Counci lSocial Services & Community Development Committee

Summary

Meeting Overview

The Social Services and Community Development Committee met on November 29, 2011, at 10:00 a.m. in the Council Chambers, with Myers presiding. The committee addressed four agenda items during the session, which included approval of previous minutes and motions, discussion of University of Kentucky student involvement in assessing community needs, an informational presentation on the Community Development Block Grant and Consolidated Plan, and consideration of a policy recommendation regarding partner agency funding. The committee took five motions to a vote and heard one public comment. While the approval of minutes and the discussion on student involvement were approved, and the Community Development Block Grant presentation was received for informational purposes, the discussion on creating a policy recommendation about partner agency funding was deferred for future consideration.

Attendance

The following individuals were present at the meeting on November 29, 2011:

• Myers
• Henson
• Kay
• Ford
• Lawless
• Stinnett
• McChord
• Ellinger
• Lane
• Crosbie

No absences or late arrivals were recorded.

Votes and Decisions

The meeting included five motions and votes on the following matters:

Approval of Minutes 0:00 A motion by Stinnett, seconded by Lane, to approve the minutes from September 27, 2011 passed by voice vote.

UK Deans Needs Assessment Project 0:00 A motion by Kay, seconded by McChord, to approve a recommendation to support the Commissioner in working with UK Deans to conduct a needs assessment using student interns passed by voice vote.

Joint Needs Assessment Budget 5:38 A motion to approve the budget for a joint needs assessment project between the UK Martin School and College of Social Work passed unanimously. All ten members voted in favor: Myers, Henson, Kay, Ford, Lawless, Stinnett, McChord, Ellinger, Lane, and Crosbie.

Section 108 Loan Program Recommendation 59:14 A motion by Ford, seconded by Crosby, to recommend consideration of the Section 108 loan program for CDBG projects passed unanimously. All ten members voted in favor: Myers, Henson, Kay, Ford, Lawless, Stinnett, McChord, Ellinger, Lane, and Crosbie.

Withdrawal of Motion 1:50:05 A motion by Kay, seconded by Ford, to withdraw the recommendation to treat partner agencies as individual budget items was withdrawn.

Budget and Financial Actions

The meeting included approval of several financial allocations and grants:

Joint Needs Assessment Project Grant The University of Kentucky Martin School of Public Policy and College of Social Work received $35,000 in funding for a joint needs assessment project.

Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Appropriation Lexington Fayette-Urban County Government was appropriated $1,904,438 in CDBG funds to support public improvements, housing, and services.

HOME Funds Appropriation Lexington Fayette-Urban County Government received an appropriation of $1,321,739 in HOME funds designated for affordable housing development.

Emergency Solutions Grant Appropriation Lexington Fayette-Urban County Government was appropriated $92,314 in Emergency Solutions Grant funds to support homeless services.

Public Comment

0:00

Corey Dunn addressed the meeting with a suggestion regarding collaboration between the city and the public school system. Mr. Dunn noted that the public school system employs social workers and proposed that the city could leverage this existing resource to strengthen its needs assessment process. He further suggested that such collaboration could provide meaningful learning opportunities for students.

Contested Items

Use of Section 108 Loan Program for CDBG Projects

The committee addressed the potential use of the Section 108 loan program for Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) projects. While the motion to consider the Section 108 program received unanimous approval from the committee, the vote masked underlying concerns among members. Several committee members expressed worry about the long-term debt implications of utilizing this loan program. Additionally, members raised questions about the necessity of establishing a sustainable repayment plan before proceeding with such financing mechanisms.

Treatment of Partner Agency Budget Requests with Employee Raises

A heated discussion emerged regarding how to handle employee raises within partner agency budget requests. Council members debated whether to adopt a formal policy governing employee raises in the budgets of partner agencies. The discussion centered on three main concerns: the need for greater transparency in how such raises are determined and approved, the appropriate timing for considering employee compensation during the budget cycle, and the risk that politicization of funding decisions could occur if raises are not handled through a consistent, formal policy framework. No resolution on a formal policy was indicated in the available information.

Approval of Minutes and Motions

0:00

The committee approved the minutes from the September 27, 2011 meeting without dissent. Speakers Stinnett and Lane participated in this agenda item. No further discussion occurred regarding the minutes.

The outcome of this item was approval.

Discussion about University of Kentucky Student Involvement in Looking at the Landscape of Community Needs

The committee discussed a proposal to conduct a community needs assessment utilizing student interns from the University of Kentucky's Martin School of Public Policy and College of Social Work. 0:00

Proposal Overview

The initiative outlined a three-semester timeline for the project and included plans for data mining activities. The proposal emphasized joint involvement from both faculty and students in carrying out the assessment work.

Key Participants

The discussion involved multiple committee members, including Beth Mills, William Hoyt, Ike Adams, Karen Badger, Steve Kay, Jay McChord, and Ed Lane.

Outcome

The committee approved the recommendation to support the initiative, moving forward with the student-led community needs assessment project.

Community Development Block Grant and the Consolidated Plan

Director Irene Gooding presented an overview of the city's Community Development Block Grant (CDBG), HOME, and Emergency Solutions Grant programs 7:43. The presentation covered funding history, administrative costs, and the consolidated planning process that guides the allocation of these federal resources.

Key Topics Discussed

The presentation included details on how the city administers these three federal grant programs and the processes used to consolidate planning efforts across them. Gooding outlined the funding mechanisms and historical allocation patterns for each program.

Concerns Raised

Committee members raised several concerns during the discussion:

• Project Fragmentation: Committee members expressed concerns about the fragmentation of projects across multiple funding streams and programs.
• Rising Administrative Costs: There was discussion about the increasing administrative expenses associated with managing these grant programs.
• Section 108 Loans: The committee explored the potential use of Section 108 loans as a mechanism to accelerate project implementation and funding timelines.

Participants

The discussion involved multiple committee members and staff, including Paul Schoninger, Kevin Stinnett, Jay McChord, Peggy Henson, and Chris Ford, in addition to Director Gooding.

Outcome

This agenda item was presented as informational, providing the committee with an overview of current CDBG, HOME, and Emergency Solutions Grant programs and their administration. The discussion highlighted areas of committee interest regarding program efficiency and project delivery mechanisms.

Discussion on creating a policy recommendation to full Council about how partner agencies are funded

1:20:38

The committee discussed whether to adopt a formal policy regarding how partner agencies are funded, with particular focus on employee raises. The discussion involved Paul Schoninger, Steve Kay, Kevin Stinnett, K.C. Crosbie, Ed Lane, Chris Ford, and Beth Mills.

After conducting research and engaging in debate on the matter, the committee examined whether raises for partner agency employees should be subject to a blanket policy approach or handled differently within the budget process.

The committee concluded that raises should be treated as additional information presented during the budget process rather than being subject to a single overarching policy. This approach would allow for case-by-case consideration of raises within the broader budgetary context rather than applying uniform rules across all partner agencies.

A motion to formalize this approach was introduced but subsequently withdrawn.

The outcome of this agenda item was deferred, meaning the discussion did not reach final resolution and the matter was postponed for future consideration.