Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2014-06-26 Commissioner Minutes THURSDAY, JUNE 26, 2014 The Franklin County Commissioners met Thursday, June 26, 2014, with the following members present: David S. Keller and Robert L. Thomas. Chairman Keller presided and after calling the meeting to order, a Moment of Silence, and the Pledge of Allegiance, proceeded with the business of the day. On a motion by Robert L. Thomas, seconded by David S. Keller; unanimously approved to adopt the agenda. Chairman Keller announced that Commissioner Ziobrowski will not be in attendance today. Sheri Morgan provided public comment and requested that a public commentary she emailed to the Board concerning the Human Services Block Grant public hearing on Tuesday be put into the public record for today's meeting. John Hart, County Administrator, responded that research will need to be done with the Grants Department on the grant requirements. Ms. Morgan's public commentary is attached to these minutes On a motion by Robert L. Thomas, seconded by David S. Keller; unanimously approved all bills presented and ordered paid. On a motion by Robert L. Thomas, seconded by David S. Keller; unanimously approved the minutes of the June 17, 2014 and June 19, 2014 meetings. The Board reviewed Archives matters. On a motion by Robert L. Thomas, seconded by David S. Keller; unanimously approved the Supplemental Appropriation to reflect the release of funding by the Records Improvement Committee, in the amount of $10,000.00, from the records improvement fund for archival supplies. The Board reviewed Emergency Services matters. On a motion by Robert L. Thomas, seconded by David S. Keller; unanimously approved the Supplemental Appropriation to provide a budget line for the purchase of a fan, UPS capacitor, and battery equipment replacement for the 911 Center's main UPS. The Pennsylvania Emergency Management Agency has allowed for the use of accrued interest from the wireless fund in the amount of$13,033.12. The Board reviewed Grants/Human Services Administration matters. On a motion by Robert L. Thomas, seconded by David S. Keller; unanimously approved the Assurance of Compliance to PA Department of Public Welfare to comply with State Fiscal year 2014-15 Block Grant requirements and for Board approval of the draft 2014- 15 Block Grant Plan. The Board reviewed Information Technology matters. On a motion by Robert L. Thomas, seconded by David S. Keller; unanimously approved for the Chairman of the Board to execute the quote from Environmental Systems Research Institute for the yearly maintenance of the County's GIS platforms for the following departments: Planning, Emergency Services, Information Technology, and Tax Services. Contract term is July 1, 2014 through June 30, 2015 at a cost of$19,662.24, $7,900.00 will be provided from 911 Communication Funding. Continued on page 2 The Board reviewed Jail matters. On a motion by Robert L. Thomas, seconded by David S. Keller; unanimously approved the Amendment to the Inmate Telephone Services agreement (dated March 21, 2009) between the County of Franklin and DSI/ITI/GTL to provide inmate telephone service at no cost to the County for the period of June 21, 2014 through June 20, 2019. The Board reviewed Juvenile Probation matters. On a motion by Robert L. Thomas, seconded by David S. Keller; unanimously approved the renewal agreement between the County of Franklin and the Tuscarora School District for the School-Based Probation Program. The school district agrees to provide $8,349.00 for the 2014-2015 school year. Franklin County will carry liability insurance for its employees and the program. The term of agreement is August 25, 2014 through June 5, 2015. The Board reviewed Planning matters. On a motion by Robert L. Thomas, seconded by David S. Keller; unanimously approved the grant agreement between the County of Franklin and the Pennsylvania Department of Community and Economic Development for the HOME Program for the second floor renovation of New Hope Shelter's second floor rehabilitation; creating seven handicapped accessible housing units for low to moderate income individuals/families, in the amount of$400.000.00 for the period of October 31, 2013 through October 30, 2018. The Board reviewed Register and Recorder matters. On a motion by Robert L. Thomas, seconded by David S. Keller; unanimously approved for the Chairman of the Board to execute the agreement between the County of Franklin and IMR Information at Work for the installation of their Tax Pass software module in Landex. This module will integrate with the CAMA Vision System and auto-populate information fields from the Tax software into Landex, at a cost of$1,500.00, paid out of the Recorder's Improvement Fund. In accordance with PA Act14, 67, 68 and 127 notifications, R. Lee Royer& Associates notified the County of a Pennsylvania Department of General NPDES Permit being applied by Washington Township for a boulevard, located in Washington Township. Phil Tarquino, Planning Director was present to provide recommendations for the Tourism & Quality of Life Enhancement Grants. Mr. Tarquino explained how the Board established the Tourism & Quality of Life Enhancement Grants program and established a steering committee that consisted of John Hart, Carrie Gray, and Teresa Beckner as County representatives and Patti Nitterhouse as the Visitors' Bureau representative. Applications were received through June 2nd. Mr. Tarquino explained the two funds available are Marcellus Legacy Fund and Franklin County Hotel Tax. The committee reviewed the applications and provided the following recommendations: For the Marcellus Legacy Fund: Antrim Township for extension of a shared use trail connecting Antrim Meadows to an existing trail for an amount of$20,000; and MACWELL to construct a streamside trail along Johnston Run in Mercersburg for an amount of $40,000. For the Franklin County Hotel Tax funds: Capital Theatre to repair the Capitol Theatre marque for an amount of$25,000; Historic Letterkenny Chapel and Franklin County Veterans and 9/11 Memorial Park to repair the panels covering the concrete base of the 9/11 memorial at Letterkenny for an amount of$15,000; Renfrew Museum to reconstruct an historic summer kitchen with the addition of a bake oven for an amount of $45,900; and Washington Township to purchase an historic piece of property preserving a viewshed and history of the area relating to the Battle of Monterey Pass for an amount of$100,000. Grant recipients were in attendance so the Board requested each attendee provide more information on their projects. Mr. Tarquino said after the Continued on page 3 recommendations are modified or approved by the Board, the Planning Office will send out agreements so the projects can proceed. The Board agreed to move forward with the recommendations. Commissioner Thomas said he is fine with what has been presented. There is a process in place that governs how these funds can be distributed and all the requirements are being adhered to by all the applicants. What he just heard is good things are happening in our county- we are making them just a little bit better with this money. On a motion by Robert L. Thomas, seconded by David S. Keller; unanimously approved to endorse the recommendations as presented and will have staff work with applicants on developing the agreements. Chairman Keller stated when the Board established this program, the goal was to preserve history, quality of life, safe and more accessible biking, walking and hiking trails and to enhance tourism in the County. These applications are shining examples of what they had in mind. He commends the committee on the recommendations as these are the types of projects the Board was hoping to see come forward and he is proud to vote in favor of these projects. Brad Graham, Antrim Township Administrator, thanked the County for making this process as easy as it was. It was simple and close to home and it's an example of local governments working together and making things happen. Mr. Hart responded that there are reporting requirements and a certain amount of time to spend the money so there are expectations that need to be met but the County wanted to keep the process simple and easy to apply. The meeting was adjourned at 10:28 a.m. with a motion by Robert L. Thomas; seconded by David S. Keller. FRANKLIN COUNTY COMMISSIONERS June 26, 2014 Dear Commissioners Keller, Thomas, &Ziobrowski, Thank you for your continued efforts to make Franklin County a better place for people living with vulnerabilities. It is difficult this particular year to comment on the proposed 2014-2015 budget and plan for the Human Services Block Grant Pilot Program(HSBG) due to the revelation of the commonwealth's failure to accurately predict the shortfall in revenues. I appreciate the frustration county staff must feel as it attempts to create the budget and plan amid the uncertainty in Harrisburg. According to our Human Services Director there was a delay in receiving guidance from the DPW with regard to completing the plan in addition to the budgetary uncertainty. I believe it was wise for our Human Services Director to place a hold on funding any new mini- grants and to save the rolled over HSBG funds until such time there is more certainty. I also thanked the Human Services Director for returning funds for Intellectual Disabilities (ID) to cover the budget deficit for ID. Without a good sense of how to comment on specific line items in the budget, I am focusing my public commentary on the process involved with developing the plan and budget. According to Act 80 of 2012, counties participating in the HSBG are legally obligated to engage the public and stakeholders in a standardized transparent process for developing the county HSBG plans. Participating counties must hold at least two public hearings to gain the public's input and feedback on the counties' draft plans before submitting them to the DPW. Although a public hearing for June 20, 2014, was advertised in a local newspaper, no information about the plan was found anywhere in the public domain. It was impossible for the public to provide input or feedback at this "public hearing." Therefore, it is hard to make the claim that the June 20h'meeting was in fact a public hearing. The planning process occurred in contravention to applicable law. When this was brought to the attention of the Human Services Director he directed that staff contact the IS Department to get the draft plan on the county website. The staff contacted the IS Department during the middle of the June 201h meeting. At the June 20h' meeting the public heard from one of the self-advocates. She stated that she had not been able to review the plan (that she was expected to vote on) due to not having a computer available to her. At that time it was noted by staff that the plan had been sent electronically to the committee members late on the Friday evening prior to that Tuesday's meeting. A committee member representing the MHIDEI Advisory Board stated he had received the plan and had reviewed it without any information about how the plan was put together. He asked how the staff was guided in its development of the plan. Two other advocates were absent. Of the 7 voting members, 1 was an actual user of services and she had not seen the document. Of the 6 other voting members, only the 1 man asked questions related to how the document was put together. None of the five remaining voting members questioned the plan. The Human Services Director answered the question about how the plan was developed, as indicated in the meeting minutes (made available after the July 24, 2014, public hearing). He stated he had staff use the previous year's parameters. The 2014-2015 HSBG Plan was developed from a "top-down" approach with no input from the voting members. When the plan was sent to voting members it came with no explanation. It is hard to comprehend how this plan could be described as having been developed in a transparent fashion or in collaboration with the voting members. According to the meeting minutes, one voting member and service provider had a question about the funding of her organization's mini- grant. The public, at the June 201h "public hearing," was subjected to the same slide show presentation given at the June 24th public hearing at the regularly scheduled County Commissioners' meeting. It is important to note that both County Commissioners present at that meeting stated the summary slide showing the proposed budget was too small and too fuzzy to read. Any document developed by a committee tasked with serving people with disabilities should make sure the document is accessible to people with disabilities. Another example of inaccessibility was made evident during the discussion on June 20th, brought about by the MHIDEI Advisory Board representative, surrounding the mission statement. He was concerned that the statement was focused on system outputs and not on how individuals using services were impacted. He offered a revised mission statement. A quick review of the original statement yielded a Flesch-Kincaid reading level of 17th grade. Again, there appeared to be no connection between the developers of the plan and the individuals they are serving. It is common practice to make information for individuals with disabilities available at a third grade reading level. Once the reading level was established, all committee members agreed to make an effort to have future documents compliant with Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act, as well as, the Americans with Disabilities Act. Suggestions for improving the process of developing future HSBG Plans should include: 1) Increasing the number or self-advocates. Doubling the number may assist in improving the likelihood there will be more self-advocates present at meetings (these are people who are living with extraordinary vulnerabilities and should have a higher than expected number of absences than other members). 2) Information, especially items to be voted on, must be received by all, voting members no less than 10 days prior to a meeting. The receipt of the information should be confirmed. It is unjust to not insure that a vulnerable person has the information needed to make decisions. Being singled out as the only person unable to access the information is humiliating and creates a situation where the vulnerable person is more likely to give socially accepted answers in an effort to appear more knowledgeable or part of the group. 3) Public hearings should not only be advertised, but should include a way for the public to provide input and feedback. Documents, such as plans and budgets, should be made available to the public prior to any hearing. 4) Minutes of all public meetings for the HSBG should be made available to the public. 5) Increase the diversity of the committee members. 6) Proofread the document before it is submitted to the DPW. In addition to process suggestions, I have a few questions and comments on plan in general. 1) Why are the proposed CASSP meetings and referrals so much lower in number than last year? Is this in anticipation of budget cuts? The same thing with the number of people projected to be served by housing organizations. 2) Why is the HSBG committee considering providing financial support for clinicians' credentialing? If a clinician wants to be able to be paid to serve people with co-occurring conditions, then they should pay for their own credentialing. That's how it is done in other fields. Same thing with CCISC credentialing. 3) Are people being trained on how to use the automark machine to assist them with voting? 4) What kind of outreach is being done for non-English speakers? 5) What are the specific types of communication methods being provided to people who are minimally- to non-verbal? How are these facilitated and augmented methods being paid for? Can they be paid for by Medicaid? 6) Data collection remains output oriented, please make every effort to be person oriented. 7) People with ID experience co-occurring substance abuse, however, these individuals are never mentioned when referring to D&A programs. 8) The Point in Time survey must follow the national standards to get a count that can be taken seriously. 9) A criticism of the grant itself(not the county staff) is that it concerns itself only with individuals "enrolled" in programs while we can see the numbers of people served are very low when compared to the expected prevalence of many disorders. Thank you for this opportunity to provide public commentary. Sheri Morgan, PhD, RN 431 Leitersburg Street Greencastle, PA 17225 717.593.9950 morgansnmd@aol.com