Council Social Services and Community Development Committee

Summary

Meeting Overview

The Social Services & Community Development Committee met on April 30, 2013, at 11:00 AM under the presiding officer Ford. The committee addressed five agenda items during the meeting, including approval of the Committee Summary from January 22, 2013, and informational presentations on Adult & Tenant Services Overview and a Social Services Needs Assessment Update. The committee approved the Bluegrass Workforce Investment Board Interlocal Agreement and deferred Committee Referral Items for future consideration. Four motions were voted on during the meeting, and five members of the public provided comments.

Attendance

Present: Ford, Akers, Ellinger, Kay, Stinnett, Scutchfield, Myers, Beard, Clarke, Henson

Absent: Lawless, Lane

Late: None

Votes and Decisions

Approval of the March 19, 2013 Committee Summary 3:03

A motion by Stinnett, seconded by Ellinger, to approve the March 19, 2013 committee summary passed unanimously.

Recommendation to Sign the Bluegrass Workforce Investment Board Interlocal Agreement 1:10:47

A voice vote on the recommendation to sign the Bluegrass Workforce Investment Board Interlocal Agreement passed with no recorded opposition.

Motion to Remove Workforce Investment and Training from Committee Referral Items 1:25:45

A motion by Kay, seconded by Ellinger, to remove Workforce Investment and Training from committee referral items was withdrawn and did not proceed to a vote.

Motion to Adjourn 1:33:01

A motion by George, seconded by Akers, to adjourn the meeting passed by voice vote.

Budget and Financial Actions

The meeting included consideration of funding for a senior citizen center project. An appropriation of $5,000,000 was allocated to support the initial phase of the senior citizen center.

Public Comment

Five public comments were made during the meeting, with Council Members addressing funding priorities, agency collaboration, and the sustainability of existing programs.

Council Member Kay spoke twice during the meeting. In the first comment 34:44, Kay emphasized the need for the administration to use needs assessment data to generate funding scenarios and recommendations, questioning whether the current process reflects the actual needs of the community. Later 1:00:03, Kay raised concerns about the council's current policy of funding only innovative programs and suggested a reevaluation of whether the council should fund ongoing agency operations.

Council Member Lawless addressed the sustainability of existing programs 48:16, raising concerns about the lack of funding for ongoing programs and urging the committee to balance innovation with the sustainability of essential services.

Council Member Mars called for a comprehensive evaluation of the current funding model 54:04, suggesting that a 30,000-foot review was needed. Mars proposed creating a new structure that encourages collaboration among agencies and addresses systemic inefficiencies.

Council Member Myers advocated for a formula-based approach to partner agency funding 1:30:12, stressing the importance of collaboration among agencies. Myers urged the committee to consider long-term funding strategies informed by the needs assessment data.

The comments reflected a shared concern about aligning funding decisions with community needs and the sustainability of essential services, while also exploring structural reforms to improve agency collaboration and efficiency.

Contested Items

The April 30, 2013 meeting included two significant areas of disagreement among council members.

Funding Model for Partner Agencies

Council members were divided on the approach to funding partner agencies. The core dispute centered on whether funding should be limited to innovative programs only, or whether it should also support the ongoing operations of agencies. Several council members advocated for a reevaluation of the current policy to broaden its scope. This disagreement resulted in a split vote, indicating that the council remained unable to reach consensus on this funding direction.

Collaboration vs. Competition Among Agencies

A heated discussion emerged regarding the structure of agency funding and its relationship to inter-agency dynamics. Some council members argued that funding should be structured to encourage collaboration among agencies, suggesting that shared funding pools could serve as a mechanism to drive cooperation. This proposal was contested, with the debate reflecting different views on whether competitive or collaborative funding models would better serve the council's objectives.

Committee Summary (1.22.13)

The committee reviewed and approved the summary of the March 19, 2013 meeting. 3:03

Action Taken

The committee unanimously approved the meeting summary. Stinnett made the motion to approve, and Ellinger seconded the motion.

Outcome

The summary was approved without objection.

Adult & Tenant Services Overview

Connie Godfrey, Director of Adult Services, presented an overview of the division's programs and initiatives 3:37.

Programs Presented

The presentation covered several key service areas provided by the Adult Services division:

• Emergency assistance programs
• Relocation services
• Burial assistance
• Newtown Pike Extension Project

Discussion and Questions

Following the presentation, several participants engaged with the material. Stinnett, Kay, and Akers raised questions during the discussion period.

A primary focus of the questions concerned coordination between Adult Services and a proposed homelessness office. Participants sought clarification on how these entities would work together and coordinate their efforts.

Additionally, questions were raised regarding data on service recipients, with participants requesting information about who the division serves and the scope of its client base.

Outcome

This agenda item was informational in nature, providing the council or board with an update on Adult Services operations and programs.

Social Services Needs Assessment Update

Dr. Diane Roffler and student researchers from the University of Kentucky presented preliminary findings from a needs assessment examining barriers to self-sufficiency in Fayette County. The presentation was delivered by Dr. Roffler along with student researchers Emily Underwood, Alex Hoover, Rachel Ratliff, Josh Nadzen, and Evan Holcomb. 19:24

The research identified eight emerging themes related to barriers facing residents:

• Poverty
• Employment
• Transportation
• Housing
• Health care
• Mental health
• Substance abuse
• Language access

The presentation provided an informational overview of the preliminary findings from the needs assessment. This item was presented for informational purposes rather than for discussion or decision-making.

Bluegrass Workforce Investment Board Interlocal Agreement

1:08:01

Chief Administrative Officer Sally Hamilton presented the administration's recommendation to sign an interlocal agreement with the Bluegrass Workforce Investment Board.

Discussion and Concerns

Council members raised several important considerations during the discussion:

• The importance of becoming an active partner in the agreement
• The need for proper representation at Bluegrass Workforce Investment Board meetings
• Accountability mechanisms to ensure effective participation and oversight

Council members Myers, Akers, and Kay participated in the discussion alongside CAO Hamilton.

Outcome

The interlocal agreement with the Bluegrass Workforce Investment Board was approved.

Committee Referral Items

The committee discussed two referral items during this portion of the meeting 1:25:13.

Items Discussed

The committee addressed referrals concerning a senior citizen center and workforce development initiatives.

Committee Actions

For the senior citizen center item, the committee voted to leave the matter in committee rather than advance it at this time.

Regarding the workforce development item, the committee chose not to remove it from consideration. Members agreed to await further guidance from the administration before taking additional action.

Key Participants

The discussion involved committee members Ford, Myers, Kay, and Akers.

Outcome

Both referral items were deferred, with the senior citizen center remaining in committee and the workforce development item held pending administrative direction.