Loading...
1976-07-12 Special CC SSB MinutesSPECIAL MEETING OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ALAMEDA AND THE SOCIAL SERVICE BOARD HELD MONDAY, JULY 12, I976 The meeting convened at 7:30 o'clock p.m. in the Council Chamber of the City with President Corica presiding. ' ROLL CALL: The roll of the Council was called and Councilmen BeCkD0, Diament, Hurwitz, Sherratt and President Corica, (5), were noted present. Absent: None. ROLL CALL: The roll of the Social Service Board was called and Board members Banda, Blaisdell, Goss, Howard, Weier and President Souza, (6), were noted present. Absent: Mrs. Burton, (1). President Corica announced discussion would be limited to members of the Council and the Social Service Board, as this was considered a work session. 1. Receipt of the Notice and Agenda of this Special Meeting had been acknowledged by Council- men and Board Members and was on ffle. The purpose of this session was for discussion - of possible conflict in roles between the Social Service Board and the Community Relations Commission, discussion of proposed expanded duties of the Social Service Board, ddscUs]iOn of a request for a professional staff director for the Social Service Board and/or a representative from city staff, and any other matters of mutual interest or concern. Also on the agenda of this Special Meeting was cODSideratbD Of compensation of certain officers and other employees of the City of Alameda, and a resolution commending Captain Edwin O. McKellar, Jr. 2. President Corica reported some members of the Board had expressed their concern over the possible conflict in roles between their Board and the Community Relations Commission. He referred to a memornaudm prepared by the City Attcrn8y, City Attorney Stroud stated there had been a tremendous amount of social legislation and regulation in the matters covered by Charter sections relating to the Board, and the language contained in the Charter was troublesome. He noted the Charter Sections dealing with health and welfare was completely duplicated by the Community Relations Commission functions set out in Ordinance No. 1733, New Series. However, he said it was his opinion the Charter poVviSiOn aid not give the Social Service Board any creater jurisdiction than the Community Relations Commission had under the ordinance. Councilman Hurwitz recalled at the time the Community Relations Commission had been formed he had questioned Whtther or not the Social Service Board could perform the functions which the Commission would carry out, and had been infom2d the Board had not been set up for this purpose. Mr. Stroud said it may not have been set up to carry out the additional functions, but no opinion had been issued that they couldn't legally do it. He pointed out the ordinance establishing the Community Relations Commissions was for an experimental two-year term and would expire in October 1976, unless extended. Mrs. Weier asked if it would not be a good time to switch �h2 Commission into community relations duties rather than social service duties. She said she thought there was a clear distinction between saial service and community relations. Mrs. Howard said she would agree, that it was her opinion social service meant you should look into the needs of the community and serve them. Councilman Diament stated the role of social service was becoming increasingly important to cities and more onus was being put upon cities to deal and coordinate problems. She said she had recently been serving on a Revenue Sharing Board H2ariUgYher2 she gad learned that cities were using their Revenue Sharing for other than social services were not going to be considered for additional funds needed in the social service field. She said she thought this pointed out O need for the city to even put a Social Service Element into the General Plan, Councilman Geckam noted these were some of the adopted Goals of Alameda, and should be in the General Plan. President Corica stated he thought the city was trying to address all of its problems and now had a Community Relations Commission, which it did not have before, as well as an Architectural Barriers Committee; that it was his opinion they, and the Social Service Board, were working toward one goal and that was to take care of the social needs of the city's residents. He asked the Board what problems they had with their role as specified in the Charter, and what did they feel they should be doing which they were not, and what role did they think they should have or felt some other Board or Commission was doing instead. Mrs Weier said it was her opinion the Commission had been guided toward social service type of activities rather than dealing with community relations, such as discrimination. The City Attorney stated the Charter spoke to encouraging the formation of organizations which would contribute, whereas the ordinance emphasis was on guiding people to existing pmernment tCi]itieS, He said the Social Service Board's power could be interpreted broadly enough so that it could pick up what the Commission was doing and this was a determination which should be made by the Council. Councilman Hurwitz stated he agreed the Commission had been steered away from what it was intended to do. He said he could see no reason why one Board could not handle the functions of both. 1 "6 Mrs. Blaisdell noted that in most communities a great percentage of their Revenue Sharing funds went toward social services. She said the Board felt the social service needs in the community were not being met and they had many ideas on the subject, but needed the input of the Council. Mrs. Howard stated, to her knowledge, the Council had not directed anything to the Social Service Board for at least twenty years and she felt there was a definite lack of communication. She complained the Board had received no information on social service funding sources which might be available to the city, such as Title XX or Revenue Sharing. Mrs. Blaisdell stated most cities had something compaaable to the Social Service Board which made recommendations to the Council on the expenditure of Revenue Sharing Funds and other social needs of the city, and this was not done in Alameda. Councilman Sherratt asked if the two basic ideas being put forth by the Board were (1) that they saw funds which were available in the social service area and could be applied for and used in the city for, such services, with the Board acting as the liaison body, and (2) that this Board also act as a screening source for proposals, new programs, or funding for new programs for social services. Mrs. Howard agreed with this statement. Councilman Hurwitz asked the City Manager if he saw anything in the Charter which would prevent the Board from carrying out these ideas, if the Council should given them such direction. City Manager Goss said he was not sure of the legal problems, however thought there were more administrative problems rather than anything else as most of the cities which had that kind of capability for screening and making recommendations also had technical staff assistance to help the Board. He reported the city did not have the type of Revenue Sharing money which other cities were spending for social programs and were fairly short on staff in being able to provide assistance. At the request of Councilman Beckam, Mr. Goss explained that through ACTEB there would be provided a service, or program, where there would be a shared staff person going through the process of helping to define problems and assist the city in identifying its role in the area of social services. He said it was his understanding the city would be getting one staff person one day a week starting in the fall, 1976. Councilman Beckam recalled the subject of the Social Service Board's getting into the social services funding field was made about one and one-ahlf years ago, but did not meet with the approval of the Council. He said he would concur that they should proceed in this direction. He noted there had recently been received within the city a $50,000 grant for a social services type program, and there was more money available from that particular source, however the city needed good programs to go after it. There followed a discussion of the city's allocation of revenue sharing funds. The City manager stated the operating budget for the coming year was pedicated on total use of Revenue Sharing money. President Corica remarked the Social Service Board was the only Board or Commission within the dty which had a paid employee whose only duty was to staff the Board. Mrs. Banda reported the staff person assigned to the Board was already carrying a full load of work; that in addition to the investigation of charitable solicitat'ions, th Board also sponsored Summer Campership Programs, the Holiday Clearing Bureau, and the Alameda Women's Town Hall. Also, she stated, secretarial services were provided for the Alameda Welfare Council. She stated the Board had established a reevaluation committee which felt strongly the Board was not fully carrying out the duties with which it was charged. She said she would like to have been involved With the Meals on Wheels program when it first started, and felt they could be very helpful in aiding senior citizen and youth programs, among others. She stated the Board felt there was a need for administrative staff assistance. Mrs. Howard reported the reevaluation committee had suggested the following proposals for expanded duties of the Board. (1) Form a volunteer bureau; (2) evaluate social services in the community; (3) coordinate provision of social services to prevent duplications of efforts; and (4) assist the city in procuring grants from public and private funding agencies. After lengthy discussion, Councilman Sherratt moved the Board further define its objectives and goals and prepare a work program; that the City Manager be directed to try to seek staff assistance for the Board in this regard. He suggested the Board contact the County of Alameda and ASAC for assistance in preparing their work program. The motion was seconded by Councilman Beckam and carried unanimously on voice vote. Councilman Beckam suggested the Board also contact Mr. Suren Dutia of ACTEB and request a copy of the "Universe of Needs", and also suggested a copy of Santa Barbara's goals might be of aid to the Board in their studies. He noted the city should soon be joining the Associated Community Action Program and social service type funds would be available through this program. In a discussion of the proposal to form a volunteer bureau, Councilman Sherratt asked that this subject be addressed in the work program outlined by the Board. At the conclusion of discussion, it was the consensus of the Council that a joint meeting of the Social Service Board and Community Relations Commission should be held prior to the submission of the work program. The Aasistant City Manager was requested to set up a time convenient to both bodies for such a meeting. RESOLUTIONS: 3. The following resolution was introduced by Councilman Beckmam,who moved its adoption: 166 "Resolution No. 8551 In Commendation of Captain Edwin D. McKellar- Jr. for His Contributions to the Community." The motion to adopt said resolution was seconded by Councilman Sherratt and carried on the following roll call vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent: None. 4. Councilman Sherratt moved the Council retire to executive session for a discussion Of personnel matters (meet and confer). The motion was seconded by Councilman Hurwitz and carried unanimously on voice vote. After a five-minute recess, the Council reconvened in the Conference Room for its deliberations. At the conclusion of discussion the Council returned to the Council Chambers. The meeting proceeded with the regular order of businesC. The following resolution was introduced by Councilman Hurwitz, who moved its adoption: "Resolution No. 8552 Designating the Number of and Providing for the Compensation of Certain Officers and Other Employees of the City of Alameda." The motion to adopt sOi(1 resolution was seconded by Councilman Diament and carried on the following roll call vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: MoOe, Absent: None. ADJOURNMENT: 5. There being no further business to come before this meeting, the Council adjourned at 10:20 o'clock p.m. Respectfully submitted, / `'� City Clerk