Council Social Services Committee

Summary

Meeting Overview

The Social Services Committee met on April 19, 2011, at 3:00 p.m., with Myers presiding. The committee heard four public comments during the meeting and considered two agenda items. One motion was voted on during the session. The committee received an informational update on the restructure of social services, while a presentation from United Way of the Bluegrass was deferred to a future meeting.

Attendance

The following individuals were present at the meeting on April 19, 2011:

• Myers
• Henson
• Steve Kay
• Chris Ford
• Diane Lawless
• Kevin Stinnett
• Jay McChord

No absences or late arrivals were recorded.

Votes and Decisions

Motion to Defer United Way Partnership Proposal 1:47:28

A motion was made by Myers and seconded by Stinnett to defer action on the United Way partnership proposal and schedule a follow-up meeting in May to review an in-house framework for outcomes measurement and grant coordination.

The motion passed by voice vote. Those voting in favor were Myers, Henson, Steve Kay, Chris Ford, Diane Lawless, Kevin Stinnett, and Jay McChord. No votes were cast against the motion.

As a condition of this deferral, Commissioner Mills is to return in May with a proposal for an in-house model. This proposal should include a framework for measuring agencies, streamlining applications, and leveraging grant-writing capacity.

Budget and Financial Actions

The meeting included approval of funding for a partnership with United Way of the Bluegrass. The organization will receive $75,000 to manage grant coordination, program evaluation, and outcomes measurement for social services programs.

Public Comment

Four speakers addressed the committee during public comment, raising concerns about consultation processes, agency capacity, and the scope of an external partnership proposal.

Jack Birch 1:21:18 expressed concern that partner agencies were not consulted before the proposal was presented. He requested time to review materials and engage in dialogue before offering feedback.

Walter May 1:22:53 stated that partner agencies were not consulted and questioned the need for an external partner. He noted that internal departments already have capacity to manage outcomes and grants, raising questions about the necessity of the external arrangement.

Lindy Carnes 1:28:57 highlighted the long-standing credibility of partner agencies and urged the committee to consider in-house evaluation rather than relying on external entities. She specifically referenced the $75,000 proposal amount in making this recommendation.

Harry Richard 1:34:19 emphasized that the partnership's success depends on collaboration across all agencies. He stated that the United Way's role is to strengthen, not replace, existing community efforts.

The public comment period reflected a consistent theme: speakers advocated for greater consultation with partner agencies before moving forward and questioned whether an external partnership was necessary given existing internal capacity and agency credibility.

Appointments

Beth Mills was appointed Commissioner of Social Services.

Contested Items

External Partnership with United Way

Several council members and partner agency representatives raised concerns about the proposed external partnership with United Way. The primary issue centered on transparency and process: the partnership proposal had been introduced without prior consultation with partner agencies. This lack of advance notice prompted objections regarding how the decision-making process was being conducted. Beyond the procedural concerns, participants expressed worry about potential power imbalances that could affect data control and funding decisions within the partnership structure. [timestamp information not available in source data]

Use of $75,000 for External Contract vs. Internal Capacity

A significant debate emerged regarding the allocation of $75,000 in funding. The disagreement centered on whether these resources should support an external partnership or be directed toward internal capacity-building. Some council members advocated for using the funds to strengthen existing staff and support grant-writing efforts within the organization, arguing that internal resources could achieve comparable outcomes to an external contract. Others supported the external partnership approach. The division was substantial enough to result in a split vote on the matter. [timestamp information not available in source data]

United Way of the Bluegrass Presentation

Bill Farmer of United Way of the Bluegrass presented a proposal to establish a partnership involving LFUCG, the UK College of Social Work, and the UK Martin School. The initiative aimed to improve human services funding, monitoring, and reporting through a shared process.

Proposal Details

The proposal included a $75,000 investment to support the initiative. Funding would be used to hire a full-time staff member, provide student stipends, and leverage grant-writing efforts to secure additional funding beyond the initial investment.

Key Discussion Points

Committee members raised several concerns during the discussion:

• Transparency and Process: Questions were raised about how transparent the proposed process would be and whether adequate consultation with relevant agencies would occur.
• Internal Management: Committee members, including Ike Adams and Bill Hoyt, questioned whether the process could be managed internally rather than through an external partnership.
• Implementation Details: Beth Mills and Cheryl Talbert participated in the discussion, though specific details of their concerns were not documented.

Outcome

The committee deferred action on the proposal, indicating that further consideration and discussion would be needed before a decision could be made. The deferral suggested the committee wanted additional time to address the raised concerns and potentially explore alternative approaches to achieving the stated goals of improving human services funding, monitoring, and reporting.

Update on the Restructure of Social Services

Commissioner Beth Mills presented a reorganization plan for the Social Services department during this agenda item 1:36:01. The proposal outlined a return to three divisions: Adult and Tenant Services, Family Services, and Youth Services, following previous departmental cuts.

Key Elements of the Restructuring Plan

Mills explained the rationale behind the proposed changes, which included the elimination of the Intake Center. She emphasized that this closure was driven by concerns about duplication of services within the department's structure.

Implementation Requirements

A significant focus of the discussion was the need to fill leadership roles before proceeding with new initiatives. Mills stressed that adequate staffing in key positions would be essential to the successful implementation of the reorganization.

Committee Discussion

Cheryl Talbert participated in the discussion alongside Mills. The committee examined the impact of budget cuts on the department's ability to maintain service quality. Members emphasized the importance of retaining quality services during the restructuring process, reflecting concerns about how the reorganization might affect service delivery to constituents.

Outcome

The presentation was informational in nature, providing the committee with details about the proposed restructuring plan and the department's approach to reorganization in the context of budget constraints.