23, 2004 minutes

MEMBERS PRESENT:	Candy Davis, Katherine Dinsdale, Rich Forney, Loring Henderson, Caroline Hicks, Barbara Huppee, David Johnson, Steve Ozark, Mike Rundle, Jim Schneider, Shirley Martin-Smith, Sara Taliaferro, and Sarah Terwelp
MEMBERS ABSENT:	Bruce Beale, Randy Beeman, Tami Clark, Helen Hartnett, Barbara Tucker,
STAFF PRESENT:	Cindy Nau and Margene Swarts
PUBLIC PRESENT:	Chad Longhorn, LJW

Rundle called the meeting to order at 4:10 p.m.

Approval of Agenda

Martin-Smith moved to approve the agenda.  Ozark seconded the motion, which passed unanimously.

Approval of October 26, 2004, minutes

Ozark moved to approve the October 26, 2004, minutes.  Martin-Smith seconded the motion, which passed unanimously.

Review Preliminary Plan from Program Development Committee, make recommendations for change, and vote on recommendations

Rundle thanked everyone who contributed and to Taliaferro for her hard work. He explained the scoring sheet and the handout from Taliaferro.

Taliaferro further explained the handout saying these were questions that people added or had questions about.  The first one is a point to note that the Plan Development Committee (PDC) thought there were three recommendations that were a funding piece and should not be included until after meeting with the stakeholders.  Rundle asked if there should be paragraph in the report that explains these recommendations were to be added later.  There is a funding portion prepared, but not added.  Taliaferro moved that a section be added for funding that says funding discussion will be added after the stakeholder’s discussions.  Schneider seconded the motion, which passed unanimously. 

Taliaferro stated that when the subcommittee on local services put together their final report they had an appendix, Section D that has the 2003 numbers rather than 2004.  She asked if anyone would object to changing those two reports.  There were no objections.

On page 6, #1, Schneider said that “supervise” should be left out.  Schneider moved to exclude supervision from #1.  Henderson seconded the motion.

Davis said references to “the homeless” should be changed to “person experiencing homelessness”.  Taliaferro said she’d make those changes.  The motion passed unanimously.

On page 12, paragraph 2, the question was asked if the statement regarding no other federal subsidies was true. Johnson said this is not necessarily true and it should read that most of the federal subsidy programs do not permit or there is limited funding.  Johnson moved it be changed to say “because most of the federal subsidy programs do not permit”.  Dinsdale seconded the motion, which passed unanimously. 

In the Jobs Program section the question was asked if the Community could be given a role there.

Martin-Smith said there is an assumption the community will have a role here and it would be a community partnership. 

Schneider said it should be left alone because the entity will oversee that. 

Martin-Smith said the report states that on page 9.  She moved to leave it as is.  Schneider seconded the motion, which passed unanimously. 

The question was asked if the description of Community be expanded. Dinsdale commented that it is a stakeholder question and moved to leave the description alone. Schneider seconded the motion, which passed unanimously. 

The question was asked regarding the difference between Community Cooperation Committee subcommittee or a different group.  Schneider said it is an entirely different group.  It was modeled after Clearwater, Florida and is meant to get the opposition involved in the problem-solving.  Johnson moved that “in addition, a Community Cooperation Committee would be formed”.  Taliaferro seconded the motion, which passed unanimously.

There followed a discussion regarding the prevention bullet.  Schneider asked if existing services should be added also.  Taliaferro said yes, but said her question at this point is whether a prevention section is included.

Henderson thought it should be added separately because this is a report on emergency shelter.  Henderson said this model was only about shelter. 

Rundle said there should be some clarifying language about “here are some things we know about people who are at-risk and here is what currently exists.”

Dinsdale said there was a sentence about the best way to end homelessness is prevention. 

Terwelp stated that she thought it should be pulled out and placed on its own. 

Gilchrist thought that it also raised the issue of maintenance. 

Rundle asked Gilchrist if she saw maintenance as separate from prevention.  She said it is separate.  Rundle asked if the Task Force should add maintenance.

Schneider said it is the job of case managers because that is in here.  Gilchrist said it is, but questioned whether it was stated in the report.

Taliaferro explained the purpose of the outline and felt that someone who deals with the issues should do this.

Johnson suggested it be added to the section under shelter types.

The Task Force discussed other recommendations.

Johnson felt prevention programs have not been defined and that case management is not life long.  Prevention really does not fit, but it could have maintenance added. 

Schneider asked for clarification from Johnson.  Johnson suggested including a statement in the parenthesis “coupled with maintenance services that foster stability”.  Johnson thinks prevention could be done with all of them and it should be a separate section in the report. 

Ozark said there needs to be a prevention program.  Schneider said the opening paragraph could say this Task Force did not focus on Prevention programs, but it is very important to success and should be addressed.

Schneider moved to have the opening paragraph state that homeless prevention is a very important element in any city attempting to address homeless services and the Task Force would suggest further research be done on prevention programs.  Henderson seconded the motion.

Ozark said he is hoping to get homeless prevention working in conjunction with churches.

Taliaferro will draft the paragraph and add it.

Davis asked why there could not be a separate heading that says “to be developed” or “these services are important”.  It should be listed in the table of contents and placed wherever it makes sense. 

Schneider amended his motion to add the paragraph.  Henderson seconded the amendment, which passed unanimously.

Davis asked for clarification about the number of case managers and outreach workers.  Henderson explained that it is five positions total.  Taliaferro will clarify that.

There followed a discussion regarding the note on page II. Taliaferro said that is something Huppee added and has not changed language dramatically.  Schneider said this kind of sentence says we’ve considered the values and the values expressed here are the values of any human being.

Henderson said the strength of this note is that the Task Force has tried very hard to incorporate disparate views and thinks all language related to values should be removed. 

Davis recommended “the City Commission should decide what course should be taken”.  Martin-Smith said the City Commission will adopt what the Task Force thinks is good for the City. 

Taliaferro moved to strike the 3^rd paragraph and say but these will not be insurmountable obstacles”, in the 4^th paragraph.  The motion failed for lack of a second.

There followed a discussion regarding the paragraph.

The Task Force directed the Committee to take out “value” and change stakeholders to Community stakeholders.

Schneider referenced the Executive Summary and noted language in the last paragraph. What is emphasized in the HUD report is not what is said in this report.

Davis left the meeting.

Schneider explained what the report said.   Taliaferro thought it could be reworded without removing anything.  Johnson moved to change that paragraph and replace with “We believe”.  Taliaferro seconded the motion, which passed unanimously. 

There followed a discussion regarding the use of “oversee”.

Martin-Smith said if on an annual basis an entity was really monitoring this it would be time-saving for the City Commission to have a Study Session with the group.

Rundle asked if there is someone that would serve as a mediator on duplication of services. 

Henderson said it seems like that will come from the Community Cooperation Committee. Henderson suggested “review”. 

Gilchrist said she sees it as working with other groups, not monitoring or reviewing.

The Task Force decided to use “review” and “evaluate” rather than “oversee”. 

Henderson stated he is still concerned about developing the 10-year plan. 

Schneider said this relates to HUD’s efforts to encourage communities to develop 10-year plans to end chronic homelessness.  That is the reason this group was formed.

Henderson said page 9 better explains this. 

Taliaferro said she would make references to all page numbers that tie into these.  Taliaferro said she would add “develop 10 year plan”.  The Task Force approved the changes by acclamation.

Henderson stated that there was no reference to whom this group reports and that it should be clarified to be the City Commission. 

Schneider asked if it should also go to the County.  Rundle said probably and commented that he wished the county had been involved all along.  Rundle felt there shouldn’t just be a report, but on-going communication. 

Martin-Smith said if it goes to the City Commission Study Session as well as others such as schools, it would be a good advantage.

There was a suggestion on the floor to add the recommendation that “the City Commission bring the report to one of the quarterly meetings it has with County, school board, etc.”

There followed a discussion regarding the emergency and shelter service section.  Henderson stated that at very bottom the “public and the people who use the facilities will review the performance” was new. 

Dinsdale said that is covered in the Community Cooperation Committee. 

Johnson said it further references the Community Cooperation Committee later in the paragraph. 

Taliaferro moved to strike the first sentence. Ozark seconded the motion, which passed unanimously.

Martin-Smith noted that on the case management section, the report is missing information from Boulder and Topeka. 

Taliaferro stated that Henderson was reviewing this piece.  Taliaferro noted the components are in the plan, but not specifically defined as to which shelter it is from. 

Henderson stated he thinks the Topeka and Boulder programs are good, but feels that the Task Force needs to develop a model.  It is the Task Force’s responsibility to develop something rather than providing many models for the public comment.  The idea was to have one model, not many.

Martin-Smith said she agreed that you have to give stakeholders something to consider, but too much information may not be good either.

Taliaferro asked if it would be helpful to add the Topeka and Boulder model information, but make a statement that says the Task Force is in the process of blending these two models.

The Task Force approved the addition by acclamation.

Taliaferro moved to changing “Summary outline” to “This section is under development by the Task Force and what follows is a draft of a possible recommendation for Lawrence” and “what follows is the actual, very successful Topeka and Boulder plan, elements of which may be included in the Lawrence plan”.  Schneider seconded the motion, which passed unanimously.

Henderson questioned the use of case managers with regard to talking to the community at-large or other interested parties about specific cases.  He understood that the Task Force would not have case managers talking directly to the community or groups.  He moved to delete case managers in both of these sections because it is the director’s job and replace case managers with agency directors.  The Task Force approved the motion by acclamation. 

Rundle postponed agenda items 4, 5 and 6 until the next meeting. 

Terwelp asked to discuss the timeline.

Other Business

Ozark requested moving the January 11, 2005 meeting since the Coalition on Homeless Concerns is having a meeting that day.

Martin-Smith said she is concerned about the retailers not having time over the holiday season to review the plan. They are asking for a delay until January.  They really want to be a part of this and need more time.

Terwelp said if we don’t respect their request we won’t be doing what we set out to do.  Maria Martin has asked that they delay release of the plan until the first week of January. 

Taliaferro stated that she could have changes given to her done by the end of this week. 

Dinsdale asked to have the draft distributed and approved electronically.

There followed a brief discussion regarding adjustment to the timeline.

Ozark stated he wants the plan distributed in December.  He thinks they will still need to meet on November 30, 2004 to discuss how the stakeholders meetings will be held.

The Task Force decided the report will go out as scheduled, but will hold off stakeholder meetings until January.

Dinsdale left the meeting.

At the next meeting, the Task Force will discuss who will make revisions if Taliaferro is no longer able to that.

Schneider stated he has concerns about funding and he has concerns over the lack of discussion regarding panhandling.  Ozark said it was passed with 0% passage for aggressive panhandling and it should be added.  Taliaferro said somewhere it is mentioned that “address nuisance behaviors in context of existing ordinances”.  She stated that they may need to add a sentence saying for instance, a panhandling ordinance is needed.

Rundle left the meeting.

Public Comment

There was no Public Comment.

Adjournment

The next meeting of the TFHS will be on November 30, 2004 at 4:00 p.m. in the City Commission Room.

There being no further business and no public present, the Task Force adjourned by acclamation.  The meeting adjourned at 5:55 p.m.