Loading...
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 "