My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
7/28/1998
CBCC
>
Meetings
>
1990's
>
1998
>
7/28/1998
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/23/2015 12:10:58 PM
Creation date
6/17/2015 11:10:02 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
07/28/1998
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
70
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
F <br />seem to struggle with the lack of information available for making wise <br />choices. <br />So, in the end, programs which are listed for 1998-99 funding may or may not <br />address undermet or unmet needs. Even given the preliminary results of the <br />Hershberg/Salter raw survey data analysis, it is clear that the quality of their <br />ultimate findings will gauge only perceived needs. Asset Mapping, when <br />available, may provide some valuable information on what and where services <br />are accessible in Indian River County. This will depend largely on the <br />thoroughness of the study. <br />A more serious problem exists in the composition of the Children Services <br />Network committees. Section 103.24 (1) of the County Code clearly provides <br />that the changes in membership of any committee (s) are subject to the <br />approval of the Board of County Commissioners. <br />Yet, additional members have been added (e.g.,minutes 9/8/97, 4/23/98) to <br />both the Needs Assessment & Planning Committee and the Grant Review & <br />Program Committee without the approval of the Board of County <br />Commissioners. <br />The problems associated with such additions are obvious. One need only <br />"stack" a committee to get the desired results (votes). Such developments <br />serve to undo the democratic process. <br />I believe the Board of County Commissioners must address the problems with <br />the CSNetwork, and take some corrective measures. Not only has the <br />Guide not been followed, but votes taken in committee, including <br />recommendations for funding, could prove invalid because of unauthorized <br />additional members. <br />Attachments: <br />1. County Code Section 103.24. Committees. <br />2. CSNetwork Guide, Chapter III Needs Assessment, Priorities & Planning <br />3. Minutes: 9/9/97 Children's Services Needs Assessment Committee <br />4/23/98 Children's Services Grant Review & Program Committee <br />4. June 4, 1998 Memo <br />5. CSNetwork Membership List (from minutes) <br />Commissioner Adams asked what Commissioner Ginn was asking the Board to do on <br />this matter. <br />Commissioner Ginn felt it was a difficult problem and the members of the committee <br />had worked hard and were not to be faulted. She felt there was nothing that could be done <br />this year. She suggested the grant review committee revisit their votes. Although it would <br />be irregular, it was the only way to remedy the problem. <br />July 28, 1998 <br />57 <br />BooK 106 PAGE 4'.30 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.