HomeMy WebLinkAbout1982-09-13-HSC-min.pdf HUMAN SERVICES COMMITTEE
Minutes of the Meeting of CPptember 13, 1982
Present Steve Baran, Ilene White, Judy Zabin, Roberta Black, Fbward
Reynolds, Bea Phear
q
Minutes
The minutes of the meeting of August 23 were approved as mailed
Muzzey
Bea reported on the draft charge to the Muzzey Conversion Committee which
was being discussed by the Selectmen this evening It includes as statement
that the primary goal will be affordable and alternate housing, as outlined
in the Planning Board submission of August, and a statement that a Senior In
Center may beeincluded if the developer thinks it would be compatible with
their residential plans There is also a tag paragraph that, if the
center is not in Muzzey, the Selectmen will have a specific package for
the 1984 Town Meeting regarding a senior center
Judy attended the TMMA Executive committee meeting at which Mary Rawls
had outlined this draft charge Judy felt that they questioned the need
for a center, and also that they were disturbed by the draft timetable
She was concerned that the Human Services committee was being misrepresented
as being in favor of a senior center Bea clarified that one misleading
sentance had been changed since Judy heard the draft read Nonetheless,
there was doubt about the position of the Euman Services Committee
Stan felt that a senior center may be a very nice thing, but is skeptical
that it fills any specific identified need or that it prevents any known
problem Steve also remembered Bob Morris ' worry that focus on a building
makes us lose sight of informal strengths
There was discussion about whether we had a responsibility to look at this
question further, possibly reviewing the CoA weekly reports, talking to
other senior providers and groups, or examining other towns ' data It was
decided to wait until the Selectmen had voted a charge, and then possibly
do more research and talk to people at the Feller School (Wally Lutz? )
Ilene reported that she had talked to the Arlington coordinator, who said
there had been initial active use of their new center, but then it was
dying down She felt it was difficult to project, since the current building
is less attractive, requires moving furniture, has fewer hours, and wondered
if it were permanent and theirs, would it draw more people Stan pointed
out that there was an underlying assumption that more utilization was good
It was decided to table the discussion until we knew what the Selectmen
had decided
Sub-Committee
Bea reported that she had had a long discussion with Steve regarding focus
for the committee, and had a list of the range of issues She and Steve
had both felt that the Committee members were primarily focused on agencies
and would be more interested in continuing that agency focus Currently,
the town (Committee and Coordinator ) are addressing the following
Providers Council - vehicle for planning, needs assessment,
communication
Evaluation of funded agencies - presented to Selectmen in a
prioritized fashion? mechanism more formal?
talk with other towns?
Share-A-Ride - approximately 25 registrants; 50 trips in July
Veterans - goes along smoothly under State mandate
Muzzey - committee role still undecided
Handicap group - met three times, now forming their own goals,
but will want to be formalized
Information & Referral - Bea gets a variety of calls, the LWV
booklet is near publication
Council on Aging - ongoing programs
Some of the possible areas for focus include
Area wide issues - MAPC, State & Federal lobbying, relationship
with other towns on shared human services
Respite Care - emerged from providers ' questionnaires
Informal providers - clergy assosciation, others
Cable TV - how can it be used for human services?
Charity - the town' s role, Trustees of Public Trusts have
approximately $3 , 000 to distribute to poor
in Lexington each year, usually getting
requests from the Selectmen; what process?
Refugees - is there a need to help them assimilate, or are other
groups and sponsors taking care of that?
Bea said she felt the committee needed to come to closure and select a
few topics , which could then be changed later, and suggested continuing the
evaluative role and providers council
Steve distributed a memo to the committee on the sub-committee structure,
with the underlying message that sub-committees are floundering, and there
is a possibility of broadening their mandates or carving functions up into
separate task forces
Stan pointed out that the committee seemed to have the number of people
to handle three sub-committees, but not more, and perhaps we should move
freom that perspective related to the number of people
Fbward suggested that for the purpose of the budgetary process , he would like
to see continu ation of the sub-committees, but would rather take on issues
sequestially by the whole committee eg Muzzey, senior center, or providers
council
Judy suggested that before the next meeting, the sub-committee would get
together and make some plans for themselves , which would be reviewed by the
whole committee, and might include expanded roles Stan suggested that
they also discuss its criteria and ways to operationalize the criteria
Steve felt it was also possible to expand the subcommittees' membership,
and have each subcommittee bring on other people in an exofficic status
For handicap issues then, David Enman would become a member of this
committee and the other people in his group would be subcommittee members
Stan thought there might be a conflict of interest, depending on what
they do
Bea introduced a draft memo to agencies currently receiving town funds ,
regarding reapplication The committee members will review this (enclosed)
and telephone comments to Bea so that it can go out shortly
Stan suggested sending it to all agencies, not just the current four
Roberta thought that was amajor shift, especially if we are putting our
recommendations in order of priority Steve thought it would also raise
expectations Stan siad we should encourage them to come talk to us and
find out what is out there, if we represent the town
It was decided to send it out only to the four (Mystic Valley, RePlace,
Council on Aging and CMARC ) for now and talk to Jim Crain about the
appropriateness of expanding the RFPs
Next Meetings
Thursday, September 16 - planning for next providers council
Thursday, October 7 3 00-4 30 - providers council meeting
Tuesday, October 12 - regular meeting, feedback from subcommittees
Monday, October 25
Monday, November 8
Monday, November 22
Respectfully submitted,
Beatrice Phear
Note I suggest eliminating criteria sections 1 (f ) & (g ) and
rewriting 3 (b ) to read " The program is appropriate for the
Town to fund" , and rewriting 5 to read "The agency has innovative
and special activites to enhance its effectiveness "