Economic Opportunity Board of Clark County (Nev.): memos, agendas, and meeting minutes

AGENDA
EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE
ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY BOARD OF CLARK COUNTY
January 6, J966 3:30 P.M.
3051 Paradise Road, #15 Las Vegas, Nevada
I.
MINUTES OF THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MEETING
2.
REPORT ON THE NOMINATING COMMITTEE MINUTES
3.
OPERATION MEDICARE ALERT
4.
CONDUCT AND ADMINISTRATION GRANT.FOR THE ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY BOARD
5.
PRIORITY.REPORT FOR OEO
6.
REPORT ON PROJECTS'. STATUS
See attached rough outline
EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MEETING ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY BOARD OF CLARK COUNTY
January 6, 1966 3:30 P.M.
3051 Paradise Road, No. 15 Las Vegas, Nevada
PRESENT: Harvey Dondero, Emory Lockette, Joseph Mankina, Charles Spann, Ernest Skagen
MINUTES: Minutes of the Executive Committee meeting of Novenibir 17 were reviewed by members. There were no corrections or additions.
REPORT OF THE NOMINATING COMMITTEE: The report of the meeting of the Nominating Committee, held December 2nd, was made by Mrs. Walbroek. All members of the committee were present at the meeting. Hr. Ted Lawson, who had been nataed Temporary Chairman* was unanimously elected permanent Chairman Of the Committee. Members discussed positions to be filled on the Economic Opportunity Board. Mrs. Nalbroek stated that NAACP had elected Isaac White to serve aa representative of NAACP on the Economic Opportunity Board. Father Shallow was requested to submit a recommendation of a person from the P-A-L Organisation. He suggested Jesse Williams. Th® Nominating Cownit tee recommended that both these people be made members of the Executive Committee. In conformity with the By-laws, Mr. Williams should be elected first to the Economic Opportunity Board and then the Board would be asked to vote as to his placement on the Executive Committee. The name of Jams Snowden was submitted for the Office of Secretary of the Executive Committee. This now brought Executive Committee Membership to ten, leaving the eleventh position still open. It was moved that the resignation of Robert Mullen be accepted and that his suggestion of Don Hawton to replace him be recognised. It was suggested that the Business Agent of the Culinary Union, Hr. Amos Knighton, be placed on the Technical Advisory Coaeaittee. It was recommended that space be reserved on the Economic Opportunity Board for six representatives elected by the Neighborhood Councils being formed in West Las Vegas in conformity to the conditions laid down by OEO. It was also recommended that Board Members who failed to attend three consecutive meetings, rather than being dropped from the Board, be placed on the Technical Advisory Committee. There was also discussion on a smaller number for a quorum to replace the majority quorum required. At this point the Executive Committee also discussed this subject. Following various opinions, it was decided to continue the over 50% representation until it was proven that this was not workable. Mrs. Walbroek stated that it wag the recommndation of the Nominating Committee that the Board meet at Rancho High School library for the January meeting; however, that the following meeting be held at Jefferson Center.
OPERATION MEDICARE ALERT: Mrs. Walbroek told members that the most important purpose of this meting was to obtain Executive Committee approval to submit a project for funding of Operation Medicare Alert. She reviewed the project which had a deadline for submission of January 22.
Notice of approval or disapproval would be received by February 1 * It is a 3-wnth project (2 month's of intensive information dissemination and one month of evaluation ©f its effectiveness.) She said she had attended a meeting in San Francisco, Tuesday, January 4, held by 0E0 to explain the program to local ccmsnunity action agencies ; and had as a consequence held a meeting this morning at the EOB office to determine if Nevada Catholic Coraminity Welfare and Operation Independence desired to participate as the two delegate agencies for the project, with Operation Independence covering West Las Veges and Catholic Welfare the remainder of Las Vegas and North Las Vegas. The project model has been set forth by 0E0 — it is primarily one of community organization in getting information out to the elderly (over 65) regarding the new Social Security provision cm medicare in advance of the March 31 deadline for registration required by legislation. 0E0 recoraraends that 75X of the staff be over 65 with a lower income. It calls for using every device to reach the over-65 t© sign up by March 31 for medicare benefits. Those who did not sign up by March 31 would net be able to do so for another 2 years. She stated that the money allocated for this project would not count against Title II-A guidelines for Clark County. The 10% local in-kind contribution could involve space costs to hold group meetings and also volunteer time. Committee discussed several points ox the project following whica it was moved by Mr. Ifenkins, seconded by Mr. Spann that Operation Medicare Alert project application be made to OEO. This was passed unanimously by the Executive Coaraittee. Mrs. Walbroek stated that this project would be submitted as soon as possible and that the Economic Opportunity Board would be asked to ratify the Executive Committee’s action at the meeting being held January 12. She asked that the Executive Committee take note that the project must be approved by the local Social Security Administration Director as this project vas only to disseminate the information sad get the people out to register; however, the actual procedure of signing up wulaj be handled by the Social Security Office.
CONDUCT AND AWMISTMTIOR OF THE ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY JOARD: Mrs. Welbteek provided members with copies of the proposed budget to be submitted for the next six months grant of the Economic Opportunity Board. She stated that it was almost the same budget which was submitted the previous period which had been cut by OEO. The Board had approved the budget for submission as the same budget previously submitted with any minor changes to be approved by the Executive Cowlttee. There was Board discussion end each budget category was reviewed individually. Mr. Lockette questioned how the salary figures had been originally arrived at; other members explained that it was by job descriptions and by comserison with other local salaries and salaries of other staff of community action agencies. There was discussion oa consultants. Ths Committee asked to have a short resume of wrk dene by consultants at the conclusion of their assignments or at the conclusion of the grant period. Mrs. W ilbroek stated that also built into the consultant budget was money to provide for a person or persons to develop informational, including printed material, directed to project participants as well as to the public for th® Economic Opportunity Board. The Executive Ccwiittee felt this was a necessary adjustment to th® program. Auditing costa ware discussed;
•2-
Mr. Lockette felt it would be advantageous to obtain bids on a competitive basis. Srs. Walbroek ssked permission for the staff out-of state trawl to be submitted at the same figure as last six months, $760. The Chairman then called for a vote on the approval of the budget at a total of $36,663. This was unaniwusly approved by the Executive Committee.
PRIORITY REPORT TO BE SUBMITTED TO 0E0: Mrs. Ifelbrosk stated that ell Board Members had received from the Regional Office of Economic Opportunity a copy o£ a priority report fora. After studying this, members asked Mrs. Walbroek to work on thia and bring it back to the Committee for approval. Mrs. Walbroek stated that she would like to continue to have the help from Board Member, Or. Leslie Shuck, to work on this with her. This was agreed.
EVALUATION OF PAL PROJECT: Mrs. Walbroek provided the members with copies of letters from University faculty members evaluating the P-A-L project. These evaluations had been made at her request after consultation with the Board Chairman. She asked the Committee’s advice as to whether they should be made available to the entire Board. She sts ted that these faculty members had ms de the evaluations based on copies provided them of the P-A-L project and the Operation Independence Community Service Center project. There was no cost involved. Committee members discussed the evaluations. Mr. Skagen motioned, and it was seconded by Mr. Lockette that these letters of evaluation be distributed to the entire Board.
During discussion of the evaluation letters, Mr. Skagen stated he was in concurrence with Dr. Katz on the need for proper training of persons. Mr. Hankins stated that if the BOB did not heed such criticism or warnings as Indicated in Dr. Katz’s evaluation, there could be repercussions if a project was funded and there were serious consequences. Mr. Dondero briefly reported that at the Operation Independence meeting to review the P-A-L project, that Board felt they could not vote on approving or disapproving the project as there were unanswered questions regarding it. Another Operation Independence Board meeting is being called with Father Shallow to be present along with others fro© P-A-L to discuss the project.
ADJOURNMENT: There being no futher matters of discussion, the meeting was adjourned.
Respectfully submitted,
Elaine Walbroek
AGENDA
ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY BOARD OF CLARK COUNTY
January 12, 1966 7:30 P.M.
Rancho High School Library
Las Vegas, Nevada
MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF NOVEMBER 17, 1965
2.
FINANCIAL REPORT (Attachment No. I)
3.
REPORT OF ONGOING PROGRAMS (Attachments No. 2 and 3)
Harvey Dondero
Lee Walker
Neighborhood Youth Corps Out of School X Doyle Longhurst
Neighborhood Youth Corps In School Leslie Shuck
Physical and Mental Health Component for NYC Doyle Longhurst
Title V, Work Experience, Program Eva Houston
Adult Basic Education Program X H. P. Fitzgerald
Elementary and Secondary Education Act ProgrammingiX Leslie Shuck
Conduct and Administration Grant Economic Elaine Walbroek.
Opportunity Board __ /David Hoggar*d
(Attachment No. 4) Williams
VISTA Project ^X . " * Lubertha Johnson
Day Care Services Center^X Lubertha Johnson
4, PROGRAMS PRESENTLY BEING REVIEWED BY THE OFFICE OF ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY
Small Business Development CenterX
Lunch Program for West Las Vegas
Migrant Community Service Center < X**-* * Operation Independence Community Service Center Day Care Services Center Continuation
Gene McCoy
Les Iie Shuck
— Ferren Bunker
Lubertha Johnson
Lubertha Johnson
5. PROJECTS UNDER STUDY FOR SUBMISSION
Tutorial Assistance Program in Henderson
Migrant Health Program
Indian Community Service Program
Legal Assistance Program
West Las Vegas Community Health Services
Visiting Homemaker Service for Clark County
Morri s Elaine Elaine Morri s Elaine Elaine
Peltz Walbroek Walbroek
Peltz
Walbroek WaIbroek
6, NOMINATING COMMITTEE REPORT (Attachment No. 5)
Ted Lawson
Nomi nations will on the Executive Secretary of the
be made for 2 members to serve Committee and for the Office of Board of Directors.
AGENDA
(Continued - 2)
7.
OPERATION INDEPENDENCE REPORT ON P-A-L TRAINING CENTER PROJECT (Attachment No. 6)
The OEO Board Study Committee on the P-A-L training project referred the project to the Operation Independence Planning Board for study as indicated by the recommendation mailed to Board Members on December 29, 1965.
8.
PLANNING AND PRIORITY REPORT FOR COMMUNITY ACTION AGENCIES Elaine Walbroek
Les Iie Shuck Report forms were circularized to the Board directly from the Office of Economic Opportunity I I dUll'llUll I NU. IT*
9.
BOARD PROGRAM ORIENTATION MEETING
For purposes of better understanding the Economic Opportunity Act, the programs available under it, existing and projected Clark County programs, a Board program orientation meeting is in the planning
stage. OEO consultants can be available. Discussion of date and time of meeting/meetings are requested from the Board Membership.
NEW PROGRAMS FOR BOARD APPROVAL
Operation Medicare Alert (Attachment No. 8)
Elaine Walbroek
David Hoggard
Clark County Cooperative Purchasing Clubs (Attachment No. 9) Charles Shallow
submitted by Nevada Catholic Community Welfare; program
was mailed to Board Members January 4, 1966.
I I. DATE AND PLACE OF NEXT MEETING
Note: The attachments indicated in the agenda items will be distributed at the meeting.
MINUTES OF THE BOARD MEETING ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY BOARD OF CLARK COUNTY
January 12, 1966 7:30 P.M.
Rancho High School Library Las Vegas, Nevada
PRESENT: Board Members: Robert E. Bellis (representing Mayor of Boulder City for Emory Lockette), Dr. Charles West, Douglass Pushard, Leslie Shuck, Father Charles Shallow, Ferren Bunker, Mi I ton Weiss, LyaI Burkholder, J.R. McPherson, Stella Fleming, Genevieve Arensdorf, Earl Brunner, Isaac White, Don Hampton, H.P. Fitzgerald, Pascale Urrabazo, Vernon Bunker, Newton Tigner, Harvey Dondero (Chairman)
Technical Advisory Committee Members: Albert Landsman, Gene McCoy, Keith Macdonald, Frank R. Coleman.
State Department of Economic Opportunity: Bruce Parks, Leola Armstrong.
Staff: Elaine WaIbroek, Morris Peltz, David Hoggard, Sylvia Leon Doyle Longhurst
■ Guests: Rae Lea Jones, Ruth Berg, Gemma Lorenzi, Jeannette Cook, Bill Chaviers, Jan Chaviers, Lubertha Johnson, Roger Williams, Emma Fenton, Flora Dungan, Bill Carlos, Bryn Armstrong, Mona Moore Maria Urrabazo, David Lamb, Nancy Williams, Jesse Williams, Sue Ann PoFter, Naomi Marque, George Barton, Robert Fahey, Barbara Fields, Earle White, Jr., Rev. Horace Gholston, Rev. Marion Bennett.
The Chairman opened the meeting, stating that as there was not a quorum yet present, the meeting would begin with project reports.
REPORTS ON ONGOING PROJECTS: Doyle Longhurst, Project Director of the Out-of-SchooI Neighborhood Youth Corps Program, presented the report. (Report distributed) He stated that to-date NYC has processed 862 youth through the program, with 109 youth currently on the payroll. Over 300 summer enrollees have returned to school, many as a direct result of the NYC program. Forty-two are enrolled in training arrangements, eg. job corps, MDTA classes. Two hundred forty-seven counseling sessions have been given; 104 aptitude and performance tests since November 5.
Mr. Longhurst further stated that though this is presently a sixmonth project, it has a very good chance of being extended beyond that date. Sponsors meetings are held each month for progress reports and planning. An initial evaluation made by the NYC Regional Consultant gave the program a favorable evaluation.
Physical and Mental Health Component of NYC
Mr. Longhurst further reported that NYC employed Dr. Harry Hess, for psychological evaluations of youth as needed, and Dr. Everett Freer for the physical examinations of NYC enrollees.
NYC In-School Project Report: Dr. Shuck reported that the program has work stations for 200 youngsters who will work 8| hours per week. Of this number, 195 are currently on-the-job, all of whom meet the required income level. The NYC In-School Project is scheduled to end June 3; however, it will be extended, if funds are available.
Adult Basic Education Report: (report distributed to members) Mr. Fitzgerald reported that under the EOA, Title I I-A, there were now 7 classes at Jo Mackey School with 125 students; 105 students participated in a class of English for the foreign-born; 2 classes opened in the Indian Village with approximately 25 students. Mr. Fitzgerald stated that the Jo Mackey School also was participating in the Title V program advertised by the Stat^TTeTfare Division, giving on-the-job experience to 15 girls as teacher aides, receptionists, and clerk typists. Mr. Fitzgerald stated he felt that 12 of the girls were now ready for the labor market, and any type of help offered would be welcomed. He presented Barbara Fields, one of the trainees who made the following report:
"On behalf of the girls from Title V, who are on the job training, who are high school graduates or have gone through the MDTA training program, if given a chance we have a lot to offer as teacher aides and clerk-typists, not only to the School District but to any employer who would be willing to accept us. We have had the opportunity to work in the office, in the classrooms, to use different kinds of machines. We greet visitors, type, file, fill in forms. We go into the classroom and do group teaching, assisting the teacher in whatever the teacher needs to have done. We assist the children at playtime and work in all phases of school work. We hope that employers will consider us."
Mr. Isaac White commented that the girls are doing a wonderful job in serving in the capacity of aides.
Elementary and Secondary Education Act: Dr. Shuck reported that the Act of 1965 authorizes money to be spent by School District in areas of high concentration of low-income families. There is $413,000 of ESEA money to be spent during this school year. There are five areas of concentration: 1) Remedial reading and language development project; 2) Saturation project (to give a school an over-abundant supply of filmed media to enrich background of children; 3) Moapa migrant worker project; 4) Reinforced studies project—one junior high school—this is a pilot project; 5) Junior high school reading laboratories.
-2-
Mr. Brunner invited Board Members to participate in the planning stages of the Project Saturate at Highland School Library on January 18 beginning at 9:00 A.M.
Conduct and Administration Grant of the Economic Opportunity Board: (Report distributed to Board Members) Mrs. Walbroek reported, stating that this is the grant that funds the operation of the Board itself and provides the mechanism through which all other CAP programs are processed. She reviewed projects and pointed out that in the first nine months of operation, over $700,000 has been brought into Clark County; 1800 individuals had been provided with jobs of which less than 1% were filled from other than the low-income or disadvantaged groups. Direct services have been given to 1100 other people. Though only a total of $369,000 was allocated for I965-66 under Title 11 —B in Clark County, this Board has taken advantage of every opportunity for funding under each Title I I —B guidelines, there is $16,000 remaining for projects to be considered by the Board.
Neighborhood Councils: (Report distributed to members) Mr. Hoggard reported on the establishment of the Neighborhood Councils.
He said he has met with a great deal of cooperation and acceptance in laying groundwork in pre-organizationaI work for the Neighborhood Councils. He advised that the Board would be kept informed on progress of the Councils, which were being organized by the EOB in cooperation with Operation Independency, which would be responsible for funding the Neighborhood Council paid workers through Operation Independence's Community Services Center project.
Youth CounciIs: Roger Williams, one of the Neighborhood Youth Corps Coordinators^, reported that early in December he had been asked to develop a Youth Council by the EOB office where youth could come together to talk about problems, pinpoint them, and make suggestions for solutions, and possibly take action upon them. The first meeting was attended by 40 youth primarily from the target area. It was felt the results were very good, and the Mayor has been asked to be kept informed regarding activities. Second and third meetings have been held, and the group is being officially organized on a city-wide basis. The Youth Council will continue to meet and keep the Board informed. Mr. Keith Macdonald stated this group could-certsih l.y.,Sofas a good sounding board for the recreation building and stated he would be interested in suggestions from the youth.
VISTA Project: Lubertha Johnson reported that VISTAs are continuing to work within the program of Operation Independence. She discussed the different projects and activities in which they had participated. She introduced VISTA worker Emma Fenton who would be terminating her assignment in Las Vegas within the coming week.
-3-
QUORUM PRESENT: With a count of 18 Board Members now present, a quorum was declared by the Chairman.
MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF NOVEMBER 17, 1965: The Chairman called for additions or corrections to the minutes as mailed to Board Members. Mr. Earl Brunner stated that his name had been left off of those in attendance. The secretary was asked to make this correction. Father Shallow moved that the minutes be approved as corrected; seconded by Mr. Bunker. The motion passed.
FINANCIAL REPORT: (report distributed to members) The Chairman called for discussion or questions on the financial report as presented. Father Shallow moved for suspension of Items 2, 4, and 5 on the basis that they had not been sent to Board Members 3 days in advance. It was pointed out that items 4 and 5 were program review and did not require Board action. Father Shallow withdrew the motion. Action on the financial report was withheld until the next meeting.
Day Care Services Center: Mrs. Johnson reported that the third day care center had recently been opened with 27 children enrolled in it. She mentioned the response from the community in helping to set up the program and she felt this demonstrates the increasing awareness and support of the Community. In the other two centers, there are 61 children enrolled in No. 1 and 30 children enrolled in Center No. 2. She reported further on the NYC enrollees who not only worked at the Centers, but were being trained for areas of employment in child care, as cooks, waiters, etc.
PROGRAMS PRESENTLY BEING REVIEWED BY THE OFFICE OF ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY:
Small Business Development Center: Mr. Gene McCoy, Chairman of the SBDC Board, gave a report of the last meeting of the Board held December 17. Location of the Center had been discussed, and Mr. Weiss, Chairman of the location committee, stated that the Washington School in North Las Vegas had been obtained; however, since then the Jefferson School has been obtained for Operation Independence Community Center programs, and space there could be set aside for the SBDC. Mr. McCoy said the SCORE Committee had been discussed and it was decided by members to change the name of the Committee to Retired Volunteer Businessmen. This committee would not be active, however, until the program becomes definite.
Mr. McCoy read to the Board the most recent correspondence on the SBDC proposal from Mr. Ross Davis, Executive Administrator of the Small Business Administration in Washington, D.C. stating that the proposal cannot be acted upon at this time due to the shortage of SBA loan money. Mr. Bruce Parks reported further that he had telephoned the Washington Office of SBA and had also been told that there were presently no monies available. Mr. Albert Landsman stated he felt pressures should be exerted to fund the Center as SBDC loans are continuously being made to already existing Centers. Mr. McCoy continued his report, stating that he had been in contact with Mr. Alvin Moyers, Regional Director of SBA, in regard to his status as a member of the Clark County SBDC Board. Mr. Meyers had clarified that he would serve
as an ex-officio member. There was discussion of clarification of whether the SBDC Board was an autonomous Board or only a committee of the large Economic Opportunity Board.
Dr. West moved that the Chair direct the Executive Director to prepare a Resolution to clarify the status of the SBDC Board. Reverend Tigner seconded, and the motion carried. Mrs. Walbroek stated that she would summarize the activities of the minutes and prepare a reso- lustion.
NOMINATING COMMITTEE REPORT: The report of this committee was distributed to the members (attached). Father Shallow moved for acceptance of the report as presented; seconded by Dr. West. Motion carried.
OPERATION INDEPENDENCE REPORT ON P.A.L. TRAINING CENTER PROJECT: The Chairman stated this proposal had been referred to Operation Independence for study and recommendation. He called for the report on the P.A.L. project from the Operation Independence Chairman, Earle White. Mr. White reported that pursuant to the request of the Economic Opportunity Board, Operation Independence reviewed the project submitted by the P.A.L. organization. At a meeting of the Operation Independence Board January 5, the project was considered and a motion carried that an invitation be extended to Father Shallow and any other representatives of Nevada Catholic Community Welfare to meet with this Operation Independence Board to discuss questions on the project. On January II, a special meeting was held of the Operation Independence Board and at that time the presentation was made by Catholic Welfare and PAL. A motion was made, seconded, and carried that Operation Independence recommend to the Economic Opportunity Board that the PAL training center project application be rejected for funding.
Dr. Shuck asked for reasons of the recommendation. Mr. White stated that any information would be out of scope of the motion. The question had been debated with various reasons expressed; however, there were no reasons incorporated into the resolution. Mr. White stated that he could try to report some of the discussion, but reminded the group that this was not part of the recommendation. He stated that at the first meeting of the Operation Board, certain questions were raised about the language used in the project which characterized the attitude and philosophy of the people in this area of Las Vegas. A second question involved the cooperative buying project and the potentiality of this inflicting business injury on the merchants of the community. The third question raised was concerned with the objectives. There was also questions raised pertaining to the training of persons in the area dealing with mental health problems. At the January II meeting some of the reasons expressed were concern over the language of the project characterizing the people; several people felt that in the area of training, without persons who were professionally qualified, more harm might be worked than good. There was also discussion in favor of the project; however, the majority favored the motion as made.
-5-
The question was raised if the Operation Independence motion was for the project as written. Mr. White stated "yes". Father Shallow moved that the Board record the Operation Independence report but that no further action be taken on it. Mr. Milton Weiss was recognized by the Chair and expressed a personal protest as to how this had been handled. He stated that there has been a very basic difference between Operation Independence and PAL; thus the Chairman had appointed a committee to study the PAL project. This committee drew up a resolution, which should have gone before this Board for action before it went to Operation Independence. He said he felt that the report from Operation Independence should be tabled until this Board acted on the Resolution (copy attached). Mr. Weiss felt that this Board should have made known its wishes to Operation Independence before asking for their recommendation. There was Board discussion on this with opinions expressed that this Board could not recommend to Operation Independence what action they should take.
Mr. Earl Brunner opened discussion on letters evaluating the PAL project which had been authored, by three Nevada Southern University faculty members. He stated he did not see why letters had been directed to NSU by the Executive Director when there had been a committee established to evaluate the PAL project. The Chairman stated that every effort was being made to get as much evaluation of programs as possible. Mr. Weiss said that if the Board felt more information was needed to resolve the issue, it should have asked the Special Committee to obtain the information. Mrs. Walbroek told the Board that one of the primary responsibilities of the Executive Director is to get objective opinions and evaluations of programs especially so for a project up against as much criticism as this project has been. She said she had taken the letters to the Executive Committee meeting at which time the Committee members recommended their mailing to the Board. There have been many people involved, both pro and con, she stated, and these faculty members were asked to objectively evaluate the project on its own merits.
Mr. Earle White pointed out that these letters were a factor in the Operation Independence meeting as well as being a factor in another resolution made by another organization. At this point, Mr. Weiss introduced a motion to withhold acceptance of the report of Operation Independence and to bring to this Board the resolution prepared by the Special Committee appointed by the Economic Opportunity Board and vote on acceptance or rejection of his committee’s resolution. This motion was seconded by Mr. Brunner. Motion carried. The Chairman read the resolution prepared by the Special Committee to study the PAL project, a copy of which had been mailed to Board Members (attached). The question was raised by Dr. West as to why it had been sent to Operation Independence. Mrs. Walbroek explained
-6-
that at the Board Meeting of November 17, Father Shallow had introduced into discussion that this project be given to Operation Independence for recommendation but that "it not be sat on" — that action be taken so that it could go to the Economic Opportunity Board. Thus, it had been sent to Operation Independence first for time-saving purposes and to comply with Father Shallow’s request that a long-period of time not elapse. The Resolution had been circularized to the Board. Father Shallow read from the minutes of November 17 that the motion he made stated that "the project be recommended' for funding" and then go to Operation Independence, and that when the Chairman called for a vote on the motion which was on the floor, it was passed. There was then discussion on the Resolution drawn up by the Special Committee. Board Members discussed that one group could not recommend to the Operation Independence Board "that affirmative action be taken’’ as had been done by this resolution. Father Shallow made a motion that the Board accept the Resolutions presented by the Special Committee. Mr. Burkholder seconded. No action was taken at this time. There was continued discussion after which the Chairman called for a vote on the motion to accept the resolution. Motion failed. There was further discussion on projects involving West Las Vegas being submitted to Operation Independence for recommendation with Mr. Bruce Parks pointing out that this Special Condition had been imposed by the Office of Economic Opportunity.
Mr. Fahey stated that Catholic-Welfare 10 years.ago had started a’ day care center, and it has a thrift shop in West Las Vegas — then newly formed Operation Independence came along and duplicated those services. Now, he stated, they are in a position to say nobody can have a project unless they say so.
Mr. Ferren Bunker made a motion that the Board submit the PAL project for funding with the recommendation of Operation Independence attached. Dr. West seconded. The Chair called for discussion on the motion. Mr. Brunner suggested that there were several corrections to be made if the EOB was to submit the project. Mr. Fahey stated, as co author, that before submitting it to 0E0, the project should be rewritten so that "it would be workable." Dr. Shuck pointed out that it was likely that the letters of the faculty could be used to advantage in clarifying the project, and also that if Operation Independence wished to make its objections known, possibly more criticisms could be eliminated.
Mrs. Johnson asked the Board if it had observed the unreasoned attitudes, animosities, and attacks against Operation Independence on the part of the PAL sponsors. She asked would the Board please consider, in recommending this project, taking some steps to insure that Operation Independence be given the respect, consideration, and the kind of treatment that has been accorded to the people who have represented themselves as Catholic Welfare. She said that
there is this expressed -feeling by persons in Catholic Welfare or PAL which does not contribute to good race relations. In addition, letters have been sent to Washington asking that Operation Independence not be funded and constant discourteous remarks have been made. She stated that Operation Independence is not a segregated organization and she hoped that the Economic Opportunity Board's recommendation does not reflect the fact that it condones the kind of treatment that Operation Independence has received from PAL.
Mr. Brunner entered discussion on the financial guidelines for Clark County — that according to project committments there is $16,000 remaining under Title I I-A monies. He questioned where would the funds come from to finance the PAL project. Mr. Fahey stated there are demonstration and research monies under Section 207 which do not count against the financial guidelines. Father Shallow stated that also, nobody knows for sure what Operation Independence will get in its approved budget.
Dr. Shuck said, in response to Mrs. Johnson's comments, that the Board can in no way condone rude actions, but it is sometimes difficult to separate the project from the people behind it. He suggested that in the event people on the Board felt that problems would continue in the future, the Board's action could be that the idea is fine but there should be reasonable assurance that conflict will not be created in the community.
Mr. Ferren Bunker asked if the Board accepts the motion of the last meeting as that the project was approved at that meeting or is the Board now discussing a project not voted upon. He said it was apparent at the November 17 meeting that the motion which the Board felt it was acting upon was "to refer the project to Operation Independence," only.
Reverend Bennett was recognized by the Chairman. He spoke as President of NAACP, stating that Las Vegas Branch went on record as opposing PAL and that the West Coast Regional Division will also be opposed. He felt the program would further create animosity. The Las Vegas NAACP Branch, he stated, is in the process of writing its criticism to San Francisco. Father Shallow asked if NAACP had taken a position on other projects. Reverend Bennett said that they had; that the organization had endorsed Operation Independence previously. The Chairman stated the motion on the floor now was to submit the application for the PAL training center project and attach to it the review report of Operation Independence. The question was raised as to whether changes would be made in the project. The Chairman said that this had not beem-pact of the motion made. DrWest:stated that the project which.would be submitted to OEO should be the identical one sent to Operation Independence for review — not a different one, and that no changes could be made on it without going back for re-review by Operation Independence.
Mr. Burkholder stated that he did not wish to vote for a project not
- 8-
knowing what it was going to be. Mr. Ferren Bunker stated that he could amend his motion to include that if it is submitted it be made as acceptable by revision and improvement as it can be made. Following further discussion that the project had to be submitted unchanged, Mr. Bunker withdrew this motion. The Chairman called for a vote on the motion as originally made by Mr. Bunker. Motion carried.
Mr. Brunner moved that letters of evaluation received from NSU faculty be stricken from the file and not included in the report as sent to 0E0. Father Shallow seconded the motion. Following discussion, the motion was voted upon. Motion was lost.
PLANNING AND PRIORITY REPORT FOR COMMUNITY ACTION AGENCIES: The Chairman stated that a report on this would be mailed by Mrs. Walbroek working with Dr. Shuck.
BOARD ORIENTATION PROGRAM: Mrs. Walbroek asked for Board Member's thinking on Board orientation meetings. She stated this was an 0E0 recommendation. She asked that interest in the meetings, and suggestions for dates, times be expressed by members. Board members indicated that they would be interested. Following discussion, it was decided that two identical meetings should be held — in February and in March — and one afternoon meeting and one evening meetingj to secure maximum Board participation.
NEW PROGRAMS FOR BOARD APPROVAL:
Operation Medicare Alert: Mr. Morris Peltz reviewed this project, stating this was a crash program being sponsored by 0E0 with the Social Security Administration as an informational campaign to insure that persons eligible for the voluntary portion of Medicare would register by March 31. In further review, he said that the program must be in the 0E0 office by January 22, for a February 1 announcement of funding. He stated that this program has been reviewed by the Executive Committee who approved its submission for funding to 0E0. He explained further that the number of personnel allowed is dictated by population. The only major variation from the 0E0 guidelines for the project was the development of a Coordinating Council. A meeting had been held at the EOB office at which Nevada Catholic Welfare Bureau and Operation Independence had been asked to participate as delegate agencies. Since this discussion and a subsequent planning meeting, Catholic Welfare has stated they did not find it feasible to participate; however, the office was immediately in contact with a number of other agencies and the project can still be feasibly undertaken at this time. It is expected that the Project Director would work out of the Economic Opportunity Board office coordinating efforts of the groups who would carry out this project. Mr. Fahey read a letter from Catholic Welfare addressed to the Economic Opportunity Board stating that organization's reasons for withdrawing participation. The Chairman
-9-
stated that the Executive Committee had acted in the affirmative on this project; and there not being a quorum of the Board now remaining at the meeting, that action would stand, and the program submitted as per recommendation of the Executive Committee. Mr. Joe Neal asked if this project was based upon race. Mr. Peltz further explained project staffing and that one-fifth of the staff would be placed in West Las Vegas according to population ratio. It was expected to caI I in all agencies that had shown interest, and he stated that this was not a project for Negroes only if that was the question posed by Mr. Neal.
Clark County Cooperative Purchasing Club: The Chairman stated this was a project proposed by Nevada Catholic Community Welfare of which the Board had been mailed copies for reviewing. Mr. Fahey reported on the proposed project. He stated that it would be reworked like all other projects before going to 0E0. He said that he had been lead to believe by Mr. Van Horn that funds might be available under the research and demonstration section 207 of Title II . There was lengthy Board discussion on this project. Mr. Brunner stated that he was opposed to cooperatives from several standpoints and questioned how Nevada Catholic Welfare could accept this, "being a United Fund agency which is supported largely by the businessmen of the community." He also questioned the previous PAL project which states that it is going to organize consumer cooperatives also. "Is that a conflict," he asked?
Mr. Fahey explained that the original project did intend to train leaders or people that can organize. In the Club, those people in turn go out and do the actual organizing. In other words, it is the second step, he stated. He stated that if the Board would like to place a sanction that purchasing not be out of state, it would be abided by.
Mr. Brunner further stated that he did not like to see federal funds used to organize cooperatives which go against private business.
Mr. Fahey debated that in saving money in food, it gives the low-income group more money to do other things and to make money go farther. Mr. Carlos pointed out that a reflection of the need for such a program was shown by over 200 people attending a meeting called to find out how much interest there was. Board discussion continued with Dr. West stating that this was working against the free enterprise system and that it would make people satisfied with living on a certain amount of money rather than stimulating people to lift themselves up. Mr. Joe Neal stated that "if people themselves feel they should organize in this buying, they should have a right to do what they want and have a chance to combine themselves together to seek an end within their own means". He stated that consumer cooperatives are being funded in the South and thriving well and he did not feel it was a question of socialism. Dr. West commented that it was socialism when the government indulged in it. The Chairman stated that there not being a quorum remaining at the meeting, Board action on this project would have to be tabled until the next meeting.
DATE OF NEXT MEETING: It was established that the next meeting would be held the third Tuesday in February at Rancho High School Library.
RespectfuI Iy subm i tted,
ELAINE WALBROEK
REPORT OF THE NOMINATING COMMITTEE ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY BOARD OF CLARK COUNTY
Chairman, Ted Lawson Secretary, James Snowden Les I ie Shuck
Charles Sha I low
Charles Spann
SteI I a Flemi ng James Anderson
The following member is nominated to serve on the Economic Opportunity Board: JESSE WILLIAMS
P-A-L ORGANIZATION
Nominated for Executive Committee members:
ISAAC WHITE
NAACP REPRESENTATIVE
JESSE WILLIAMS
P-A-L ORGANIZATION
Nominated for the position of Secretary of the Executive Committee: JAMES SNOWDEN
Nominated for replacement on the Economic Opportunity Board:
MR. DONALD HAMPTON to replace MR. ROBERT MULLEN as a representative of the Clark County Probation Department (recommended by Mr. Robert Mu I Ien)
MR. DOUGLASS PUSHARD to replace DR. OTTO RAVENHOLT as a representative of the Clark County Health Department (recommended by Dr. Otto Ravenholt)
1/12/66
SMATJ, BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT CENTER
An Approved Project of the
ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY BOARD OF CLARK COUNTY
The Small Business Advisory Council for the Small Business Development Center of Clark County at its regular monthly meeting held on December 7, 1965, did adopt and unanimously pass the following Resolution.
RE-SOLVED that a Small Business Development Center in order to carry out and achieve the objectives of the President's ANTIPOVERTY PROGRAM must necessarily be located in West Las Vegas to more efficiently and conveniently serve the impoverished and jobless people of West Las Vegas, and
THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Small Business Advisory Council do hereby petition and request of the Honorable Mayor and Commissioners of the City of Las Vegas, Nevada, to grant the unrestricted use of the Jefferson Recreation Center as a West Las Vegas Neighborhood Services Center to house the activities of a Small Business Development Center and Operation Independence and its duly constituted related projects.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 7th day of December, 1965.
SMALL BUSINESS ADVISORY COUNCIL
Mr. Gene McCoy, Chairman
Mr. Milton Weiss, Chairman, Location Committee
January 18, 1966
Mr. Robert Van Horn
Community Action Program
Office of Economic Opportunity
100 McAllister Street
San Francisco, California
Dear Sob:
At our Board Meeting of January 12, the Directors of the Economic Opportunity Board of Clark County approved the concept of having a Board Orientation Meeting.
We hope you will help ws In developing the orientation program and that you will serve as a resource person at the two and one-half to three hour session. We hope to hold the same meeting twice — once in the afternoon, followed by the identical program held the same evening. This would insure the maximum attendance of the Board.
Which of the following suggested dates would be most satisfactory to you: a day during the week of February 28j or a day during ths week of March 7? Our next Board Meeting is set for February 15. Would there be an advantage In holding the meeting on a date prior to the Board Meeting?
I would surely appreciate any thoughts or suggestions you might have In developing the orientation program and your agreement to serve as a resource person on the program.
With kindest personal regards, I remain
Sincerely yours,
ELAINE WALBROEK
Executive Director
EWssl
ccs Mr. Harvey Bonder© Mr. Bruce Parks Mrs. Leola Armstrong
TO BE ANNOUNCED BY CHAIRMAN RE ACTION OF THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE AT THEIR MEETING HELD FEBRUARY 14, 1966:
Neighborhood Councils
Motion made by Mr. Mankins; seconded by Mr. Spann and carried:
"that the establishment of the Neighborhood Councils be continued with the staff of the Economic Opportunity Board doing the formation."
Financial Report
The Committee felt that the Chairman should announce- to the Board that policy will be that If there are questions on small budgetary items with explanations requested, that person raising the question should be asked to visit EOB office for answers — that Board time should not be taken up with minor Items.
Nominating Committee REport:
Chairman will ask for acceptance of the report.
OTHER ACTION BY EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE:
Day Care Special Conditions
Pointed out that conditions must be accepted; and that if necessary a supplement can be requested In 90 days that total budget be revised in 120 days by the Board.
EOB Budget
Letter to be written by Mr. Spann as a member of the Screening Committee and signed by total Executive Committee stating the circumstances of establishing the salary of the Executive Director.
Executive Committee Meeting
February 14, 1966
I.
Submission of PAL project held per request of Father Shallow
2.
Development of Councils In West Las Vegas
3.
Cash contribution of Economic Opportunity Board for 10? matching funds
4.
Conditions placed upon Day Care Project by 0E0 - approval Conditions placed upon E08 grant by 0E0
5.
Nominating Committee Report
6.
Orientation Session for Board Members - request for suggestions
7.
Financial Report, January 31, 1966 Request for review of finances
OTHER
Review of Agenda for Economic Opportunity Board Meeting of February 15, 1966
ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY BOARD OF CLARK COUNTY
MEMORANDUM
TO: Board Members
FROM: Elaine Walbroek Executive Director
THE NEXT MEETING OF THE ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY BOARD OF CLARK COUNTY WILL BE HELD AS FOLLOWS:
February 15 (Tuesday), 1966 7:30 P.M.
Rancho High School Library
Enclosed are two items for your review: the minutes of the meeting of January 12, 1966; and a letter from the Treasurer of the Board recommending approval of the financial statement for the period ending December 31 (copy of statement was distributed to Board Members at January 12 meeting).
Enclosed also is a copy of a letter to Father Charles Shallow regarding the P-A-L Project which was approved for submission at the last Board Meeting. The letter outlines the staffs’ present efforts to implement the Board’s decision.
EW:sl
2/4/66
ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY BOARD OF CLARK COUNTY
301 S. Highland, Suite 303 Las Vegas Phone: 384-3162
TO: Board of Directors
FROM: Elaine Walbroek Executive Director
RE: Board Meeting of February 15
Enclosed is the following material for your consideration at the Board Meeting to be held: February 15, 1966; 7:30 P.M.; Rancho High School Library.
(I)
Agenda
(2)
Financial Statement for the period ending January 31.
(3)
Letter to Nevada Catholic Welfare Bureau regarding "PAL Leadership Project."
(4)
Draft of a proposed Small Business Development Center (SBDC) Resolution.
2/10/66
AGENDA
ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY BOARD OF CLARK COUNTY
February 15 | 9 4 &
7;30 P.M. '
Rancho High School Library
Las Vegas, Nevada
1. MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF JANUARY 12, 1966
Harvey Dondero
2. FINANCIAL REPORT - Approval of two reports, for months Lee Walker
ending December 31, 1965 & January 31, 1966
3. REPORT OF ONGOING PROGRAMS
Conduct and Administration Grant Economic
Opportunity Board
Neighborhood Youth Corps In School and Out of School
Physical and Mental Health Component for NYC
Title V, Work Experience, Program
Adult Basic Education Program
VISTA Project
Day Care Services Center
Operation Medicare Alert
Elaine Walbroek
Leo Johnson*^, Leo Johnson4>^
Eva Houston
H.P. Fitzgerald**
Lubertha Johnson
David Hoggard
4. PROGRAMS PRESENTLY BEING REVIEWED BY THE OFFICE OF ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY
Small Business Development Center
Lunch Program for West Las Vegas
Migrant Community Service Center
Operation Independence Community Service Center
Day Care Services Center Continuation
Morris Peltz
Lubertha Johnson
5,
PROJECTS UNDER STUDY FOR SUBMISSION
STAFF:
Tutorial Assistance Program in Henderson
Migrant Health Program
Indian Community Service Program i/
Legal Assistance Program^/
West Las Vegas Community Health Services^
Morris Peltz
Elaine Walbr<
Visiting Homemaker & Heme Health aide Service for Clark County
6.
NOMI NAT I NG COMM ITTEE REPORT
Ted Lawson
Report of Nominating Committee Meeting of Feb. 8 Nominations will be made for 2 members to serve on the Board of Directors
7.
BOARD PROGRAM ORIENTATION MEETING
For purposes of better understanding the Economic Opportunity Act, the programs available under it, existing and projected Clark County programs a Board program orientation meeting has been planned for March 3, 4. Robert Van Horn will be the 0E0 Consultant to the meeting.
8.
FCR: BOARD APPROVAL
Programs to be approved:
Clark County Cooperative Purchasing Clubs
submitted by Nevada Catholic Community Welfare;
program was mailed to Board Members January 4, 1966. SBDC Resolution
Elaine Walbroek
Father Charles Shallow
Gene McCoy
9.
OTHER BUSINESS
10.
DATE AND PLACE OF NEXT MEETING
MINUTES OF THE MEETING
ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY BOARD OF CLARK COUNTY
7:30 P.M.
February 15, 1966
Rancho High School Library Las Vegas, Nevada
PRESENT: Board Members: Harvey Dondero, Chairman, Stella Fleming, Ernest Skagen, Ferren Bunker, Douglass Pushard, Ida Belle Riggins, Jesse Williams, Ted Lawson, Charles Spann, Newton Tigner, Lee Walker, Emory Lockette, J.R. McPherson, William Morris, James R. Snowden
Technical Advisory Committee Members: WiI Iiam Kearns, Gene McCoy, Gary Petersen
Regional Office of Economic Opportunity: Robert Van Horn
Guests: Leo M. Johnson, Leola H. Armstrong, Earle W. White, Jr., E.J. Schmidt, Robert E. Bellis, R.W. Bauer, Maggie Darling, Robert Fahey, DeGlorias Bass, Theron H. Gaynes, Lubertha Johnson, Ethel Winternheimer, Richard Lundquist, Charles L. Williams
Staff: Elaine Walbroek, Morris Peltz, David Hoggard, Evelyn Mauldin, Sylvia Leon
The Chairman called the members to order, however, until there was a quorum present only reports would be heard.
CONDUCT AND ADMINISTRATION GRANT FOR THE ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY BOARD:
Mrs. Walbroek reported, stating that February 15 was the termination date of the present grant which funds the Board and its program; however, OEO here had granted an extension until March 1 with provisions for carrying it further. The next six months grant is essentially the same as the grant application preceding it; however, the conditions which will be attached to it are not yet known. The 10^ in-kind contribution will be coming from the same sources — partially in rent and partially as cash contributions from the county and municipalities of Las Vegas and North Las Vegas. The Executive Committee at its last meeting had suggested that Henderson and Boulder City be kept apprised of progress and a letter be sent them so that they might be approached for their participation financially in the program at a later time. Mrs. Walbroek said that the local Economic Opportunity Board had had some excellent articles in the newspapers. She reported that the League of Women Voters had hired a bus for their members to visit the sites of poverty programs in Clark County, and she felt this was an excellent example of community interest. Committees which have met since the last meeting have been the Nominating Committee, Medicare Council, Executive Committee, Neighborhood Council, and the Migrant Comm i ttee.
NEIGHBORHOOD YOUTH CORPS OUT OF SCHOOL PROGRAM: (Report distributed to Members). Mr. Leo Johnson, Senior Coordinator, reported. He stated that the report covered the period January I, 1966 to February 10, 1966. He stated that it seemed desirable to give the youth a more extensive physical examination, because there are places they cannot work due to mental or physical handicaps. Mr. Johnson asked the Board to keep NYC youth in mind should they become aware of a job opening where a youth might be placed. Presently, NYC enrollees are being screened again on on criteria of their employment. In creating jobs for youth, there has been cooperation from EG&G, Nellis, and the staff is now contacting other installations. Staff has had an opportunity to talk with the Department of Defense who have extended the services of their recruiting agent.
PHYSICAL AND MENTAL HEALTH COMPONENT FOR NYC: Mr. Johnson further reported that under this project Dr. Freer of North Las Vegas has given 72 routine: physicaI'examinations, with six revealing findings that necessitated more intensive follow-up, which was given.
ADULT BASIC EDUCATION PROGRAM: Mr. Theron Goynes reported after conveying apologies that Mr. Fitzgerald could not be present. He stated that there were two program sites: at Jo Mackey School, where there are 137 adults enrolled in basic education, with approximately 96 who will be getting certificates; at the Indian Village where there was a beginning enrollment of 18, now reduced to 12 students. Enthusiasm is very high among faculty and students, and they are looking forward to going into the second phase of the program which will begin February 22. In addition, on March I, a modern math program is beginning which has enrolled 82 students to date. The program has a faculty of 10 teachers; a project psychologist; and 2 counselors, with the County Dept, of Education providing the facilities.
OPERATION MEDICARE ALERT PROGRAM: David Hoggard reported that this program became an actuality February 7 when the Project Director was employed. He explained that this was a joint project in conjunction with and with the assistance of the Social Security Administration. It is funded by 0E0 to insure that information regarding medicare gets to low-income, isolated senior citizens. There are now 27 people working in Clark County to accomplish this, and it is hoped by March 31 they will have personally contacted on door-to-door basis everyone over 65 to sign up for Medicare benefits. He introduced Mrs. Ann Mai us, the Project Director, and Mr. John Schmidt, a Team Captain.
VISTA PROGRAM: Lubertha Johnson reported that at the end of January, several of the VISTA workers had completed their one year of service in Las Vegas, and presently there are only two on the job. The persons remaining are very fine workers. The VISTA Program calls for 10 Volunteers; however, Operation Independence has been advised that it may not be possible to have that many. Diane Mason is serving as one of the Head Teachers for the Head Start child care program and is an example of one of the fine VISTA workers. A call had been received from
-2-
Washington recently that a new person who had had experience in dealing with children would be assigned to Operation Independence.
DAY CARE SERVICES CENTER: Mrs. Johnson reported that a continuation grant had just been awarded to continue operation of the day care services center. Many visitors who have observed the work of the center have complimented the program, which is now extended to three centers. Mrs. Johnson called upon one of the mothers to give her impressions about the progress of her child since being in the day care center. Mrs. Bass, a day care parent, said that her 3-year old daughter is presently attending the Center and she has been able to see a great and favorable change in her. There has been an improvement in her enunciation of words and in her behavior due to association with other children and the teachers.
TITLE V "WORK EXPERIENCE" PROGRAM: Mr. Robert Bauer of the State Welfare Department reported that the Title V program now serves as participants in training 210 men and women in Clark County (163 women and 47 men). The State Welfare Department hopes to prove by means of this work experience program that aid should be offered to families while the family is still intact.
PROGRAMS PRESENTLY BEING REVIEWED BY 0E0:
SMALL BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT CENTER: Mr. Gene McCoy, Chairman of the SBDC Board, reported that the status of the grant application for a center remained the same with funds currently being unavailable. Mr. Van Horn, 0E0 Regional Consultant, was asked for comments regarding any action that could be taken to secure funds. Mr. Van Horn stated that the City of Tuscon has dispatched a letter pointing out that in the Act of 1964 there is a statement that the 0E0 Director (Shriver) shall have the right of guaranteeing loans. The Tuscon office is asking it there is a possibility of 0E0 setting up a pool of money to make available to local SBA's as assurance which they can take to their local banks and ask banks to participate in this program, making loans at their normal rate of interest but without the potential problem of loss of money due to a defaulted loan. Mr. Van Horn stated that the reason an office (SBDC) is not funded by CEO is that there is actually no financial resources to make the loans or back them up if the resources were there, 0E0 would, of course, consider the grant application. Mr. McCoy stated that Mr. Alvin Meyers would be in town this month and this matter would be further pursued.
LUNCH PROGRAM FOR WEST LAS VEGAS: Mr. Morris Peltz reported that this program, which was passed by the Board last October, was designed to establish hot lunch program in 6 schools in West Las Vegas area. This program's delay has been occasioned by a number of legal issues. The original thinking of the School District was that 0E0 would finance remodeling work and equipment and provide additional subsidies to pay for meals of children of low-income families; however, 0E0 will finance only
-3-
that part of the program which actually will go for the serving of foods for low-income children. Mr. PELTZ stated that he has worked with School District on percentages and has arrived at a revision which will be re-submitted within the next few days to 0E0.
MIGRANT COMMUNITY SERVICE CENTER: Ferren Bunker reported that this project was submitted in December. Since then the EOB office has had a visit from a consultant in Washington, who made a trip to the MOapa Valley and met with a group there to discuss various phases of the program. The consultant felt certain revisions should be made in the program. He suggested that the 30 housing units were not in keeping with the best interests of the project and that it be cut to possibly 15 homes or less to be used for educational purposes while the people live in them, e.g. demonstration in home economics, how to keep house. He was concerned that more responsibility be given the migrants managing and controling their own program, and suggested a Migrant Council be formed with its structure detailed in the project. Mr. Bunker stated that these suggestions have been developed and that there is a local Community Council to coordinate the migrant program with the local community. A revised application is being prepared for submission in the near future. A meeting is planned for all agencies concerned to discuss the migrant program to be certain of coordination.
COMMUNITY SERVICE CENTER: Mrs. Johnson stated that this project is still being reviewed in the 0E0 Regional Office and it is hoped that funds can soon be available so that the Community Service Center program can begin operation.
PROJECTS UNDER STUDY FOR SUBMISSION:
TUTORIAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAM IN HENDERSON: Mr. Peltz stated that this program was in very initial planning stages. The group to be served would be the intermediate and high school youth in county housing authority projects.
MIGRANT HEALTH PROGRAM: Mrs. Walbroek reported that this is an example of how there can be linkage of programs not necessarily centered on 0E0 monies. Application is being made for US Public Health Service funds by the Clark County Health Department for a program relating to the migrant people using the Community Service Center in Moapa Valley.
LEGAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAM: Mr. Peltz reported he had been in contact with the Legal Aid Society, and that the present program of legal aid had minimal funds. There is the possibility of 0E0 funding for expanded legal aid services involving the employment of lawyers on a fee or salary basis. A consultant from 0E0 has been in Las Vegas at EOB’s request and has met with the Legal Aid Society which will take the matter to the Bar Association. He requested that Board Members spread encouragement and understanding of the nature of the program for expansion of the legal aid program. Mr. Skagen questioned how he could support this program when he knew nothing about it. Mr. Peltz said there was very little that could be described at this time as it was only in the planning stages. Mr. Earle White stated that exactly what will be done
-4-
by such a program would have to be fully understood to be explained in order to engender support of the program. There was further Board discussion regarding this, following which Mr. Peltz stated that exact program details could not be worked out until later — but that the support now hoped for was only on the concept of expanding legal aid services through an 0E0 grant request.
VISITING HOMEMAKER SERVICE AND HEALTH AIDE PROGRAM: Mrs. Walbroek reported that there will be more and more need for home care programs; this type of program is highly desirable to keep the elderly in their own homes, and out of nursing homes, etc. A meeting of agencies had been called in Las Vegas at which Father Shallow had indicated a great deal of interest that their agency be a sponsor of this program. Mr. Fahey commented that Catholic Welfare has obtained a great deal of information; however, are waiting for Title V to take some action.
NOMINATING COMMITTEE REPORT: Mr. Ted Lawson, Chairman of this Committee reported on action taken at the meeting held February 8. The Nominating Committee recommended that Mr. Gene McCoy as a Board Member of the Nevada Tuberculosis and Health Association be nominated to the Board; that Mrs. Charlotte Hill as a Board Member of the United Fund be nominated to the Board; and recommended to the Chairman that he appoint as members to the Technical Advisory Committee: Mr. Gary Petersen, Mr. Lyal Burkholder, Mr. Edward Young. The Chairman stated that Mr. McCoy had withdrawn his name, preferring to remain on the Technical Advisory Committee. With no quorum present, the Nominating Committee report was held until the next Board Meeting.
FINANCIAL REPORT: The Chairman called for questions on the two financial reports (ending December 31 and January 31). With no quorum present, these were referred to the next Board Meeting.
BOARD ORIENTATION MEETING: Mrs. Walbroek stated that the Board, at their last monthly meeting, had agreed that they would benefit by a Board Orientation Meeting at which an 0E0 consultant would be present. She said this meeting has been planned for March 3 and 4 (an afternoon and an evening meeting). She said that invitations would be extended not only to Board Members but to other professional people concerned with 0E0 programs, in order to extend as much information as possible. Mr. Van Horn commented here that it was extremely critical to have a session for Board Members only. Board discussion determined that the meeting would be held Thursday evening, March 3 and Friday afternoon, March 4.
PROGRAMS FOR BOARD ACTION: With no quorum present, the Board entered into discussion on how these programs should be handled. Mr. William MOrris suggested that this be declared an emergency meeting and that the Executive Committee proceed to take action on items, subject to ratification of Board of Directors at their next meeting. The Chairman then called the Executive Committee into session.
-5-
CLARK COUNTY COOPERATIVE PURCHASING CLUB: The Chairman stated that this proposal would now be reviewed by the Executive Committee. There was Board discussion with Mr. Morris commenting that it seemed there would be technical difficulties and problems with the Health Department involved in the food handling. Mr. Snowden felt it would not be a problem as outlined in the project if the equipment requested can be obtained. Mr. Snowden moved that this program be approved by the Executive Committee subject to ratification of the Board of Directors; motion seconded by Jesse Williams. Further Board discussion followed. Mrs. Riggins questioned whether enough study had been given this project and she felt that not enough pro and con discussion had taken place to warrant taking final action. There seemed to be concurrence with problems roused as to the need for study of the program by the Public Health Department. There was discussion on whether the Executive Committee should take action at this meeting. Mr. Van Horn was asked to comment. He stated that if there is a device in the By-Laws for taking emergency action, this is meant to get something literally underway; something similar to Medicare Alert which needed immediate action; otherwise, there is nothing accomplished by Executive Committee emergency action; however, with the motion on the floor, the Chairman called for a vote by the Executive Commmittee. There were 4 votes for the motion; one against.
ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business, the meeting adjourned.
Respectfully submitted,
ELAINE WALBROEK
Executive Director
BOARD MEMBER SEMINAR TRAINING PROGRAM
Economic Opportunity Board of Clark County
March 3, 1966 6:30-9:30 P.M.
March 4, 1966 2:30 - 5:30 P.M. (Alternate)
The program Is divided Into four parts, the first and third of which would be primarily lecture, and the second and fourth, a discussion type seminar with all members participating. Each part would cover approximately 45 minutes. The Planning and Priority Report form will be Introduced at the beginning of the session and used as a focus for stimulating Board concern over member responsibility In Board decision-making as well as In stimulating and coordinating with other public and private agencies.
I.
The Economic Opportunity Act and Its Implications (Lecture)
A.
Brief history of the Act
B.
Description of various Titles In the Act
C.
The basic philosophy of the Act
(I)
The role of local community Boards — unique responsibility for coordinating all programs In ’’War on Poverty."
(2)
The Involvement of the poor.
The Involvement and responsibility of the Bdard In programs not directly administered through 0E0
(I)
Other 0E0 Act Titles
(2)
ESEA Act programs
(3)
Other federally-funded projects Including USPHS Public Housing Administration
II.
What can an Individual Board Member do to strengthen the Board and Implement the Board’s objectives (Seminar)
A.
History of Clark County Board structure
B.
Involvement of target area representatives and actual members of groups served In Board deliberation and action.
C.
Responsibility of Board Members to establish communication with target area residents
D.
Problems of communication between present Board Members and new Council members to be elected.
E.
Responsibility of Board Members to coordinate and stimulate programs within agency or group they represent to fulfill total objectives.
III.
Program Development and Evaluation (Lecture using the report form directly)
A.
Inventory of poverty In Clark County
B.
Summary of past program development of EOB.
C.
What areas are being considered?
D.
What are other possible areas of Board Involvement?
E.
What other programs administered by outside agency require Board concern and/or action?
F.
Need for Board structure of committees to make effective evaluation of all programs.
IV.
How do we test which projects are priority and which needs should be met first? How shall we evaluate programs when there Is limitation on funds for refunding? (seminar)
A. The need for an over-all program for Clark County poor.
B* An approach by target area — Westside example.
(I)
Present programs
(a)
Formation of Operation Independence
(b)
Day Care Center
(c)
Title V programs
(d)
NYC program
(e)
Basic Education program
, (f) PAL organization activities
(2)
Proposed programs
(a)
Community Service Center
(b)
PAL leadership training
(c)
Consumer Cooperatives
(d)
Special Instructional programs - ESEA
(e)
SBDC program for widening business, and therefore, employment opportunity.
(3)
Future planning
(a)
Establishment of representatives and programs of public agencies In neighborhood centers Including health, employment, welfare, and legal services
(b)
Future development of self-help organizations already
In existence and the use of Neighborhood Councils for other community action programs.
-2-
E C 0 N 0 M I C
OPPORTUNITY BOARD OF CLARK COUNTY
301 S. HIGHLAND, SUITE 303 LAS VEGAS, NEVADA
March 9, 1966
TO: Board Members
FROM: Harvey Dondero
Cha i rman
RE: BOARD ORIENTATION SESSION TO BE HELD MARCH 17
An information session for Board Members will be held in two sessions on Thursday, March 17. An Office of Economic Opportunity Consultant will be present to lead discussion and to allow an opportunity for Board Members, in a question and answer period, to learn the many ramifications of their Board pos i t i on.
Attached is a tentative agenda.
Note: Two sessions will be held, both identical, to allow the largest possible attendance of Board Members.
Afternoon Session: I:45 P.M. to 5:00 P.M.
Evening Session: 6:45 P.M. to 9:45 P.M.
Place: Youth Opportunity Center Conference Room 629 Las Vegas Boulevard North (Civic Plaza)
Please advise our office which session you prefer to attend. (384-3162)
HD:sl
cc: Mrs. Leola Armstrong Mr. Robert Van Horn Mr. Bruce Parks
ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY BOARD OF CLARK COUNTY
Information and Orientation Seminar
Place: Youth Opportunity Center Conference Room
Time: March 17, 1966 1:45 - 5:00 P.M.
6:45 - 9:45 P.M. (Alternate)
The seminar will revolve around the basic responsibilities of Board Members in the community action program of Clark County. The emphasis of this meeting will be upon a frank and informal exchange of ideas among Board Members with assistance from Mr. Robert Van Horn, the 0E0 Regional Consultant, and members of the staff of the Economic Opportunity Board of Clark County.
Two major topics will serve as a basis for the discussion: I) The development of the Economic Opportunity Board and its responsibility to the community;
(2) The role of the Board in program development and education. For each topic there will be a short initial presentation by staff to be followed by general discussion. The following sub-topics listed below are suggested areas for consideration under each major topic, but other important issues undoubtedly will be raised during the discussion. These sub-topics represent only a few of the questions that have been raised by Board Members. Your prior consideration of these problems should make for a more stimulating and educative session for all.
Agenda
I.
The Development of the Economic Opportunity Board and its General Responsibility to the Community.
A.
Given the basic philosophy of the Economic Opportunity Act, what are the unique responsibilities of the Economic Opportunity Board?
B.
What are best means of insuring involvement of poor residents in all phases of planning and policymaking?
C.
What is the role of the Board in coordinating all community "War on Poverty" programs? These include projects administered by other agencies under the Economic Opportunity Act as well as those funded by other Federal legislation including the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, the U. S. Public Health Service, and the Housing and Urban Development Administration.
D.
How can individual Board Members coordinate and stimulate programs within agency or group which they represnet, to fulfill program objectives?
II.
The Role of the Board in Program Development and Evaluation.
A.
What is the present status of program development?
B.
What other areas of program involvement should be considered?
C.
How should the Board be organized to make effective consideration of all problem areas including those programs administered or proposed by other agencies?
D.
How shall the Board make a determination of program priorities, especially as proposed projects exceed allotted 0E0 monies?
E.
How can the Board evaluate effectively on-going or completed projects?
MEMORANDUM
ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY BOARD OF CLARK COUNTY
TO: Board Members
FROM: Harvey Dondero
Cha Irman
RE: Notice of Meeting
Enclosed are the minutes for the last Board Meeting of February 15, 1966. May I remind you that the next meeting of the Board will be held:
7:30 P.M.
March 30, 1966 (Wednesday)
Rancho High School Library
At the last Board Meeting we did not have sufficient attendance to constitute a quorum, arid a number of agenda items had to be deferred. May I urge you to attend this Meeting.
In addition there is enclosed a revised version of the proposed work program and budget of the Cooperative Purchasing Club Project, sponsored by Nevada Catholic Community Welfare. This project will be on the agenda for your consideration and approval.
HD:dj
3/18/66
OLD'Business :
I Special conditions of the 0E0 make it necessary to fulfill the
• following provisions within 60 days of the grant award (Set 4 award date)
That 2 representatives of minority organizations come on Board
That representatives other than the West side target area be , selected to serve on the Board drawn from "poverty areas inhabited by the Mexican'American, Anglos, and Indians”.
to—t U1T111"TT1 a 1j b u
a p p rU. ■■> 4- - J-
-t1 WT"! HggTTie
S*?***11T1 ''fl'Wnfr
Minority organizations: and the Moapa Tribal Oounci
Letters written to NAACP and the Spahlch American Society ■ have requested that a representative be sent from their organization. (This was approved in minutes for
• October that such Letters be sent)
A“yof<5Ill'iUL''JU L' ... ---l—ium
Thejf migrant committee was as ed to give a name which they did (Pasquale Urrubasco)
It was recom ended that the Board approve the represent-tives designated by
Haacp - announcment will be made soon
Spanish American Society ” ”
OLO i-iigr nt r1"' moo - b -o LveoPasquale Urrubasco (migrant Comml Anglo representative -(From Stella Flemming
Mooapa Tribal Council
J Announce of appointment of Emory Lockette to 2nd V-President
3.
Ask for Nomination for 7 members to serve on nominating con ilttee who will xsixstlxx nominate for the following:
1 secretary to executive committee
2 members to the executive committee
Ut Ask for/Board discussion on when should the 3-times missed on Board
/ st rt to apply: Wheji by-laws passed on October 27,?
' include the October 29 meeting of Board?
Appointment of Project sere ittee for,,!__ project:
* _Fitzgerald, temporary chairman; Bill Briare; Les Shuck
6. Ask Board for discussion as to what should be :done with e.g. Dr.
Ravenholts resignation and his recommendation that his chief sanitarian be appointment; Mr. Mullen’s request that Mr. Hampton represent the Probation Department
EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MEETING ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY .BOARD OF CLARK COUNTY
March 28; 1966 3:30 P.M. '
301 S. Highland Ave. Las Vegas, Nevada
PRESENT:. Harvey Dondero (Chairman), James Snowden, Charles Spann, Jesse Williams, Lee Wal ker,:Ernest Skagen, Emory Lockette
Staff Members: Elaine Walbroek, Sylvia:Leon
The Chairman called the meeting to order.
Screening Committee for the Executive Director:
Mrs. Walbroek.advised .that the Nominating'Committee had met at 2:00. P.M. today and had nominated seven persons to serve on the Screening-Committee to screen applications for the position of Executive Director. These persons are: Charles Spann, Lee Walker, James Snowden, Father Charles Shallow,.Ted Lawson, Isaac White, Al Landsman. Mr. Charles Spann would serve as Acting-Chairman untiI-the Committee’s first meeting when a permanent chairman would" be .elected. According to.the By-Laws, the Chairman of the Board of Trustees would'serve on the committee as an ex=offIcio;member.
She said.that the matter now before the Executive Committee was to approve these persons to serve on the Committee which was according to the By-Laws procedure. It was moved by James Snowden, seconded by Charles Spann that this.NomiihitJ.ng Comml- tee’s recommendation be approved.by. the Executive Committee. Motion carried.
Project Study Committee:
Mr. Snowden advised that the'Nominating-Committee had recommended that the Economic Opportunity Board appoint a committee which can be.made up of members other than Trustees, to study each proposal that comes before the Economic:Opportunity Board and that that committee would advise on projects submitted to.the Board.for funding. Mr. Snowden moved that this be.approved by the Executive Committee. There was discussion on whether other.than Board Members should be members of these committees. Mr. Spann seconded the motion. Motion carried with.one dissenting vote being cast by .Jesse Wi11iams.
Study Committee to Analyze Board ^Structure:
It was reviewed that the Nominating Committee had voted to.recommend to the Board of Trustees that a Study Committee to analyze Board structure.be formed and to make recommendations-for necessary changes. Mr. Snowden moved that this recommendation of the Nominating Committee be approved by the:Executive Committee. Seconded by Lee'Walker, motion carried unanimously. Mrs. Walbroek pointed out that the concept of analyzing Board.structure.should be approved by the entire.Board membership. This would be so recommended by the Executive Committee. ' •
Borrowing of Funds:
Mrs. Walbroek advised.the Executive Committee that it had not been necessary to borrow the money for which plans had been:approved at the previous meeting of the Executive Committee. Advisement that the letter of creditwas forthcoming had been received the following day.
Board Meeting Agenda:-
Following discussion, the Committee concluded.that a time limit should be set on an agenda item if it seemed obvious that a conclusion would not be reached. It was suggested that an Executive Committee member should make such a motion when necessary. There was also discussion on Board Member attendance and offers made by Executive Committee members to call other Board. Members to,:tryto Improve the situation.
AGENDA
ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY BOARD OF CLARK COUNTY, NEVADA
March 30, 1966 7:30 P.M.
Rancho High School Library Las Vegas, Nevada
Harvey Dondero
Harvey Dondero Ted Lawson
Lee WaIke
Operation Medicare Alert
I.
MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF FEBRUARY 15, 1966
2.
FINANCIAL REPORT
3.
COMMITTEE REPORTS
Execut i ve Comm i ttee Nominating Committee
4.
REPORTS OF ONGOING PROGRAM AND PROJECTS on
Neighborhood Youth Corps Operation Independence
5.
PROJECTS IN PROCESS OF FUNDING BY OEO Migrant Community Service Center Conduct and Administration
Operation Independence Community Service Center Small Business Development Center Hot Lunch Program for West Las Vegas
6.
PROJECTS FOR BOARD ACTION
School District Summer Head Start Clark County Cooperative Purchasing Clubs Other
p&tT Cocks----------—
j^Bfey'le Longhurst l/t^ubertha Johnson
Ferren Bunker EOB Staff
Les Iie Shuck Catholic Wei
7. PROJECTS FOR BOARD DISCUSSION
NYC Mental and Physical Health and Education Component Nelson Amendment Beautification Project
Legal Aid Services
Catholic Community Welfare Project — Unstated
Staff
Catholic Welfare
8. OTHER BUSINESS <2^.^
9. DATE OF NEXT MEETING
REMINDER:
THE BOARD MEETING WILL BE HELD WEDNESDAY, MARCH 30, 7:30 P.M. AT RANCHO HIGH SCHOOL LIBRARY. BOARD MEMBERS ARE URGED TO MAKE EVERY EFFORT TO ATTEND.
AGENDA
ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY BOARD OF CLARK COUNTY, NEVADA
March 30, 1966 7:30 P.M.
Rancho High School Library Las Vegas, Nevada
I. MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF FEBRUARY 15, 1966
Harvey Dondero
2. FINANCIAL REPORT
Lee Walker
3.
COMMITTEE REPORTS
Executive Committee O 0 < X^-XxJIarvey Dondero
Nominating Committee o- z -j Ted Lawson
4.
REPORTS OF ONGOING PROGRAM AND PROJECTS
Conduct and Administration Elaine Walbroek
Operation Medicare Alert Ed Cocks
Neighborhood Youth Corps Doyle Longhurst
Operation Independence Lubertha Johnson
5. PROJECTS IN PROCESS OF FUNDING BY OEO Migrant Community Service Center Conduct and Administration Operation Independence Community Service Center Small Business Development Center Hot Lunch Program for West Las Vegas
Ferren Bunker
EOB Staff
Les Iie Shuck
6® PROJECTS FOR BOARD ACTION
School District Summer Head Start
Clark County Cooperative Purchasing Clubs Other
Les Ii e Shuck Catholic Wei fare
PROJECTS FOR BOARD DISCUSSION
NYC Mental and Physical Health and Education Component EOB Staff
Nelson Amendment Beautification Project " "
Legal Aid Services " "
Catholic Community Welfare Project — Unstated Catholic Welfare
8« OTHER BUSINESS
9, DATE OF NEXT MEETING
REMINDER:
THE BOARD MEETING WILL BE HELD WEDNESDAY, MARCH 30, 7:30 P.M. AT RANCHO HIGH SCHOOL LIBRARY. BOARD MEMBERS ARE URGED TO MAKE
EVERY EFFORT TO ATTEND.
BOARD MEETING
ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY BOARD OF CLARK COUNTY
7:30 P.M. Rancho High School Library
March 30, 1966 Las Vegas, Nevada
PRESENT: Board Members: Harvey Dondero (Chairman), Dr. Charles West, Stella Fleming, Emory Lockette, Bob McPherson, Douglass Pushard, Father Charles Shallow, Ted Lawson, Juanita White, Ferren Bunker, Genevieve Arensdorf, Ida Belle Riggins, Mi I ton Weiss, Charles Spann, Lee Walker, James Snowden, Jesse Williams, Isaac White, Newton Tigner, Don Hampton
Technical Advisory Committee Members: Gene McCoy, Keith Macdonald
Guests: Mr. & Mrs. W. R. Hampton, Lee Lamoreaux, Joe Neal, Ed Cocks, Roger Williams, Robert Fahey, Jan Chaviers, Jeanette Cook, Gemma Lorenzi, Lerne Lievett, Bill Chaviers, Leola Armstrong, Robert E. Bellis, Mona Moore, Adeline Dueninig, Lubertha Johnson
Staff: Elaine Walbroek, Morris Peltz, Sylvia Leon, David Hoggard, Doyle Longhurst
The Chairman called the meeting to order advising that program reports would be heard.
MIGRANT COMMUNITY SERVICE CENTER FOR MOAPA VALLEY: Ferren Bunker reported that this project is now in Washington, with all requested revisions made; and, hopefully, the project will soon be granted. He advised that though funding may be soon, it was past the peak season in Moapa.
HOT LUNCH PROGRAM FOR WEST LAST VEGAS: Mr. Morris Peltz reviewed the project: it was first approved by the Board July 29, 1965; had run into legal problems, was resubmitted in February, and it is now expected that 0E0 approval will be received in the near future.
SMALL BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT CENTER: Mr. Peltz advised that there seems to be no hope for funding during this fiscal year according to information presently available. Mr. McCoy further reported that he had met with the SBA Regional Director, Mr. Alvin Meyers, during his last visit to this area, who substantiated that from all indications in Washington there was scant hope of funding in the near future. The possibility of funding a Center on the basis of bank-guaranteed loans had been discussed and this had been deemed not feasible.
CONDUCT AND ADMINISTRATION GRANT OF THE ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY BOARD: Mr. Peltz advised that the EOB office had been given authorization to borrow funds from other component projects until the grant received final processing and funds were forthcoming. Father Shallow suggested that final approval was not given because the 0E0 Special Condition directing formation of Neighborhood Councils had not yet been met, and further suggested that at this time the Board petition Washington to remove this condition. He stated it was the Board that should determine how to do this job and this restriction was not proper. He felt the restriction was unworkable because only three people had shown
up at each of three meetings called for the formation of Councils. He stated Neighborhood Councils have not worked in any other city and is not working in _ Las Vegas thus far, and he did not know "what theorist thought this up." He felt that the people want more things before they want Councils. Mrs. Walbroek advised that nearly 300 people were present at an initial Council informational meeting. Mr. Peltz further advised the grant’s processing was delayed because letters guaranteeing in-kind contributions had not been secured until early March. The delay in no way was pertaining to the Special Condition.
COMMUNITY SERVICE CENTER FOR WEST LAS VEGAS: Mr. Peltz reported that this project is to provide a neighborhood center with a main center and three branches. The project will include staffing for six neighborhood councils. It is felt by 0E0 that a community service center will insure that there is maximum feasible participation of the poor and a neighborhood council formed of local resident area personnel is the best way to advise as to what the basic community needs really are. Since the time of submission of this project, the Office of Economic Opportunity has been working on refining guidelines for Community Service Centers. Mr. Peltz advised that Mr. Van Horn of the Regional Office of Economic Opportunity would be in Las Vegas next Tuesday evening to discuss these new guidelines. As Operation Independence is the delegate agency for this Center, its chairman, Mr. Earle White, with his Board of Directors will be in attendance. Mr. Dondero at this time asked that the Executive Committee of the Economic Opportunity Board be present and urged that other members of the Board be present also.
MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF FEBRUARY 15: The Chairman called for discussion on the minutes of the meeting of February 15. There being no corrections, additions, or deletions, Mr. Spann moved and Mr. Bunker seconded that the minutes be approved as presented. Motion passed.
FINANCIAL REPORT: The financial report for the period ending February 28 had been provided Board Members. Father Shallow requested an audit on monies of the Economic Opportunity Board. Mrs. Walbroek advised that at the termination of a component project, an audit was obtained, was available, and further stated that all Board Members had copies of the audit for the first six months grant of the Economic Opportunity Board. An audit would be obtained for the second six month period as soon as the termination date had been established which would be when the next grant was available. She advised that an audit had just been finished on the NYC summer program and was available. A copy was distributed to the Board. Board discussion on financial reporting followed in which Mr. Milton Weiss requested that an itemized checklist of check-by-check reporting be provided Board Members. Lengthy discussion followed after which Dr. West moved and Father Shallow seconded that Board Members be provided with a listing of disbursements made during the month. Discussion indicated that salaries could be listed in a lump sum. Motion carried.
-2-
NOMINATING COMMITTEE REPORT: Mr. Ted Lawson, Chairman of the Committee, reported that the Nominating Committee met March 28. The action at the meeting is itemized in the report provided each Board Member. In discussion on the Committee’s report, Dr. West questioned that the Nominating Committee had followed the spirit of maximum involvement of minority representation. There were seven members on the Committee; two were Negro. Dr. West felt there should have been four Negro members on the Committee. Mr. Snowden said these members had been chosen because of their various abilities and members felt they had chosen a well-balanced committee. Dr. West said he was not questioning the qualifications of any of the persons, only that the spirit of maximum involvement had been overlooked. Father Shallow said that "the color of your skin does not determine how poor you are — and does not give you any more perspective to see the needs of the poor;" also that this was reverse discrimination. Mr. Lockette concurred that Dr. West's point had merit. Mrs. Walbroek advised that target area representation should be in the same proportion on committees as on the Board, according to guidelines. The Chairman ruled that this report had been accepted by the Executive Committee and will stand as is unless the Nominating Committee wished to recommend changes. There was continuing discussion with Dr. West maintaining that a racial situation was involved as the poverty program is attempting to bring up the poverty condition of the Negro and that it was the condition of the Negro that had originally stimulated the anti-poverty program. Mr. Mi I ton Weiss said that North Las Vegas had given money for the operation of the Economic Opportunity Board with the stipulation that the Board structure be balanced. Mr. Snowden moved that the recommendations of the Nominating Committee be accepted and that a study committee be appointed to analyze Board structure. Father Shallow seconded. Motion carried unanimously.
EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE REPORT: Chairman, Mr. Dondero, reported that the Executive Committee had ratified the selection of the Screening Committee members, considered the proposal of the Nominating Committee that a Study Committee to analyze Board structure be set up. Also they recommended that for each new project that comes in, a special committee be set up to study the project and bring a recommendation to the Board. Executive Committee members also agreed that in lengthy items when it seems a conclusion will not be reached, a time limit should be set on discussion. Father Shallow questioned whether a study committee would have the power to name its own experts, would the Board determine the experts, or would the staff determine them. Mr. Spann advised that the By-Laws state that a committee can call in its own experts.
CLARK COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT SUMMER HEAD START PROGRAM: The Chairman advised that this program has been approved by the School District and now needs approval of the Economic Opportunity Board. Dr. Caliguri of the Clark County School District, reported that since last summer there has been much positive evidence as to pre-school programs. There has been assurance that Project Head Start programs are needed, especially in the areas of medical attention and in social behavior development. Research has indicated that children with negative social attributes gained even from a seven-week program. Board members were provided with a summary of the application to be submitted. On motion of Father Shallow, seconded by Dr. West, motion carried unanimously.
CLARK COUNTY COOPERATIVE PURCHASING CLUBS PROPOSAL: Mr. Lawson moved for approval of the program by the Board; Jesse Williams seconded. The Chair called for discussion. Father Shallow stated that many people are opposed in that this program will’hurt the businessman. As this is a buyers club, he did not see the logic of opposing it on the basis of cooperatives hurting the businessman. Mrs. Riggins questioned on the basis of cost, and overhead, on how all the materials would be obtained; and that leaders would only give one or two items. This just did not make sense, she stated. Mr. Fahey explained the concept as that a group of people get together, look over the grocery advertisements in newspapers and decide what leaders and kinds of foods they can buy; and they can go also to the wholesale people to buy. These will be local merchants so the money will not be going out of the area. The only personnel requested in the project is to train people to organize themselves; after one group is trained, the personnel will train another, and the former group functions on its own. Miss Arensdorf stated that she had a knowledge of food habits and all people had different tastes; there would be the possibility of getting stuck with a food item. Mr. Fahey stated that every poverty program is in the nature of an experiment. This program hopes to involve the people in their own buying habits so they can go alone to buy leader items. Even if savings are only 10%, it is teaching good buying habits. Mrs. Johnson asked where the clubs are being organized. Mr. Fahey stated all over the county, in all the housing developments. Mr. Spann commented on the attitudes of the retailer in the community about competing with a government facility, with government employees, government supplies, rent, utilities and such. Father Shallow stated that some people feel Operation Independence Day Care Centers are competing with private day care centers in the same way. Mr. Pushard felt there would be a stipulation by the merchants placed on leader items, such as only being available after a $5 purchase of food. Father Shallow advised there are 140 families waiting for funding so the program will be available. Dr. West cited reasons why he did not believe the project feasible; one that the project states that after one year it will involve 80 to 100 clubs from 25 to 100 units each, and he did not believe 10,000 to 15,000 will not be interfering with the business of private enterprise; he felt this is too close to a socialistic movement. He further felt the wholesalers would threaten a boycott and it would create ill will. Mr. Fahey said that if it is called socialism — helping people to shop, checking so that they got food instead of booze — he didn't see anything wrong with it.. Father Shallow asked "if we were attempting to help the businessman or attempting to solve the problems of poverty." Mr. Williams said, "These clubs are working all over the United States," and he further stated they were necessary for people often went to the County Welfare Department and could not get food. Mrs. Stella Fleming Director of County Welfare, advised that no one ever was turned away without food if they were hungry.
Mr. Spann submitted a subsidiary motion that the original motion be tabled and that this project be referred to a committee of experts selected by the Nominating Committee to investigate the feasibility of the project by people versed in the field of this trade and return their findings back to the Board. Motion was seconded by Dr. West. The Chair called for discussion.
-4-
Mr. Lawson stated that none of these Board Members were experts on poverty but still are trying to do a job for the poor. Mr. Fahey stated, for the record, that not many are experts in day care, migrants, Neighborhood Youth Corps, yet all these projects were passed without committees. Mr. Spann advised that there had been experts on projects citing as examples Mr. McCoy on the SBDC project, Mr. Bunker on the migrant project. Mr. Fahey answered that Father Shallow is an expert on poverty. The Chair called for a vote on the subsidiary motion before the Board. The vote was II in favor; 4 against, that this project be referred for further study. The Chair instructed the Nominating Committee to recommend members to serve on thi-s comm i ttee.
OPERATION MEDICARE ALERT: Mr. Ed Cocks, Director of the Social Security District Office, reported on the Medicare program which was funded by 0E0 and carried out in conjunction with the Social Security Administration. He advised that workers had contacted over 50,000 homes, on a door-to-door basis. Over 800 cards have been received from people saying they wanted to apply for Medicare. He further advised that a survey of senior citizens is now being conducted to determine their expressed needs. The information received would be provided to Board Members for program planning.
NEIGHBORHOOD YOUTH CORPS: A progress report has been provided each Board Member and is made part of the minutes of the meeting. An audit of the first grant funding the Neighborhood Youth Corps program is available for Board Members information. Mr. Longhurst also reported that the physical and mental health component for the Neighborhood Youth Corps would expire in 30 days. Morris Peltz reported that a request for refunding was now in process for this component, and would be constructed to meet the requirements set by the Department of Labor. This component will continue to provide for physical and mental health examinations and in addition will provide for a required educational component.
Mrs. Lubertha Johnson invited Board Members to the Operation Independence Center to observe some of the work being done by NYC enrollees. Garments will be on display made by enrollees; refreshments will be served by enrollees being trained in the culinary arts.
NELSON AMENDMENT: Mr. Peltz advised that this was a program providing money for a nationwide project for improvement in public areas using unemployed or underemployed persons to give them work experience and training. He reported that this information has gone to the City of Las Vegas, and to Henderson. Recent meetings have been held with the Las Vegas Park Superintendent. The City is studying the feasibility of the program. Similar programs will also be offered to other areas.
-5-
LEGAL AID PROGRAM: Mr. Peltz reported that at present the Society employed one secretary and used volunteer legal services. The amount of services provided is small. The American Bar Association had sent a consultant and through other interventions, the Legal Aid Society voted to continue planning such a program. The beginnings of a program have been outlined, and hopefully by the next Board Meeting a work program can be presented for these expanded legal services.
PROPOSAL FOR NEIGHBORHOOD SERVICES CENTER FOR CLARK COUNTY POCKETS OF POVERTY: Board Members were provided with an outline of this program submitted by Nevada Catholic Welfare Bureau for Henderson; this outline is made part of these minutes. The Chairman announced that under the practice just adopted, this proposal would be referred to a special committee for study.
PROPOSAL FOR NEIGHBORHOOD YOUTH CORPS: Father Shallow advised that Catholic Welfare is beginning Investigation to determine if it would be feasible, when the present NYC program expires, to have the program operated by an agency other than the Economic Opportunity Board. He further advised that he thought the EOB was supposed to operate programs only if no other agency is available to do so. There is a possibi lity that the United Fund or YMCA may be interested in this.
ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business to come before the Board, the meeting was adjourned.
Respectfully submitted,
ELAINE WALBROEK
Executive Director
EW:sl
-6-
ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY BOARD OF CLARK COUNTY
301 S. HIGHLAND Room 303
Las Vegas, Nevada
April 20, 1966
TO: Board of Directors
FROM: Harvey Dondero Chairman
RE: April 27 Board Meeting
The next meeting of the Board of Directors of the Economic Opportunity Board of Clark County will be held April 27, 1966 (Wednesday), 7:30 P.M., at the Rancho High School Library.
Enclosed for your consideration are items concerning that meeting. There will also be a proposed submission of a Nelson Amendment Project for the City of North Las Vegas; however, details have not been finalized as of this date.
Following is the agenda for the meeting.
AGENDA
Minutes of the Previous Meeting,
Treasurer’s Report.
,Chai rman
Lee Walker
For Board Action:
NYC Physical and Mental Health Component..........................................................Morris Peltz
North Las Vegas Nelson (Employment) Amendment Project.............................Morris Peltz
Election of Two Members to the Nominating Committee..................................Chairman
Reports
Neighborhood Council Report.......................................................................................David Hoggard
Current Program Reports................................................................................................Morris Peltz i
Nominating Committee Report.......................................................................................Ted Lawson
Screening Committee Report.........................................................................................Charles Spann
Other Business
BOARD MEETING
ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY BOARD OF CLARK COUNTY
Apr!I 27, 1966 7:30 P.M.
Rancho High School. Library Las Vegas, Nevada
PRESENT: Board Members: Harvey Dondero (Chairman), Robert E. Bellis (representing Emory Lockette,) Stella Fleming, Douglass Pushard, L.E. Shuck, Scott D. Staub, Isaac R. White, Don Hampton, Mi I ton Weiss, Ferren Bunker, Father Charles Shallow, Charles Spann, Reverend Newton Tigner, James Snowden, Charlotte Hill, J.R. McPherson
Technical Advisory Committee Members: Albert Landsman
Guests: James A. Wagoner, Leola Armstrong, Bill Chaviers
Staff: Elaine Walbroek, Morris Peltz, David Hoggard, Sylvia Leon
The Chairman opened the meeting calling for project reports to be the first matter on the agenda.
NEIGHBORHOOD COUNCIL REPORT: David Hoggard reviewed that Neighborhood Councils were now in the process of being formed and would use approximately the same district boundaries as the six school district areas of West Las Vegas. Two meetings have thus far been held in each Council district since March 22, nominating committees have been created in each council. It is hoped soon to have elections and by-laws established. The San Francisco Office of Economic Opportunity has informed the Economic Opportunity- Board that it will be required that a Council has 20 to 25 members active before it is on its own and elects permanent officers. Mr. Hoggard further reported that preliminary discussions are now in process with the County Housing Authority for obtaining space in Carver Park and Victory Village as Neighborhood Service Centers and for Washington School in North Las Vegas. The Neighborhood Councils in West Las Vegas are being formed in conjunction with Operation Independence, with the attendance of parents of children of the day care centers.
Mr. Al Landsman, as a member of the Housing Authority, advised that space has been granted in Carver Park.
ADMINISTRATION REPORT: Morris Peltz reported that there were now five projects in the San Francisco Regional Office of Economic Opportunity. The Conduct and Administration Grant for the Economic Opportunity Board has passed all review channels and should be approved shortly. He reported that the Migrant Community Service Center project has been reviewed in all necessary departments, and approval is being expected shortly. The Hot Lunch Program for West Las Vegas, Mr. Peltz reviewed, is to institute hot lunches in the six schools in the West Las Vegas area. This program has passed preliminary reviews by the area coordinator in San Francisco, and should shortly be on its way to funding. The Clark County School District Project Head Start Summer Program is having necessary changes of its program worked out by School District staff, and it is hoped that there will be no problem with this project. Concerning the Operation Independence Community Service Center, Mr. Peltz advised that 0E0 office has established new
criteria for how a neighborhood center will operate. A consultant from Washington, Mr. James Eastman, will be in Las Vegas next Wednesday, to meet with Boards and agencies concerned with the program. Board members were invited to attend this meeting, at which it would be hoped that questions or concerns would be discussed regarding the proposed program. Mr. Peltz further reviewed that through the Center will come programs in education, employment service, etc.Though it is a single project, it is a program covering many broad areas. On the Legal Aid Program, Mr. Peltz reviewed that a committee has, with the EOB staff, prepared a preliminary draft of an OEO-funded legal aid program. This will be submitted to the Executive Board and then to the entire Bar Association for consideration. Regarding the Nelson Amendment, the City of Las Vegas Beautification Committee is considering this program which is now in the planning stages.
BOARD MEMBER ATTENDANCE: Following discussion, Mr. Robert Reid and Mr. James Arnold were dropped from the Board due to their inattendance at meetings. A quorum was declared present.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Ferren Bunker moved, Reverend Tigner seconded, that the minutes of the previous meeting be approved as present. Motion passed.
TREASURER’S REPORT: The Chairman briefly reviewed the financial statistics presented which had been provided each Board Member. Mr. Mi I ton Weiss commended the staff on compilation of report. Several questions were raised on expenditures made by the Economic Opportunity Board. Following satisfactory answers to al I questions, Mr. Weiss moved and Father Shallow seconded that the financial report be adopted as presented. Motion passed.
PHYSICAL AND MENTAL HEALTH AND EDUCATION COMPONENT FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD YOUTH CORPS: Mr. Peltz reported that this component provides support services for the Neighborhood Youth Corps. The past program has provided the physical and mental health examinations and needed follow-up; the presently proposed program provides for an educational component to be added. This component is required by the U.S. Dept, of Labor without that department authorizing monies for this. This will provide funds for NYC enrollees to take special vocational courses or finish up a high school diploma. The total component asks for funding of $8,000. Following brief discussion, Mr. Bunker moved that this project be approved by the Board for submission; seconded by Reverend Tigner, this motion passed unanimously.
NORTH LAS VEGAS NELSON AMENDMENT EMPLOYMENT PROJECT: Mr. Peltz reviewed that this project provides special money to train unemployed or underemployed persons in the area of beautification. Information regarding this project has been submitted to North Las Vegas and Las Vegas, and Mrs. Armstrong has given information to Operation Independence. The City of North Las Vegas has developed a program with Mr. Forsen, Director of Parks and Recreation, working with the EOB staff.
Mr. Peltz advised that Mr. Wagner, assistant to Mr. Forsen is present to answer questions. He further explained the two facets of this program—the involvement of community improvement; and the involvement
-2-
of a training program to develop skills of presently unemployed or underemployed persons. Board Members were shown pictures of the area planned to be developed by North Las Vegas. Mr. Peltz further advised that this project would not be funded under guideline monies, but by special funds. Over 70^ of the project monies would pay for 30 unemployed or underemployed persons in Clark County. At the end of the one year of this project, these people would be trained in many areas of beautification work. The supervisors employed for the project would need to be trained so that they can provide training for the unexperienced workers. In Board discussion Father Shallow felt this was a project that was wandering far from basic poverty; Mr. Weiss supported the project stating that the North Las Vegas staff has worked long hours to meet a deadline on this project submission and if this money was not applied for it would be gone and 30 people who might be employed then would not. He also pointed out the benefit to the community in having a permanent park in an area that now contains sparse, substandard housing. Mrs. Walbroek pointed out that this project will also attempt to employ those who are heads of household, thus relieving payments that may otherwise need to be carried to the Welfare Department. Father Shallow, commenting that North Las Vegas has a history of getting things done, moved to approve the North Las Vegas Nelson Amendment Project. Seconded by Ferren Bunker, motion passed unanimously.
ELECTION OF TWO MEMBERS TO NOMINATING COMMITTEE: Chairman, Harvey Dondero, stated that there were two vacancies existing on the Nominating Committee created by the resignation of Dr. Leslie Shuck and the inattendance of James Anderson. Nominated for these two positions were Ferren Bunker and Emory Lockette. Mr. White moved that nominations be closed; seconded by Reverend Tigner, motion passed and Mr. Bunker and Mr. Lockette were declared new members to the Nominating Committee membershi p.
NOMINATING COMMITTEE REPORT: Report distributed to Board Members and is made part of these minutes. Mr. Snowden added to the report that Mr. Arthur Sartini has declined to serve on the Committee to Study the Clark County Cooperative Purchasing Clubs. Another member to replace him will be named at the next Nominating Committee meeting. Father Shallow corrected the report stating that Vernon Bunker had been named to the Committee to study Board Structure, not Ferren Bunker. This correction was noted. Mr. Snowden further advised that Mr. Pushard had declined to serve as Chairman of the Committee to Study the Clark County Purchasing Clubs but would serve as a member. It was noted that the Committee could then select its own chairman from the membership. Ferren Bunker moved that the Nominating Committee report be accepted as corrected. Seconded by Reverend Tigner, motion passed.
-3-
SCREENING COMMITTEE REPORT: Chairman of Committee, Charles Spann, reported that the Screening Committee elected by the Nominating Committee consisted of himself as Chairman, Father Charles Shallow, James Snowden, Ted Lawson, Lee Walker, Isaac White, and Al Landsman. This committee has laid ground rules and has advertised in the newspaper for applicants to fill the position of Executive Director. The salary has been established at $13,000. Al I interested persons have been asked to send resumes to Employment Service where they will be turned over to Mr. Spann; he will in turn send them to Sylvia Leon at the EOB office to be duplicated in 7 copies and mailed to members of the Screening Committee. Following the closing date for applications another Screening Committee meeting will be held at which the best qualified applicants will be selected for interview. Of the seven-man Screening Committee, a majority of five is hoped for to recommend an individual to the Board for appointment. Mr. McPherson questioned how the $13,000 salary had been arrived at. Mr. Spann stated this had been approved by the Regional Office as compared to cities of comparable size. Mr. McPherson asked if a salary range was being considered. Mr. Spann said this was not possible and reviewed the previous experience of the Economic Opportunity Board is attempting to promise a salary increase to Mrs. Walbroek when she was initially employed. Mr. Spann also stated in answer to a question by a Board Member that if a decision could not be arrived at by a majority of 5, then a simple majority would rule. He advised it was hoped that the Screening Committee could bring their recommendation to the Board at its May 18 meeting.
ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business to come before the Board, the meeting was adjourned.
Respectfully submitted,
SYLVIA LEON
Staff Secretary
ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY BOARD OF CLARK COUNTY
301 S. Highland, Room 303
Phone: 384-3162
TO: Board Members
FROM: Harvey Dondero Chairman
RE: EMERGENCY BOARD MEETING
All Board Members are urgently requested to attend a special Board Meeting to be held:
Wednesday, May II, 1966 7:30 P.M.
Rancho High School Library
The purpose of .the meeting is to discuss the salary to be paid to the new Executive Director. Some concern has been expressed that the Board discuss further the question of salary to be paid to the i new person. Employment will be delayed until this question is resolved. Mrs. Walbroek will be leaving our employment shortly, and it is essential that there should be an individual on the job before her departure.
. The other agenda item will be consideration of the manpower program for Clark County.
HD:sl
5/4/66
AGENDA
ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY BOARD OF CLARK COUNTY
May II, 1966, Special Meeting Rancho High School Library
7:30 P.M. Las Vegas, Nevada
FOR BOARD DISCUSSION
I.
Title V Renewal Projecf^^^
2.
Manpower Project
FOR BOARD ACTION
3.
City of Las Vegas Summer Youth Employment Program
4.
Amendment to NYC Support Component
5.
BOARD DISCUSSION AND ACTION REGARDING THE SALARY OF THE NEW EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
SPECIAL BOARD MEETING
ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY BOARD OF CLARK COUNTY
May 11, 1966 7:30 P.M.
Rancho High School Library Las Vegas, Nevada
PRESENT: Board Members: William W. Morris, Emory Lockette, Stella Fleming, Charlotte Hill, Scott Staub, Leslie Shuck, James Snowden, Don Hampton, Bob McPherson, Milton Weiss, Ferren Bunker, Douglass Pushard, W.J. deValcourt, Jr., Isaac White, Father Charles Shallow, Reverend Newton Tigner, Harvey Dondero, Lee Walker, Ted Lawson Technical Advisory Committee: Albert M. Landsman
Guests: Bill Chaviers, Eva L. Houston, R.W. Bauer, Mrs. L. Shuck, Robert Fahey, Anthony Amenta, Robert E. Bellis, Lubertha Johnson
Staff: Morris Peltz, David Hoggard, Sylvia Leon, Doyle Longhurst, Ann Mai us
The Chairman opened the meeting calling for reports on action items. Mr. Peltz apologized for not being able to give the customary 3-day notice for the projects to be reviewed, stating that the reason was that projects have not been finalized in the limited amount of time allowed to get the proposal in to Regional CEO. The time limits being set now are due to reaching the end of the fiscal grant year.
C|TY OF LAS VEGAS SUMMER YOUTH PROGRAM: Mr. Peltz reviewed that last year Clark County had one of the first NYC programs funded and because of this was able to have 700 work stations for youth: however, as more and more communities established programs funding to Clark County was reduced, and presently has in the neighborhood of 100 work stations for this summer. In line with information from the regional 0E0 that there might be monies left over this fiscal year to fund worthwhile antipoverty efforts, the staff of the E0B proceeded to work with the City of Las Vegas in proposing a program for youth to work in beautification. Tying in with the NYC program, this proposal asks for 40 additional job stations to assign youth for work experience in two departments of the City — the Parks Department and the Recreation Department. Mr. Peltz stated this would be a training program with a total cost in the neighborhood of $32,000. 75$ of the project cost will be for the low-income youth. There is a Project Director at a salary of $100 per week who will recruit, coordinate, etc., and a half-time bookkeeper. There is a small amount of money for consumable supplies. In Board discussion Dr. Shuck questioned if this would take the place of the project which was not completed for Las Vegas under the Nelson Amendment. Mr. Peltz advised it did not. It was hoped to go ahead on the Nelson Amendment project with plans to request funding in the next fiscal year. Mr. McPherson advised this was only a summer program planned to initiate some of the objectives of the city. Discussion initiated by Mr. Lockette questioned the difficulties of giving Board Members ample time to review proposed projects before voting.
Mr. Peltz outlined the happenings that resulted in this situation. Ferren Bunker suggested the Board commend those employees who have put this project together in the limited amount of time imposed by 0E0. Mr. Weiss moved and Mr. Pushard seconded that this project be approved for submission. Motion carried unanimously.
STATEMENTS BY WILLIAM MORRIS: Mr. Morris asked to have the opportunity to comment on a matter on the agenda as he had to leave the meeting early. Regarding the matter of salary to be paid to the new Executive Director, he expressed that the salary should remain at $13,000. He stated that only through competency of personnel can the Board hope to accomplish its objectives and the salary determines the competency of personnel. He stated he would hope that the salary would not be lowered.
AMENDMENT TO NEIGHBORHOOD YOUTH CORPS COMPONENT: Mr. Peltz in discussing this proposal, stated it would be a somewhat new venture on the part of the Board. The amount of funding requested is only $3,000, and concerns youth who were expelled from school. Nevada Catholic Welfare has been conducting a program of education for these youth so that they will be ready to enter school again next September. This amendment would provide funds for a counselor from SYNANON in San Francisco to work with these youth in trying to find their real problems and to be of help to them. Mr. Peltz advised that this might be a controversial movement as feeling expressed at the last NAACP meeting was that should be the concern of the School District. This project will hope to orient these students to their lives and to the school environment. Nevada Catholic Welfare will make tapes of the counseling sessions to be used by counselors in training sessions. There are 30 youth involved in this project at a cost of $3,000 which averages the cost to be $100 per youth. In Board discussion Mr. Weiss questioned were there not qualified counselors in Clark County? Mr. Peltz stated that there was no one in this community trained to do this kind of unique therapy. Dr. Shuck concurred with this, stating that this is not a well-known technique and are not skills that are easily come by. Father Shallow commented that it is hoped that the Synanon counselors have something, as thus far the problems are known but many of the answers are not. Following the above discussions, Mr. Lockette motioned that the NYC amendment be recommended for funding. Motion was seconded by Reverend Tigner and carried.
DISCUSSION REGARDING SALARY OF THE NEW EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR: The Chairman reviewed that some of the members of the Board felt that the question of the salary for the new Executive Director should be opened for discussion. The position had been advertised at a salry of $13,000 per annum. Applications had been received through April 30 after which a Screening Committee meeting was called. However, because two Board Members (representing Mayors) and another city employee (represent!ng a Mayor), informed the Screening Committee that they were asking for a Special Board Meeting to discuss the salary to be paid, the Screening Committee did not proceed with their work. There was lengthy Board discussion on this question. Mr. Landsman said it was bad business to change a salary after it had been publicized at a certain figure. Isaac White
-2-
felt that a person should have something to work toward and that a salary range should be established. In discussing the security of the position, Mr. McPherson felt that employees of the cities and county had no more nor less security than this position. One of the criticisms nationally leveled against the poverty program has been against the salaries of the people involved and he fait the Baord should correct this image locally. At this point, Mr. Snowden moved and it was seconded by Mr. White that the starting salary be established at $10,500. There was discussion initiated by Mi I ton Weiss on salaries of comparable positions. Salary schedules were passed out to the Board and are made part of these minutes. Mr. Lockette stated these schedules were attempting to sh.ow what the prevailing salaries in the community were. Dr. Shuck stated the issue is what does the job deserve and what is it equated to in the community. He said that throughout the United States you will find many persons trained to fill the jobs listed in the salary schedules, therefore, there is a difference in demand and lower salaries are paid for these kinds of positions. He stated that you could not equate these positions with the Executive Director’s position. He further said the Board should not be too concerned that it looks like, by someone's definition, the salary is out of synchronization. The things the Board should consider, Dr. Shuck stated, is quality, someone who can do a good job, and has skill and knowledge. Lee Walker stated there might be criticism for paying a salary of $13,000; however, a skilled person worth $13,000 then might avoid the Board a lot of other criticism. He stated further that this salary should be related to the administrative field and $13,000 is not high in that field. Mr. Weiss stated the Board is not here to create a high title, a high paid job, but are here to get a job done in the best possible manner in the poverty program. The Chairman cal led for a vote on .the question now on the floor. On a rolI cal I vote, there were 9 yes and 6 no. Motion passed to establish the starting salry for the position of Executive Director at ?$10,500,
~Mr. Weiss proposed that the Screening Committee send a form letter to each applicant on record, stating that the Board has established a starting salary of $10,500, and that they establish a salary range of
I$10,500 to $14,000. This was seconded by Mr. McPherson? Following ■"discussion that a salary range could not be established as the budget was granted on a six-month basis, Mr. Weiss withdrew the motion. Mr. Lockette entered a motion that the Screening Committee submit a minimum of three individuals with their recommendations as LclMq they recommend as first, second, and third choice, to the Beard for consideration with qualifications of the individuals outlined and that Screening Committee members be in a position to answer questions. In discussion the Screening Committee advised that they had planned to bring only one recommendation to the Board. There was not a second to this motion; however, following Board discussion Mr^_ Lockette. restated his motion which was seconded by Reverend Ti.qner. There was further discussion on how the Board would go about making a choice from 3 names submitted. Mr. Lockette amended Kis motion to delete the phrase to rank the three individuals. On a roll call vote, there were 7. yes, 9 no. ^Motion lost. 'If was determined that the Screening ’ Committee would submit only one recommendation to the Board.
-3-
APPOINTMENT OF ACTING EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR: Ferren Bunker moved for the appointment of Morris Peltz as Acting Di rector in the interim until a new Director was selected and recommended that his salary be increased $1000 per annum during that time. Motion was seconded by Mr. Pushard. Following brief discussion, motion carried with two dissenting votes.
FURTHER DISCUSSION ON EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR POSITION: Upon motion of Father Shallow and seconded by Reverend Tigner, it was recommended that the Screening Committee contact those applicants on record and make the selection from those who are interested in the position at the reduced salary. Motion carried unanimously.
ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned.
Respectfully submitted,
SYLVIA LEON
Staff Secretary
ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY BOARD OF CLARK COUNTY
301 SOUTH HIGHLAND, ROOM 303 384-3162
TO: Chairman and Members of Economic Opportunity Board of Clark County
FROM: Morris Peltz
Acting Director
DATE: June 6, 1966
SUBJECT: Items for Board Discussion for Board Meeting of June 8, 1966
Enclosed please find copies of the financial report covering the operations of the Economic Opportunity Board of Clark County up to April 30, 1966.
In addition, there is enclosed a copy of the Proposed Amendment to the Operation Independence Community Service Center CAP 7-13 which is on the agenda for Board consideration and action.
ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY BOARD OF CLARK COUNTY 301 SOUTH HIGHLAND 384-3162
MEMORANDUM
TO: Board of Directors
FROM: Harvey Dondero
Cha i rman
RE: Meeting of the Board
This is to advise all members of the Board and others concerned that the Meeting previously scheduled for May 25 has been postponed. The next regular Meeting will be held:
Wednesday, June 8 7:30 P.M. Rancho High School Library
This change is due to the immediate primary concern of the Board - that of selecting a new Executive Director. At the special meeting of May 11, the Board voted to reduce the starting salary of the new Director to $10,500. Consequently, the Screening Committee has had to contact all candidates for the position to determine if they would still be interested at this reduced salary. Giving candidates time in which to respond, the Screening Committee hopes to begin screening on June 1. Thus it is contemplated they can make their recommendation to the Board at the meeting of June 8.
An agenda, and three new proposed projects will be mailed to you shortly.
5/18/66
AGENDA
BOARD MEETING OF THE ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY BOARD OF CLARK COUNTY
Wednesday. 7:30 P.M.
June 8
Rancho High School Library Las Vegas, Nevada
APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF THE MEETINGS OF APRIL 27 AND MAY 11....Chairman
O^FINANCIAL REPORT.
Treasurer
PROJECT STATUS REPORT.
EOB Staff
PROJECTS FOR BOARD ACTION.
EOB Staff -
3.
Amendment to Operation Independence Community Service- Center (Manpower Project)
Clark County Counci l of Older Americans Project —
Clark County Legal Aid Services Project
REPORT
OF THE
SCREENING COMMITTEE
.Charles Spann
REPORT
OF THE
COMMITTEE TO ANALYZE BOARD STRUCTURE
,MiI ton Weiss
CONSIDERATION
OF TIME AND PLACE OF ANNUAL MEETING.
.Chai rman
MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY BOARD OF CLARK COUNTY
June 8, 1966 7:30 P.M.
Rancho High School Library Las Vegas, Nevada
PRESENT: Board Members: Lee E. Walker, Emory W. Lockette, Dr. Charles I. West, Stella Fleming, Charlotte Hill, James L. Snowden, Thomas W. Wilson, Sr., Bob McPherson, Mi I ton Weiss, Douglass Pushard, Ferren W. Bunker, J.H. Mankins, Father Charles T. Shallow, Charles W. Spann, Harvey Dondero (Chairman), Reverend Newton Tigner, Isaac White Technical Advisory Committee Member: Albert Landsman
Guests: Leola Armstrong, Lubertha Johnson, Jack Watson, Annie P. O’Neal Bea Everage, Dorothy Johnson, John W. Lyon, Sarah Ray
Staff: Morris Peltz, David Hoggard, Ann Maius, Sylvia Leon, Evelyn Mauldin
EOB OFFICE REPORT: Sylvia Leon advised that two projects had been funded in May. The Conduct and Administration grant for the Economic Opportunity Board was approved May 16 for $29,768; however, the beginning date for this grant is February 15. There are two special conditions; that within 60 days of release of funds, evidence must be submitted that the By-Laws of the community action agency have been amended to provide that representatives of the groups being served shall be represented by a minimum of 1/3 membership of the Board and, on all committees and subcommittees of the Board of ten CAA in at least the same proportion as they are represented on the Board itself. The second condition states that within 60 days after the new Executive Director assumes office, there shall be submitted, for approval of the Regional Office, new job descriptions for the positions entitled Executive Director and Program Assistant for this grant. Mrs. Leon further advised the Board that approval of the grant to fund a Migrant Community Service Center for $147,950 had been received May 4. There is one condition attached to this grant — that a nurse be in the vicinity when there are children under age 3 being cared for. She advised that this situation was being worked out with the Clark County Health Department. Mr. Bunker discussed further happenings in this regard. In Board discussion, questions were raised regarding which agency would be responsible for the nurse salary. Mr. Peltz advised that it will be requested through 0E0.
Discussing Title I I—A guidelines for Clark County, Mr. Peltz reviewed that the projects up for consideration committed nearly all of the monies available. He asked the Board to consider that several of the projects would require resubmission for next year's fiscal monies. He said though that there are other sources for project funding, eg. Nelson Amendment, Migrant, Upward Bound, research monies. On the Clark County Legal Aid Program, Mr. Peltz advised that this program had been submitted to the
Bar Association where it was discussed and voted to set up a committee to study the proposal and return it to the Bar again for a vote. This project then will require emergency action by the Executive Committee of EOB so that it can be submitted before the end of the fiscal year.
MINUTES OF THE MEETINGS OF APRIL 27 AND MAY 11: There being no discussion on the minutes of the meeting of April 27, Mr. Mankins moved that they be adopted as presented. Motion was seconded by Father Shallow and passed by the group. In discussion of the minutes of May 11, Mr. Weiss stated that on the motion made by Mr. Lockette "that the Screening Committee submit a minimum of three individuals with their recommendations as to who they recommend as first, second, and third choice," which was further amended to delete the ranking of the three persons, there seemed to be some misunderstanding. In discussion Mr. Walker stated that when this motion lost, it was his understanding that the Screening Committee would bring only one name to the Board. There was further discussion on reason for one or three names being submitted. Mr. Bunker stated that the minutes did reflect what actually happened, thus he moved for the adoption of the minutes as recorded. This was seconded by Reverend Tigner. In further discussion, Mr. Lockette requested the minutes be changed where they stated that a "salary range could not be established as the budget was granted on a six-month basis." Following discussion as to the correctness of this statement, the Chair ruled that though the statement might not be accurate, the concern was whether or not what had been said was recorded correctly. The Chair called for a vote on the motion. Motion carried with two dissenting votes by Mr. Lockette and Mr. Weiss.
FINANCIAL REPORT: There being no questions, the report was accepted as presented. Mr. Peltz advised that next year's guideline monies will probably require a percentage of guideline monies to be committed for Head Start programs. Operation Independence centers will probably have an allotment of between $110,000 and $120,000. Mr. Peltz requested that the Board give the staff authority to plan with Catholic Welfare and the Neighborhood Councils in Henderson and North Las Vegas for Head Start programs in those two areas if the Councils want such programs and if funding becomes available. Mr. Weiss made a motion to do such as stated by Mr. Peltz. This was seconded by Mr. Pushard. Mr. Peltz further advised that this is a year- round program for which planning should begin immediately. Dr. West questioned whether this would not be overlapping Operation Independence's Head Start programs. Following brief discussion a vote was taken on which the motion carried with one dissenting vote cast by Dr. West.
NEIGHBORHOOD YOUTH CORPS PROGRAM: Mr. Peltz reviewed some of the difficulties of the NYC program, particularly in that the real hard core youth were not being brought into the program. He stated that the wage of $1.25 per hour did not attract these youth. Mr. Peltz submitted for the Board's consideration that they request that Nominating Committee be instructed to establish a three-member permanent NYC committee. Mr. Snowden moved and Mr. McPherson seconded that this committee be established. There was discussion on what the problems of the NYC program are. On a vote on the question, motion passed unanimously. There was Board discussion as to whether this would be a Standing Committee or a Special Committee. Members felt that the word "permanent" seemed to indicate a Standing Committee. Dr. West made a motion to recind the previous motion because
-2-
of faulty wording. This was seconded by Reverend Tigner and passed. Dr. West restated the motion that this Board recommend that the Nominating Committee select a three-member special NYC committee. Seconded by Reverend Tigner, this motion passed unanimously.
AMENDMENT TO OPERATION INDEPENDENCE COMMUNITY SERVICE CENTER: Mr. Peltz reviewed the background of this project and advised the Board that this present amendment was now before them for approval prior to being submitted to 0E0 for funding. The basic philosophy of the program is for sub-professional aids to be employed to act as shepherds for low-income persons seeking employment services, educational services, etc. When such a person comes to the Center, he will be attached to an aid until he leaves the center having a job which will bring him above the poverty level of income. Mr. Spann moved that this amendment be approved as submitted. Seconded by Mr. White, motion passed unanimously.
CLARK COUNTY COUNCIL OF OLDER AMERICANS: Mr. Peltz introduced Mrs. Ann Maius, former Project Director of Operation Medicare Alert who is temporarily on the EOB staff developing a project to fund a Council of Older Americans, Mrs. Maius reviewed that respondents of medicare had expressed a desire for a community center and part-time employment service. The project now before the Board, she stated, would fund such a council which would include the development of these two items. She advised that this was a one-year non-refundab Ie program as other monies would be sought for future programs. Mr. Snowden moved that this project be referred to a special study committee to be set up by the nominating committee. Seconded by Reverend Tigner. In discussion, Mr. Peltz advised that if this program was sent to committee, it could not be submitted until next fiscal year at which time there might not be guideline monies available. There was board discussion on the matter of all projects being handled in the same manner and that a definite dec ids ion should be made regarding whether each project should go to committee first or whether the Board could act on it immediately. On the question, there were 5 yes votes, 8 no votes. Motion lost. Mr. Spann submitted a motion that application for funding of this project be submitted to 0E0. Motion seconded by Dr. West and Mr. Bunker and carried unanimously.
PREFERENCE COMPONENT FOR NELSON AMENDMENT: Mr. Peltz advised that a preference component was not requesting approval of a project. It was asking the agency which would fund a project to coordinate it with a project that is being requested by 0E0. In this particular case, this preference component is tied in with the Nelson Amendment Project for North Las Vegas which has already been approved by this Board. The preference component is asking the Department of Interior to provide money to buy equipment and materials to allow the Nelson Amendment project to be carried out. Mr. Weiss introduced Mr. Jack PQt+iti, Councilman from North Las Vegas, and Mr. Bob Forson from the Parks and Recreation Department. Mr. Forson further reviewed the Nelson Amendment project stating that it would create a multiple use recreation area in the city, in addition to creating an opportunity to train people in critical skills in the Department of Parks and Recreation. This companion project, called the preference component insofar as 0E0 is concerned, would provide monies for supplies
-3-
and materials necessary to build the park. This preference component is a request that OEO fight for this project, though it will not be funded by OEO. In answer to a question from Mr. Ferren Bunker, Mr. Forson advised that the Nelson Amendment Project was dependent upon the approval of this project. Mr. Bunker moved that the Board prepare the endorsement of this project. Seconded by Mr. McPherson, motion carried with one dissenting vote cast by Mr. Mankins. The Chairman at this time recommended that crash programs be avoided and enough time to study programs be given to Board Members before being asked to approve a program. Mr. Pettiti thanked the Board for its endorsement.
NEIGHBORHOOD COUNCILS: David Hoggard reported that work is continuing on establishing eight Neighborhood Councils. In West Las Vegas, two of the Councils have progressed rapidly with the West Las Vegas Council having elected its member to sit on the Economic Opportunity Board. He introduced this member, Mr. Thomas Wilson. Mr. Hoggard also advised that applications are being received for the position of Director of the Neighborhood Councils, which project expects funding shortly. Mr. Snowden moved that Mr. Thomas Wi Ison be accepted as a Board Member representing the West Las Vegas Council. This was seconded by Dr. West and Mr. White, and passed unanimously.
REPORT OF THE SCREENING COMMITTEE: Chairman of the Committee, Charles Spann noted that the Committee has prepared a recommendation; however, discussion has arisen as to whether it was the responsibility of the committee to submit one candidate or three. Mr. Spann requested clarification from the Board. Dr. West motioned that the recommendation of the Screening Committee be presented plus the names of two alternates. This was seconded by Reverend Tigner. Mr. Weiss asked that this motion be amended to instruct the Screening Committee to submit three written resumes of the candidates for the position. This amendment was accepted by Dr. West and Reverend Tigner. In Board discussion, Mr. Landsman stated a motion had been made and passed at the previous Board meeting not to submit three names. Mr. Weiss stated the Board should have the power to enter a new motion. Mr. Bunker asked if the present motion were passed, did this mean the Screening Committee would curtail action on its report. Mr. Spann advised that though the Committee had prepared a written recommendation, if they were called upon to present two alternate persons, the opinion of the Committee members is that action should be deferred and that Mr. Peltz continue in the capacity of Acting Executive Director until the next Board meeting at which time the report will be submitted according to the Board's determination. The Chairman advised that though the previous minutes stated that the Screening Committee would not bring three names to the Board, there was now a new motion on the floor. He called for a vote on this motion; that the recommendation of the Screening Committee be presented to the Board plus the names of two alternates with written resumes of the candidates. Motion carried with 9 yes votes, 1 no vote. Mr. Spann then requested that final selection be deferred until next month. Mr. Landsman advised Board Members that 15 applicants had been lost in the salary cut for the position; however, Mr. Lockette noted that the top contenders had not lost interest.
REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE TO STUDY BOARD STRUCTURE: Chairman of this Committee, Mr. Mi I ton Weiss, presented his report as submitted to Board Members and made part of these minutes. He advised there would be normal attrition in reducing the Board to 16 members. Amendment of the By-Laws could not take place until the July meeting. Mr. Peltz discussed the necessity of complying with the special condition which required that EOB seat members from six neighborhood councils. He requested that San Francisco 0E0 be queried as to whether there can be exemption from this special condition and that possibly neighborhood council representatives can be seated according to district rather than counci I.
DISCUSSION: Mr. Lockette suggested that EOB Staff had made the committment of funds, according to Mr. Peltz' discussion of the project for Older Citizens. He asked that it be made clear that staff has no right to make committement of funds. Mr. Peltz explained that no committment had been made — only that a group had been told that monies could be requested.
ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business, the meeting adjourned with the next meeting being set for June 29, Wednesday, 7:30 P.M.
Respectfully submitted,
Staff Secretary
June 15, 1966
2i00 P.M.
MINUTES OF THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE
ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY BOARD OF CLARK COUNTY
301 S. Highland Drive
Las Vega®, Nevada
PRESENTS Harvey Dondero (Chairman), Charles Spann, James Snowden, Jesse Williams, Father Charles Shallow
APPROVAL OF NOMINATING COMMITTEE REPORT: (Attached) Mr. Snowden moved that the proposed members of the Executive Committee as nominated by the Nominating Committee be approved. Father Shallow seconded. Motion carried unanimously. Mr. Spann moved that the recommendation of the Nominating Committee which proposed members for the Finance Committee and the series of study and evaluation committees be approved. Seconded by Jess© Williams, motion carried unanimously. In discussion, the Executive Committee determined that th© Slate of Officers would be presented to the Board of Directors should there be further nominations from th® floor, they would be added to the Slate at that time.
CLARK COUNTY LEGAL AID SERVICES PROJECT: Mr. Peltz reported that this program had been distributed to Board Members at Its last meeting. There are a few changes In its present form. He further reviewed that this program could be funded outside of guideline monies. It was now being requested that Executive Committee members give emergency approval on this project so that It could be submitted for funding. Board approval had not been requested at the last meeting because it had not yet been approved by the Bar Association. Mr. Spann moved that this project be ratified and submitted to the Office of Economic Opportunity for funding and that it be referred to the Social Services Committee for study and recommendation at the next Board meeting. Seconded by Father Shallow, motion carried unanimously.
ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY BOARD OFFICE REORGANIZATION: Mr. Peltz discussed the present grant and the fact that th® office funding hereafter would b© on a January through December basis. The present budget expired August 30, and the budget now being presented to the Executive Committee was an amendment to carry operations from September 1 through December 31, 1966. Emergency action was being requested so that It could possibly be funded by OEO before the end of this fiscal year. June 30. Mr. Peltz explained change In office structure. The position of Secretary to the Executive, now held by Sylvia Leon, was being elevated to Administrative Assistant. Significant new duties for this position was working with committees of the Board and supervising office personnel. Following alscusslon of the added duties of the position, Mr. Spann submitted that this new position be established at a salary of $650 monthly commensurate with the responsibilities of the position. Mr. Peltz reviewed the position now held by Mr. Hoggard titled Program Assistant. He advised that h© was re-tltling this position Program Coordinator and the chief responsibility would be the coordination of all projects following their funding. This position Indicates a raise tn salary beginning In November at which time Mr. Hoggard
will have completed one year's employment. The third change Is that of the Finance Officer, which Mr. Peltz advised was being projected for 3/4 time Instead of 1/2 time beginning September 1. An annual raise is built Into this position to begin November 1. Mr. Peltz advised the addition of a position; that of Youth Coordinator which Is presently being paid out of the Program Assistant category and which will be an added position on the budget beginning September 1.
Mr. Snowden made a motion that the proposed budget for the 4-month*s operation of th® Economic Opportunity Board be sent to the Finance Committee,, and further that the Finance Committee particularly consider elevating the salary of Administrative Assistant; if the Finance Committee approves the budget, it should be sent on to San Francisco for funding. Further on the motion, that the Finance Committee be requested to make a report on this budget at th® next Board meeting. Motion was seconded by Mr. Spann. In discussion, Mr. Bonder© suggested that the proposed salary for the position of Administrative Assistant being given to the Finance Committee as a recommendation. Mr. Spann motioned to amend Mr. Snowden;s motion to Include that the salary for Administrative Assistant be changed to $650 per month. Seconded by Father Shallow, the motion as amended carried unanimously. The budget would be submitted to the Finance Committee with the above-described change In salary.
Mr. Peltz advised Executive Committee members that members of the Board and Committees of the Board would be allotted 10$ per mile for travel to meetings. He further advised that travel money was being requested In the EOB budget amendment requesting funds for Board and Committee members to travel to other areas to observe or study projects relating to business of the Economic Opportunity Board. Mr. Snowden moved that insofar as approved by 0E0, the Executive Committee goes on record as approving the policy of authorizing travel to committee and board meetings at 10$ per mile; and that reports be submitted quarterly for such mileage and reviewed by the Finance Committee before payment. Seconded by Jesse Williams and Father Shallow, motion carried unanimously.
Mr. Peltz pointed out that the public Information material budget was rather high ($1500); however, this Is because it is hoped that Information describing the poverty program In Clark County can be distributed to other areas of the nation; eg. a newsletter.
Mr. Peltz advised the Executive Committee of the special condition attached to the present EOB grant stating "Within 60 days of release of funds, evidence must be submitted that th® By-Laws of the C.A.A. have been amended to provide that in accordance with Vol. I., Part B, Paragraph 6, CAP guide, representatives of the groups being served shall be represented by a minimum of 1/3 membership of the Soard, and on all committees and sub-committees of the Board of 10 C.A.A. in at least th® same proportions as they are represented on th® Board Itself. Mr. Snowden mad® a motion that this matter be referred
to the Committee to Study Board Structure, chaired by Mitton Weiss, and that the committee prepare a report regarding this for the next Board meeting. Seconded by Charles Spann, motion carried unanimously.
OTHER BUSINESS: In discussion of the series of Project Study and Evaluation Committees the Executive Committee requested that all projects be requested primarily to the Executive Committee for Its determination as to which particular study and evaluation committee It should be submitted.
Respectfully submitted
SYLVIA LEON
Staff Secretary
AGENDA
ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY BOARD OF CLARK COUNTY
EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MEETING
June 16, 1966 3:39 P»M»
EOB Office
Las Vegas, Nevada
FOR CONSIDERATION AND ACTION
LEGAL AID SOCIETY PROJECT
APPROVAL OF NOMINATING COMMITTEE REPORT
SPECIAL CONDITION REQUIRING CHANGE IN BY-LAWS
AGENDA
BOARD MEETING OF THE ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY BOARD OF CLARK COUNTY
Wednesday, June 8 Rancho High School Library
7:30 P.M. Las Vegas, Nevada
APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF THE MEETINGS OF APRIL 27 AND MAY I I ....Chairman
FINANCIAL REPORT.............................................................................................Treasurer
PROJECT STATUS REPORTS........................................................................EOB Staff
PRO J ECTS FOR BOARD ACT I ON......................................................................................EOB S ta f f
I.
Amendment to Operation Independence Community Service Center (Manpower Project)
2.
Clark County Council of Older Americans Project
3.
Clark County Legal Aid Services Project
REPORT OF THE SCREENING COMMITTEE.......................................................................Charles Spann
REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE TO ANALYZE BOARD STRUCTURE............................'...Mi I ton Weiss
CONSIDERATION OF TIME AND PLACE OF ANNUAL MEETING...................................Chairman
MEMORANDUM
ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY BOARD OF CLARK COUNTY
TO: Board Members
FROM: Morris Peltz
Acting Executive Director
RE: ANNUAL MEETING OF THE ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY BOARD OF CLARK COUNTY
The Annual Meeting of the Economic Opportunity Board of Clark County will be held as follows:
June 29, 1966 (Wednesday)
Rancho High School Library
Enclosed for your attention is the Nominating Committee which contains in it the .Slate of Officers as proposed Nominating Committee, piis Slate will be voted upon a) Enclosed also .are the ng/nutes of the meeting of June 8 for the Annual Meeting, the Financial Import, and the ‘ Committee Report.
ng
AGENDA
BOARD MEETING OF THE ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY BOARD OF CLARK COUNTY
Wednesday, June 29 Rancho High School Library
7:30 Las Vegas, Nevada
I. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF THE MEETINGS OF JUNE 8 .....................Chairman
I I. FINANCIAL REPORT.................................................................................................Treasurer
III.
PROJECT STATUS AND PLANNING REPORT.........................................................EOB Staff
IV.
Committee Reports
Nominating Committee
B.
Finance Committee
C.
Social Service Committee (fTf? Board Structure Committee
E. Screening Committee
V. Election of Officers
MEMORANDUM
ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY BOARD OF CLARK COUNTY
TO: Chairman and Members of the Board of Directors
FROM: Morris Peltz
Acting Executive Director
SUBJECT: Matters For Board Consideration at the Meeting of June 29, 1966
Your attention is invited to the following enclosed materials which are subjects fo various committee reports to be presented at the next bpefrd meeting: The minutes of the finance committed; the proposed 4 month extension of the Conduct and Administration Grant which funds this office; and a report of the board study committee regarding the composition of the board committees.
MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY BOARD OF CLARK COUNTY
June 29, 1966 7:30 P.M.
Rancho High School Library Las Vegas, Nevada
PRESENT:
Board Members: Ferren Bunker, Harvey Dondero, Stella Fleming, < <
representing the Mayor of Boulder City, Robert McPherson, Joseph Mankins Douglass Pushard, Reverend Charles Shallow, James Snowden, Charles Spann Reverend Newton Tigner, Lee Walker, Milton Weiss, Dr. Charles /West, I saac White, Jesse Will iams, Thomas Wi I son, Sr.
Staff: Morris Peltz, David Hoggard, Ann Maius, LaMar McDaniel, Evelyn Mauldin, Minnie Gates
Technical Advisory: Albert Landsman
Guests: Leola H. Armstrong, Sarah Ray, Bill Carlos, Lubertha Johnson, Emma Walker, Annie O'Neal, Dorothy Johnson, David C. Williams, Malvin L. Burt
The Annual Meeting of the Economic Opportunity Board of Clark County was called to order by Chairman Harvey Dondero on June 29, 1966 at 7:30 P.M., at Rancho High School Library.
Motion: Mr. Snowden moved that Mrs. Marvie Smith, Highland Neighborhood Council representative, be seated as a member of the Economic Opportunity Board of Clark County. Seconded by Dr. West. Motion carried.
Chairman Dondero reported that he had requested Leola Armstrong, Assistant Director of the State Department of Economic Opportunity to record the minutes of this Annual Meeting, in the absence of Sylvia Leon. It was agreed that this procedure was acceptable to the members of the Board.
Motion: Father Shallow moved that the minutes of the meeting of June 8, 1966 be approved. Seconded by Mr. Mankins. Motion carried.
The Chairman presented the report entitled "Economic Opportunity Board of Clark County Financial Position, May 31, 1966."
Motion: Mr. Mankins moved that the report be accepted as presented.
Seconded by Father Shallow. Motion carried.
Mr. Dondoro presented to the Board a Resolution and Application for: . Election of Coverage under the Nevada Unemployment Compensation Law •which is made part of these minutes and attached hereto.
Motion: Dr. West moved that the resolution be*adopted. • Secohded;’by • ' Mr.-Snowden. -Motion carried.
NOMINATING COMMITTEE REPORT: Mr. Mankins presented the report of the Nominating Committee which is made part of these Minutes, and a copy of which was provided each Board Member. Mr. Weiss questioned Mr. Mankins' attendance at regular meetings of the Board, and asked for a report of how many meetings Mr. Mankins had attended. The Attendance Report indicated that Mr. Mankins had attended one regular meeting of the Board since November 17, 1965. Mr. Mankins stated that he had notified the Executive Director prior to the meetings he had missed and further, that he had attended every meeting of the Executive Committee.
Dr. Gray moved that the Secretary cast a unanimous ballot for the names presented in the Nominating Committee report for officers for the Fiscal Year 1966-1967.
The Chairman ruled Dr. Gray's motion out of order on the grounds that Article III, Section 1 of the By-Laws provides that "In all cases of election of officers by the Board, the vote shall be taken by secret ballot."
Motion: Mr. White moved that the Report of the Nominating Committee be accepted. Seconded by Reverend Tigner. Motion carried.
Mot i on: Mr. Chairman asked for nominations from the floor for Chairman. Mr. Weiss moved that nominations be closed for Chairman. Seconded by Dr. West. Motion carried.
Motion: Mr. Chairman asked for nominations from the floor for First Vice Chairman. Dr. West moved that nominations be closed for First Vice Chairman. Seconded by Reverend Tigner. Motion carried.
Motion: Mr. Chairman asked for nominations from the floor for 2nd Vice Chairman. Mrs. Hill moved that nominations be closed. Seconded by Mr. White. Motion carried.
Motion: Mr. Chairman asked for nominations from the floor for Secretary. Mr. Lawson moved that nominations be closed. Seconded by Dr. West. Motion carried.
Motion: Mr. Chairman asked for nominations from the floor for Treasurer. Mr. Snowden moved that nominations be closed. Seconded by Reverend Tigner. Motion carried.
Mr. Chairman asked for nominations from the floor for the six additional members indicated in the Report of the Nominating Committee.
Motion: Reverend Tigner moved that nominations be closed. Seconded by Dr. West, motion carried.
Mr. Chairman advised the Board Members that the Nominating Committee's recommendation for Finance Committee Membership needed only to be ratified by the Board and it was his ruling that adoption of the Report of the Nominating Committee acted as the necessary ratification. He
-2-
indicated further that this ruling applied to the recommendations for membership on the Youth Committee, Manpower Committee, Social Services Committee, Education Committee, Public Works Committee and Senior Citizens Committee.
In accordance with Article VIII of the By-Laws, ballots were distributed to the members.
Mr. Chairman declared that the following were elected by unanimous vote:
Mr. Charles Spann, Chairman
Mr. Emory Lockette, First Vice President
Father Charles Shallow, Second Vice President
Mr. James Snowden, Secretary
Mr. Lee Walker, Treasurer
Mr. Ted Lawson, Member
Mr. Harvey Dondero, Member
Mr. Joseph Mankins, Member
Mr. Isaac White, Member
Mr. Jesse Williams, Member
Mr. Thomas Wilson, Member
Mr. Chairman congratulated the new officers and members of the Executive Committee on their election.
Mr. Weiss stated that he was remiss in not bringing to the attention of the Board.that all committees are to be selected in accordance with Article VI of the By-laws. Mr. Weiss did not believe that this had been complied with in the selection of project and evaluation committees.
He stated that all committees should have a public official as a member, and that the only committee he felt complied with this was the Committee on Public Works.
Mr. Chairman pointed out that Under Article III, the representation called for was "approximately one third of the Trustees shall be represented by members of the elected officials of local governing bodies, to include, but not be limited to Mayors and City Commissioners of Las Vegas, North Las Vegas, Henderson, and Boulder City, County Commissioners of Clark County and members of public agencies of the State, County or City;..."
Mr. Weiss withdrew his objection.
Mr. Mankins asked how many elected officials were on the Board. Mr. Spann indicated there were five, and further, that Mr. Weiss's recommendation for revising the Board structure had not been acted on by the Board.
Mr. Chairman indicated that Mr. Weiss's proposed amendment could not be acted upon until the July meeting.
-3-
REPORT OF THE ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY BOARD:
NEIGHBORHOOD YOUTH CORPS: Mr. Peltz advised that an additional 500 space allotment with approximately $250,000.00 had been awarded Clark County, in addition to the previous grant of 170 out of school and 200 in school. These additional allotments will be for those youngsters who will be returning to school in the fall. He requested an expression from the members of the Board concerning the addition of these allotments to the present program.
Motion: Mr. Spann moved that the Board accept the proposal to add the additional 500 space allotments to the present NYC program, and that Morris Peltz and Leola Armstrong be commended for their efforts in obtaining this additional money. Seconded by Reverend Tigner, Motion carried.
NEIGHBORHOOD COUNCILS: Mr. Peltz advised that funding had been approved for Neighborhood Councils, and that there would be 6 in West Las Vegas, 1 in Henderson and 1 in North Las Vegas in addition to 5 Neighborhood Service Centers. He further indicated that official openings had been held last week - three for Operation Independence and two for Catholic Welfare, all of which were attended by Governor Sawyer and city and county elected officials.
HOT LUNCH PROGRAM: Mr. Peltz advised that funding for the Hot Lunch Programs for the Clark County School District had been approved and would serve the six elementary schools in West Las Vegas.
MANPOWER PROJECT: Mr. Peltz indicated that this project was in the final stages of approval, and funding was expected in July. He further advised that the City of Las Vegas Youth Program and the City of North Las Vegas Nelson Amendment project are in the Regional Office.
FORMATION OF NEIGHBORHOOD COUNCILS: Mr. Hoggard reported that the formation of Neighborhood Councils had shown rapid development within the last two weeks. He credited this activity to the employment of Mr. LaMar McDaniel, Neighborhood Council Coordinator. He introduced the following persons and their positions on the Neighborhood Councils.
Sarah Ray, Westside Neighborhood Council and Publicity Chairman, Senior Citizens Council; Mary Smith, President, Westside Neighborhood Council; Bill Carlos, No. Las Vegas, Neighborhood Center Worker; Emma Walker, representative to Operation Independence from Kit Carson Neighborhood Council; Annie O'Neal, Temporary Chairman, Kit Carson Neighborhood Council; Dorothy Johnson, Temporary Chairman, Matt Kelly Neighborhood Council.
Mr. Hoggard further indicated that a week of orientation had been conducted with the staff members of the neighborhood councils, with visits to agencies, such as the Clark County Health Department. The orientation included presentation from representatives of various public and private agencies.
SENIOR CITIZENS PROJECT: Mrs. Mai us reported that the Senior Citizens group is in the process of working up two projects — a visiting homemakers
service, and hot meals on wheels. She advised that the Senior Citizens have an office opened in Lorenzi Park, the space being donated by the American Association of Retired People.
Dr. West indicated that he didn't believe there had been any federal funding for the Senior Citizens projects.
Mrs. Maius explained that while no federal funds had been received that they were operating on an in-kind contribution and local contributions.
REPORT OF STANDING COMMITTEE ON FINANCE: Mr. Lee Walker, Treasurer presented the report and recommendations of the Finance Committee which is made part of these minutes. Mr. Spann questioned the recommendation concerning pre-review of consultants. He stated he felt that if the Executive Director remained within the budget allowed that this type of a control would be superfluous. He stated that there should be concern by the Finance Committee only when the budget was exceeded.
Mr. Weiss stated that the Finance Committee should oversee all expenditures of funds and when a consultant is to be retained, the Finance Committee should make an evaluation of it. He indicated that it wasn’t the desire of the Finance Committee to hamstring the Executive Director. Mr. Weiss stated that recent publicity indicated there was nationwide abuse of hiring of consultants in other states, and that the Finance Committee doesn’t want that to happen here.
Mr. Spann indicated that there was a Social Services Committee that reviewed consultant needs and if it became necessary to run these matters through two committees, everything would become bogged down in committees rather than getting the job done. He asked how far committees were going to go in the area of being watchdogs.
Mr. Walker agreed that this did become involved in a lot of detail’ however, he expressed concern that a series of articles in the newspapers had made reference to the consultants that had been hired. He further stated that this is one area that must be watched closely as a result of national publicity.
Mr. Weiss stated that the Finance officers in the city and county are involved in these functions. He said the Committee would come to the Board for final action, and that the Board could overrule the decisions of the committee, if they felt it was necessary.
The discussion turned to signing of checks, and Mr. Walker indicated that it was the recommendation of the Finance Committee that the Chairman, Secretary, or Treasurer should sign checks instead of the Executive Director; that the actual expenditure of funds should be the responsibility of the Board members rather than the administrative staff.
-5-
Dr. West stated that the Executive Director should have the responsibility of signing checks, in addition to countersigning by the Chairman or some other officer of the Board. He stated further that no member of the Board is that familiar with the financial records and he felt the Board should depend on the Executive Director.
Mr. Walker indicated that the Executive Director, the Chairman or the Treasurer do this now.
In answer to Mr. Mankins question on who signs checks, Mr. Walker indicated any two of the above three mentioned.
Dr. Gray indicated that on any policy making board, the school district, city and county, that the board members signed checks rather than the hi red hands..
Father Shallow stated that the Board Members should be made aware of everything that goes on.
Mr. Bunker asked if it was necessary for the Board to adopt the recommendation on signing of checks. He indicated that consultant services should be considered as a separate entity. He stated that other than that he would say adopt the report.
Mr. Weiss explained the consultant item, stating that all items are more or less fixed and the only open item is consultants; however, the Committee felt it should have control over that expenditure rather than the Social Services Committee.
Mr. Spann stated it was his position that if the Social Services Committee determines that a consultant is needed and the budget has not been exceeded, they should make the determination as they are the experts in this field.
Motion: Dr. Gray moved that the Finance Committee report be adopted with the following amendments: Appraisal of consultant services be given by the appropriate committee instead of the Finance Committee.
Change the title of Budget Officer to Finance Officer. Seconded by Mr. Spann. Motion carried, and the report adopted as amended.
SOCIAL SERVICES COMMITTEE REPORT: Mr. Pushard, Chairman of this committee submitted his report, a copy of which was provided each Board Member, and is made part of these Minutes. »
In discussion, Mr. Peltz indicated that the Legal Aid Society program had been approved by the Executive Committee to submit for funding, and that the Legal Aid Society had received approval from the Bar Association. He indicated that within the proposal there was a recommendation that services be given in West Las Vegas, Henderson, and North Las Vegas; and space would be provided in the Neighborhood Service Centers.
-6-
Mr. Dondero explained that the Executive Committee had approver-funding for'this project and how it was necessary for’tho Board to ratify this act ion.
Mot ion: Mr. Bunker moved that the Board approve the action of the Executive Committee in approving the funding for the Legal Aid component. Seconded by Mr. Pushard. Motion carried.
REPORT OF THE BY-LAWS COMMITTEE: Mr. Weiss requested that the Board consider the amendments proposed by the By-Laws Committee at the July meeting. He further stated that the special condition which related to the three- legged representation as it affected committee structure, was already reference to in the By-Laws in Article VI Section 7. Report of this committee was provided each Board Member and is made part of these Minutes.
Mr. Peltz indicated that the Regional Office of 0E0 had added a special condition to grants that all committee representation be the same as the three-legged representation of Board membership. He stated that at the time, San Francisco was not aware that this provision had been met.
Mr. Weiss requested that the Board instruct Mr. Peltz to get an official answer on the three-legged representation.
Mr. Peltz stated that the Board had met the condition that San Francisco had requested, and he would notify the Regional Office accordingly.
REPORT OF THE SCREENING COMMITTEE: Mr. Dondero requested that the Board resolve into closed Executive Session to consider the appointment of a new Executive Director.
IN EXECUTIVE SESSION
9:20 P.M.
Mr. Dondero in the Chair
Mr. Spann presented the report of the Screening Committee which is made part of these Minutes and attached hereto.
Father Shallow stated he would like to propose that the Board go by the same ground rules in this discussion that the Screening Committee did in its deliberations. He suggested that in order to pass a candidate, the Board have at least a 2/3 majority rather than a simple majority. He stated that while this was difficult that there is too much at stake to appoint someone that wins by one vote.
Motion: Mr. Weiss moved that the selection be made by a 2/3 majority of the 21 voting members, that if the candidate fails to carry a 2/3 majority after three ballots, the Board will go to a simple majority. Seconded by Father Shallow motion carried by a 2/3 majority.
h discussion of the merits of the candidates followed:
Messrs. Spann, Walker, Weiss, White, Shallow, Gray, Landsman discussed the qualifications of the three candidates in terms of educational qualifications and community involvement background.
Mr. White referred to the following paragraph from CAP Memo No. 23:
"While the attainment of a high level of education and prior experience may be essential to performance in certain capacities, every consideration should be given to providing opportunities to poor persons who have been denied the benefit of formal education and who are willing to learn to perform new functions. Each grantee and delegate agency shall make certain that its recruiting procedures afford adequate opportunity for the hiring and advancement of people to be served by the community action program. Educational qualifications, unless required by State or local law or regulation, shall not be made a condition for employment or advancement if a candidate is otherwise qualified to perform the duties of the position."
Dr. West remarked on Mr. Hoggard's service to the community and stated he would like to place his name in nomination for the position of Executive Director. Seconded by Mr. Mankins.
No further action was taken on this nomination because it was not stated in the form of a motion.
Mr. Bunker moved that all three names be placed on a ballot and circulated to Board members. Seconded by Reverend Tigner.
Mr. Chairman declared that the motion was out of- orderabecause • Article VIII of the By-Laws provided that in all cases of election of officers by the Board, the vote shall be taken by Secret ballot and that all other motions, except those amending the by-laws shall be viva voice, etc.
Motion: Mr. Bunker moved that Article VIII of the By-Laws be suspended and that secret ballots be circulated. Seconded by Father Shallow. Motion carried unanimously.
Mr. Dondero announced the results of the first ballot, as follows:
Mr. Cottrell - 6
Mr. Hoggard - 8
Mr. Peltz - 6 One not voting
Mr. Dondero stated that in the absence of a 2/3 majority for one candidate, that the second balloting would take place, and ballots were circulated accordingly.
-8-
Mr. Dondero announced the results of the second ballot.
Mr. Cottrell - 5
Mr. Hoggard - 9
Mr. Peltz - 6
One not voting
Mr. Dondero stated that in the absence of a 2/3 majority for one candidate, that the third ballot would take place and ballots were circulated accordingly.
Mr. Dondero announced the results of the third ballot.
Mr. Cottrell - 7
Mr. Hoggard - 9
Mr. Peltz - 5
Mr. Dondero stated that in the absence of a 2/3 majority for one candidate that the fourth balloting would take place, and in accordance with a previous motion, the selection of candidates would be made on the basis of a candidate receiving a simple majority of 21 votes. Ballots were distributed accordingly.
Mr. Dondero announced the results of the fourth ballot.
Mr. Cottrell - 8
Mr. Hoggard - 9
Mr. Peltz - 4
Mr. Dondero stated there was an absence of a 2/3 majority for one candidate, and requested a motion on what the procedure was to be.
Dr. West moved that the candidate receiving the least vote to be dropped from the balloting, that the names of the candidates receiving the largest votes be placed on a ballot and that the candidate receiving a simple majority be designated Executive Director. Seconded by Reverend Tigner. Motion carried.
Ballots were distributed accordingly.
Mr. Dondero announced the results of the vote.
Mr. Cottrell - 12
Mr. Hoggard - 9
Mr. Dondero declared Mr. William Cottrell to be Executive Director of the Clark County Economic Opportunity Board.
It was agreed that the new Executive Director would serve a probationary period of three months.
Mr. Chairman declared the Annual Meeting of the Clark County Economic Opportunity Board, and the Executive Session adjourned.
Respectfully submitted, Teola Armstrong
Assistant Director
State Department of Economic Opportunity
ATTACHMENT
State of Nevada
Employment Security Department
Carson City, Nevada
RESOLUTION AND APPLICATION FOR ELECTION OF COVERAGE UNDER THE NEVADA UNEMPLOYMENT COMPENSATION LAW
WHEREAS, the 1937 Legislature in the enactment of the Nevada Unemployment Compensation Law in the "Declaration of Public Policy of State," stated in part "Economic insecurity due to unemployment is a serious menace to the health, welfare, and morals of the people of this State. Involuntary unemployment is therefore a subject of general interest and concern which requires appropriate action by the legislature to prevent its spread and to lighten its burden which now so often falls with crushing force upon the unemployed worker and his family. ***" and
WHEREAS, Section 612.575, Nevada Revised Statutes, provides:
"State department, counties, cities and other political subdivisions may elect to become employer; conditions.
1.
The governing board or officers of any department of the State of Nevada, or of any county, city or other political subdivision of the State of Nevada, or of any instrumentality of any such department or political subdivision, may, by resolution of the majority of its members, elect to become an employer subject to this chapter for not less than 2 calendar years.
2.
Upon filing a certified copy of such resolution with the executive director and with his written approval, such department, political subdivision or instrumentality shall become an employer subject hereto to the same extent as al I other employers, as of the date stated in such approval, and shall cease to be subject hereto as of January 1 of any calendar year subsequent to such 2 calendar years only if at least 30 days prior to such January 1 it has filed with the executive director a written notice to that effect.
3.
Contributions paid by any such department, political subdivision or instrumentality shall be a proper charge upon the funds of such department, political subdivision or instrumentality."
WHEREAS, the Legislature indicates the intent to provide unemployment insurance, with the consent of the employing unit, for all employees of any department of the State of Nevada or for all of the employees of political subdivisions of the state;
"Operation Opportunities"
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, THAT Economic Opportunity Board of Clark County shall and does hereby make application to become an employer subject to the Unemployment Compensation Law and to obtain coverage of all its employees under the provisions of that law as of January 1, 1966.
"Operation Opportunities" Economic Opportunity Board of Clark County (Name of Applicant)
Signed Harvey N. Dondero
Cha i rman_____________________________
(Title of Authorized Official)
I, (signed) James L. Snowden, Secretary of the Economic Opportunity Board hereby certify the foregoing to be a full, true and correct copy of the resolution adopted by said board at its meeting on June 29, 1966, as more fully appears in the minutes of said board. *******. **
The above application is hereby approved and the Economic Opportunity Board of Clark County shalI become an employer subject to the Nevada Unemployment Compensation Law as of January 1, 1966.
Executive Director
Nevada Employment Security Department
Date:
In view of the appointment of a Personnel Committee in July, 1966, and the recommendation of that committee that every year theypersonnel policies, job descriptions, and salary range plan be studied, it is the staff’s opinion that this recommendation does not adequately cover the functions and responsibilities intended.
It is therefore suggested that the Board might wish to adopt the following Resolution or one similar to it to More clearly define the role of the Personnel Committee.
RESOLUTION
Be it resolved that a special committee of the Economic Opportunity Board of Clark County be created and known as the Personnel Committee. Members of this Committee will be elected in accordance with the provisions of the By-Laws regarding special committees.
Be it further resolved that this Committee shall recommend to the Board a salary schedule and shall annually review job descriptions and make recommendation for assignment of personnel and positions according to job classifications by project and salary range.
Be it further resolved that this Committee shall also serve as a grievance committee to whom all personnel may appeal any claims of unfair treatment as provided for under Rule fX. Section B, Paragraph 3, of the Personnel Policies and Practices of the Economic Opportunity Board of Clark County.
MINUTES OF THE MEETING Of THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE OF THE ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY BOARD OF CLARK COLNTY
July
Z:00 P-Mr~
EOB Offices
501 S. Highland
This was a special meeting of Executive Committee mor.bers called at the request of Mr. Robert Van Hom of the Regional Office of Economic Opportunity.
Present were: Mr. Robert Van Horn and Mr. Harold Moore of OEO Regional Office;
EOB staff members William Cottrell, Sylvia Leon, and Evelyn Mauldin; Guests Leola Armstrong, Robert Trimble, and Robert Fahey.
Executive Committee Members present: Charles Spann (Chairman), Harvey Dondero, Milton Weiss, James Snowden, Joseph Mankins, Isaac White, Thomas Wilson, Sr., Emory Lockette, Lee Walker
Mr. Van Horn introduced Mr. Harold Moore of the OEO Region staff whom he said would be the liaison person for Clark County. He advised that this moeting had been called for purposes of talking about the County Board and about Its future.
MANPOWER PROJECT? Mr. Van Horn advised that official notification should be received soon approving this project for funding. The Washington Office, he stated, was pleased that this project had been worked up with good coordination and resources In the community. There was discussion on the high priority of getting Jobs Into the community.
PERSONNEL POLICIES AND PRACTICES: Mr. Van Hom advised that each local CAP was required to set up specific regulations governing personnel and providing specific guidelines, and stated that such a plan must be submitted to the OEO office by July 31. A delegate agency has the option of setting up Its own policies or adopting those of the CAP Board.
: Mr. Snowden moved that the Chairman appoint a committee to study CAP Memo No. 23 and establish a set of over-all rules and regulations applying to the Economic Opportunity Board. Motion was seconded by Mr. White. In discussion It was pointed out that appointment of such a committee would violate tl»e By-Laws which reads that membership on special committees Is to be nominated by the Nominating Committee and ratified by the Executive Committee. There was further discussion on the time element Involved and the necessity of having this In to OEO by July 31. On the question, motion carried unanimously.
The Chairman appointed members to the committee as follows: Emory Lockette, Isaac White, Harvey Dondero. (Note: Thomas Wilson, Sr. wAs later appointed to this committee) The CM Irman further requested that this committee be prepared to report Its findings to the Executive Committee meeting to be held July 25. Mr. Weiss stated that he would be available as an advisor to the committee and suggested that Mr. McPherson also had had valuable experience In this field and should be contacted as an advisor.
COMMITTEE TO STUDY SOARD STRUCTURE: Mr. Weiss reviewed that his comlttee was proposing that the Board of Trustees be limited to 16 to be divided as follows: five representatives of the cities, county and school board; 5 representatives from business, religious, and social organizations; 5 representatives of poverty-ridden people, and the Chairman to be the 16th person.
It was pointed out that there was a special condition Imposed by OEO that a representative from each of the Neighborhood Councils be seated on the Board. Mr. Weiss proposed that the Neighborhood Councils be set up In 5 districts and that a trustee from. each district serve on the Board, He pointed out that eventually the number of Neighborhood Councils could Increase, and It would not be possible to keep adding members to the Board to represent each Council formed.
Mr. Van Hom advised that the Office of Economic Opportunity would express concern from a standpoint of practicality, and he did not forsee a need for anymore Councils that are being anticipated now. Further, he pointed out, It becomes difficult to do the zoning or districting as the Intent Is to provide representation of each Council on the Board. Mr. Weiss stated that It was a concern of the County Commissioners that there was an Imbalance on the Board and the County might take over the Board In such a case. Mr. Van Horn stated there Is no case where a Board Is run by elected officials under OEO funding; that all CAP Boards are required to have representation from the three elements of the common Ity.
MANPOWER CENTER: Mr, Mankins questioned the status of funding for this project. Mr. Van Hom advised that It should be received shortly.
DISCUSSION ON P.A.L. ORGANIZATION: Mr. White advised Mr. Van Horn of a newspaper article and the comments regarding Negro leadership made by a spokesman of P.A.L. He advised also that the Neighborhood Center in North Las Vegas has printed P.A.L. on Its sign rather than Catholic Welfare. Mr. Van Hom discussed a similar situation In Arizona and advised that the Centers should be Identified for the community rather than as an organizational headquarters. Mr. Weiss suggested that the Board take action to Instruct that Neighborhood Centers be identified as such.
Motion: Mr, Snowden moved that this matter be referred to the Board of Directors for determlnation. Motion seconded by Mr. White and carried unanimously.
Respectfully submitted,
W.F. COTTRELL Executive Director
WFC:dJ
MEMORANDUM
TO: Board Members of the
Economic Opportunity Board of Clark County
FROM: W. F. Cottrell Executive Director
SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEMS FOR BOARD MEETING OF JULY 27, 1966
DATE: July 20, 1966
I• ENCLOSED MATERIAL:
Enclosed are copies of the following items:
A.
Personnel Policies and Practices (first draft). This material has been prepared and submitted to the special committee appointed by the Chairman for their consideration. It should be emphasized that this is only the first draft, and that the committee, and subsequently the Executive Committee, may wish to make changes, modifications or deletions prior to presenting it to the full Board for action at the meeting next Wednesday.
As you may know, we are under mandatory deadline of July 31 for submission of a complete personnel policy and wage program to the Regional Office of OEO as required by CAP Memo No. 23. Therefore, we are getting this material into your hands as quickly as possible (and without any changes as may be recommended) in order that you wi II have the maximum amount of time to study it before the Board meeting.
B.
CAP Memo No. 23: At a recent meeting of the Executive Committee, it was suggested that all Board Members should have a copy of this memo which is one of the most important CAP memos, inasmuch as it deals with personnel policies and practices and sets definite guidelines within which we must operate.
C.
Regional Bulletin SFR-48: This Bulletin sets forth the Region’s interim funding policy for 1967 fiscal funds. You will note that (I) no new projects may be considered by the Region for approval, at least for the time being; (2) existing projects may be refunded only up to their 1966 guidelines, at a maximum;
(3) we must prepare and submit a Planning and Priority Report in order that Region may assess the relative importance of various projects.
Page 2
1
1 • PROJECT STATUS REPORT:
A.
The Legal Aid and Senior Citizens projects were submitted to the Regional Office on July 7. However, in view of SFR Bulletin No. 48, there is little likelihood that any immediate action will be forthcoming to approve either of these projects, pending final Congressional action on appropriations for the 1967 fiscal year.
B.
Conduct and Admin!stration (period ending August 31): Funds in the amount of $29,768 were received on July 15. We wiI I be required to take action soon to either supplement this amount or request an acceleration of the project in order to finance such unanticipated costs as advertising for a new Executive Di rector, the cost of vacation pay and compensatory time accumulated by the former Director and the Acting Di rector, etc. We will also prepare a new application to cover the last four months of the calendar year as soon as the Board takes action on the personnel policies and wage question.
C.
Moapa Valley Migrant Program. Funds in the amount of $147,950 have been released. At the present time the Cooperative Extension Division of the University and the Clark County School District are discussing implementation of the educational components of this project. A meeting was held on Friday, July 15, to discuss cooperative health efforts in the Valley, including the County Health Department, Southern Nevada Memorial Hospital, U. S. Public Health Service (Indian programs), and our own health component under the migrant grant.
D.
Summer Head Start. Funds in the amount of $103,054 have been approved, and the District has received an advance of $80,000.
HI. VISITS BY REGIONAL REPRESENTATIVES:
Mr. Robert Van Horn and Mr. Harold Moore of the Regional Office of Economic Opportunity visited Las Vegas on July 14 and 15. They met with our Executive and Finance Committees, and the Executive Board of Operation Independence, as well as with representatives of the Neighborhood Councils and with our staff. These meetings were beneficial and cleared up several questions.
Mr. C. Z. Brown, Regional Neighborhood Youth Corps representative, met with EOB and NYC staff personnel all day Friday, July 15.
This meeting, too, was most productive, and has made clear several points about which questions had been raised recently.
IV. REGIONAL COMMUNITY ACTION CONFERENCE:
We have received notice of a meeting for regional Executive Directors and Chairmen of CAP Boards in Fresno on September 18-20. Funds are available for out-of-state travel if the Board wishes to approve attendance at this regional conference.
ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY BOARD M CLARK COUNTY
Ml S. aighland Us Vegas
TO:
Executive Committee of the Economic Opportunity Board of
Clark County
nOKi Charlee W. Sperm Chatiaeaft
MSI JffiHIK — Jtaly 15 •• 3*» B.M.
Executive Committee mmbara are hereby notified that a meeting of thia committee is being called as MoUwst
MONDAY, July 15 5tM S.M.
BOB OFFICES (Ml S. Mlghland)
The agenda for this nesting will include discussion on the following:
1.
1.
3*
Interim regional finding policy and offset
Financial eooRitmente made by Acting EwMjutive Director,
Youth Coordinator position.
Personnel policy and practice material.
(Including report tarn special comittse)
-
OF TH? KETJHC
OF TMt EXECUTIVE CSHMIHO
EC0*O<lC ORWUMTY BOW OF CLA^ £(W
5; 30 P.H. July 26t
£06 Offices
Uf Vegas, Hevsda
P«E&OiT: Charls® Spann (Chalrwn,) Jero® Snwden, Thews® wllsm. Sr,, Isaac Whit®, Harvey t^ndero, Joseph £r®ry UsckMte, Jess© Wl 11 la*&
*Suest; ifcmeil McCcm&U (Streeter of ttetwlde CAF Fro^r**)
Stott: wUllan Ceftr«n, Executive director; Sylvia U-rn, Administrative Assist®*?
HIM0TES OF ThC MEETING OF JULY U? Mr. S^de* mde an addition to the al rotes to fee added to the third ^areyre-h uador Cemffto® te Stagy So&rd Structure, to stat® that Hr. Va* Morn advised that OfcG was not ccsncerrod ateut ®* te&etero® of a ftosre whereby represjentat lo*s fro® Hel^hfeortoed Cewmlia would camtltut* sore tter» oro-thlrd of tfe® Soard trosbarshlp provided that the three eltsests of th# ccssmnlty were rapres®*?^. w*. Snowdy* wved that Th» ml nut*® o* th® roatlfcj to* accepted as juwaded. Seconded toy Hr. Mhlte. Kytkjh carried.
IfcWUW «S«M FWOIWS POLICY: A copy of SFR Swllatl* Ho. 4S was provided each ®eM>»r and was discus**# toy Hr, Cottrell. He pointed oat that ttfrwta to i;;wUs prawMIy funded up to their IW expanded guld«||«& will be United, st * row lawn, t® th* &wunt rocetsary te refund swUtlng jH^ram. Clark County's exptuidad guldwHna* last yanr ware O^GQO; tnU ward now has guldo.Hn® prexjraes which total wr* YM* $450,500. H® eavtsad that It I® not yet known what guldellna® will fco for this fiscal year, but ®t tM there can to® funding only for existing until t^r»
Is furtiwr Contrast Ions I scrHoa. This also advitnc that roro restrictive pollcUg roy ** «*rots*ry. U thia case prosant furols^ of j-nsjsets «*y haw to c» rociuc-sd. Mr. Lgttroll stated that no new projects can fee re^uostad at present.
Th® Chairman asked th« status cf tM two «®«t recently subalttod projects -- L*y*l Aid and Senior Citizens, »r. Cottrell revised that untess dlscrstloaary fund a can E© found t® fund thjw. mnk U sot wch cM^ that they will W fWed In tw future. Thsre W*« ©omltt^ discussion on project® toeing rushed' through th® Soard only to rtroln In the ^lonal Gfflc®.
Hr. Cottrell further advised that GFO would require such stricter sdhorasc^ to $u|del 1 s«a, rule*, and regglsttoa* l«$o»*< toy 0B0. SH? Sull*tln No, 4fi states -'*a wr®a ell Cnwunlfy Action Agencies to conduct their perao.ro®I pot Ida® la accerdonco with 0£0 Ho^randa, an® la such « ®aroar ** can bser full public tcrutlny.^ Guideline r&ile* for th® Mlghborhood Youth Corps ®rogr«s have also cut beck. It |» anticipated that the fall profra® will fuad only 70 oat-«f~achrol work stations and 120 Insciool. Thl» has
©ccurrod teecaus* there are eor® an<3 n©r# n«u projects In countI•» which previously Md not applied for an HYC progree.
On refunding of present projects, application will nsed to be wade within the next few months «« OtO required « project t© U la thetr office 75 Cays ;rlor to approval. He reviewed further the strictness that will be damMed In adhering to M(5 condition*. aM advised that steps were presently being taken In the Operation Independroc# Oay Caro Canter® to laser® that of the children enrolled set the Incoos criteria sot forth by <O.
Executive C«^»ltta© w®wrs discussed whether ©r not plications for continuing programs would need to go before th© Soard of 01 roofers for approval Micro applying for refundlog. YMy coroludsd that they would not unless eajor ehangas were mode therein.
YOUTH CQOftSinATCn POSITION Mr. Cattrall advised that «r. Koala Oliver tea* been employed by Mr, Fol t1 as * Youth CoardIn©tor for the (coaeeilc Opportunity &e>#rd« He pointed out that though Mr. Peltx had briefly ewnfloroe this position at the Sxacutlve €«?etfte« rooting of July IS, th&re was no ©way to pay ths salary. He discussed th© proseat budget which funded the operation of tn© Econe&lo C-ppertunify Soard ©nd the details of why that budget will be ovgr-^ypero«d at th# end of th# great period, Miyust 51. In discussion with the Son Francis*© Falero I Office, It was determined that th# mat feasible e*s©fis of obtaining the funds necessary would be t© ro^vest transfer cf funds fro® ether coa^oaents; eg. the sMgNxarhood CW11 Project which Is rot yet operating m ttsl 1 staff funded.
Returning to discussion ef th# Youth Coordinator position, Executive Cwslttw «w»Mr» did not recall the addition of this position being approved.
Mr. Cottroll advised that ep#*r©fitly It had Man Hr. Pelts’# Intention to Incorporate this position In a project ter youth which has ©ever bwn crown up. Troro was lengthy dlecu#»lm on this alt vat tex? with Hr. Ccttroll «dvlsta& that Mr. Oliver n»d few» directed to work with »r. Scharf Trhsbla at tro Youth Opportunity Centerj however, he Md rot routed to Mr. Triple U the last w®#k.
Motions Mr. Lockett# motioned that It be Mtarolned by tOS staff whether or not Mr. Oliver has bean werklng during this period of rot reporting end that his <mpl©yeent be temlmated as of the data when It hes been deteroilrod he was no longer working, wtitiem saccade© by Mr. Whits, and carrlsd ©nenlsjousiy.
There was further dlscesslen on ctrar bud^t categories which had been or would be eversra^ehdad, Hr. Cottrell reviewed the ^osltldrt of Finance Officer end the rocessIty for It being elavated from h#lf-tl«« to full-time. Mr. lockatte stated that the raise In salary previously proved by &©aro action should be effective tdwsn 1t Is egprowd by C£0. Mr, Snowden advised that this raise had been redhwsanded by th# Finance Cevwlm# because of the roc lassi fl cat Ion of tM position from Qoekkeepar to Fl nanon Officer, carrying with It more rwonsibl titles, nr. Cottrell stated that when Soard taka# action on the proposed shlVy schedule st |t# next meting, these salaries c#n be properly budgetod.
-2»
OTHER FIMAMCIAL COWITWhIS; A listing of expend!tMr®» Incurred by ths Acting Executive ©Irecter, Hr. Pelti, was provided each Cowoltta® w^«r and Is maoc ©art of those Miwtos. Mr. Cottrell reviewed fhoae expenditures which Involved cutting « record entitled ’’Gat Ost And Vets1 and painting of signs. Checks for tka persons Involved In srcficalng the record haw* writ tan; however, they m© been ha Id up pending direction fro» the Executive C«ws|tt«o, The Sen Francisco regional Office has advised that It Is doubtful that time can be considered allowable costs.
Motionf Mr, Sncwdcn wv&d tMt these bills be denied pay^nf end that ths fxectttlva Olructor be e^onHhod novar to Incur such bills. Seconded by Mr, MaMtlas* In discussion, *rt Spann »u fitted that this situation explained to the Regional Office end Heir opinion reewstad. Mr. Ucfcette suggested that whsn and If funds becom eval labia the bills ba paid, upon awrousl of ths Regional Offh», Hr, White felt ths bills should bo subaitted to exj/lalnis^, t&M they Mve boon denied for payeonf fcoeevM they wore r«>wr sutherUad ty tbs tje&cutlv® Coaeeltfos or the ^oard and that the persona to whom peyswnt was fiy© be advised that the tills hav® bean submitted tu Ss^kAal Office,
Hot lent Mr. Snowdon restated Ms aMlon Hfh®T the Snteutlva Coewlttee «SSy these bills bsmues tMy ware net authorised, but that the®® bills bo emitted to the ^agtonM Office far detsrelnatlon ©f paysont/’ Metlon earrled unanimously,
IWWL POLICIES AN& PRACTICES AHO JOB CLASS I Fl CAT I <5M FtAH f&t TK bCC^MK OW.- TtritTY Chaliwn of this ccaoalttao, Mr. lochstte, presided ssmbars cobles cf
this plaa which was « first draft Incerpsratln^ chw^s «aes» by the special cowftlttoe. Hr. lockatt* reviewed each change Udlvlduslly, Copies wre provided to each imsber of the salary rafig* plan for positions ©f th® Ecewfcle Opportunity Board.
Mr. LocMtf* advised that the ranges were calculated on a perenfita^ mis. Hj Mm> sfeted that «r. McPherson wr.d «r. wslsa had assisted the esmittsa because of their beck§reund In this field. W. Uckstt® advised that thU pay pl«n reflected not «My fwderel policies hut those of the *«nlclpM1ttes end the school district.
In discussion of the job descriptl<wis and th© reqwlremnts thereof, Mr. fcbahtas axpretaed concern that In sc^n ceses there was a reejulrnscnt of an ecaeeole, Ma stated that ejc'erlonco should always fes taaea Uta consideration. It we# pointed out that each j>b description contains a footnote, stating fh«t»tMugb a degree was desirable If was nsver MndMory.
In dlscus&loa of ths salary ranges, It was dMcrelnsd that where an &wtoyae was now earning eore than ti^t beginning step of Ma range, he wovlot ba put In th® salary step next MjMst tc whst he wo# noAMg. w. MaaMns aovad that th® personnel policies and practices be approvosJ as ©rojxvsad by th® C©er?ltt*o. Seconded by Mr. rhlfe, «?t!on cnrrUd wnswlesfcusly. TMs plan would now fee submitted t& the Soard ©I directors.
Job d® serfpt I an* for nsch position was r-aC® available to Sxacuttw Cmsltte® »wab«rs. These would M jjrovl&sti to 1‘osrd Members also. advising ths® that th®** ar® Job d©&crUtlw>s which Mva t^on previously approved by the Jx,®rd cut which tew revise ano brought up to Cate.
Kathan «r. Sondar© wwl that th® schedule ®t salary rates «s prop^4 by tMVieclal «©w1ttw be approved as part of m ferv&MMl Policies an<? Practices of th® geonoaU Opaertunltv Soars of Clark County ana preasnf^ to tiw &>srd. i^sflon MMRM&4 by Jasso Willie®* and p»»*ad u®antwously.
Hr, Cattrell advUod that Ca? fcw> h©. 2> provisos that In-town travel rvl ntur^fcsnt cx-uid ba ®a*» evallabU to Soar© yodur certain conditions
to travel tc ant fro® awjetln^s at 1£t ?&r <"!l«. TMra was lengthy discussion oh this with the conclusion that the situation should road* a* Is, with fflewsbora paying tMlr t>»n travel, until a hardship situation crises, In which case th* s|tu»fIon would $0 before the Board for approval.
DISCUSSION Of fi»T PREMSM? »*r. Maakhw» advised Cxaevflva Cemltte® weber* that an of the LcqrossIc Opportunity s>aar«1, J4r. McOeaIeI, baa creetoc a preb1«< ty l«^tyl?»£ unfair civil rights practices et Sonrlaa Map Hal wMra on tr^lftlns progrws was achadaUd to bw^ln. h® setd that
b®esvsa cf this co^HInf the was being dals/ed two weahs.
r&W»ti»d that whm such c^Ulntw arise, they should bo elrectsc ta hl®.
la dlxcusslon |t wa« pointed out tMt fhU te$ not a cx^UInt about civil rights or eboet th® OJT In guest Ion, but was an Inquiry ®» to
©na of th* applicants for m prt^rea Md not bean callM by th® heapltal wMn a premiss Md previously bwa ssudo to return her call,
Mr. Cottr«H also noted th»t Hr. Mr^lel Is th® Project director for th® UalgftMrhKKMJ Council Project! Md W?) <s#4» awam of this situation when If *as wntloned at a imtln^ of one of tha nulghbcrMod councH*. and furtMr pointed out fMT one of IM function* of tbs councils Is to bring forth web problem* and to help council ^nMrn and other rwlWts of th® Mlghborhood Harn to resolve those suffers. H® also noted that ha Md asked Mr. Mellon UI to bring cc^ I a Infs such as this to the attention c.f tM Enccutlv® Cirector In th® future.
Pespectfully sufc»lttad,
4«.F. tomai Sxscutlv® 31 rector
HEIGWORIXX® CO42XX15 PROJECT
PUBLIC WOmTIOM
Signa
"CET OUT AW VOTE"
Michael Cohan:
Writing & Directing of Recording
$U2.00
Billy & the Bachelor#:
Musical Recording Service#
315.00
Dsumy Rae:
Singing
Dyuraeic Sound:
Recording of Record
Fred Pons:
StenCdle & Blow ups of eigne
Michael Porter:
Consultant services & supplies 4 days @ $50
Suppllea
Plane fare
• 59..OO
131.95
2*0. CO
■*K50
13.00
$37.72
$ 663.95 $ 309.22
.jprayrsgyrss ......'X1X.JS:
AGENDA
BOARD MEETING OF THE ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY BOARD OF CLARK COUNTY
July 27, 1966 7:30 P.M.
Auditorium of the Clark County District Health Department
FINANCIAL REPORT.
PROJECT STATUS REPORT.
APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF JUNE 29,
RATIFICATION OF NEIGHBORHOOD COUNCIL DIRECTOR APPOINTMENT.
OFFICIAL TITLES TO DESIGNATE NEIGHBORHOOD CENTERS,
Chai rman
Treasurer
EOB Staff
EOB Staff
Chai rman
6. COMMITTEE REPORTS
Report of the Executive Committee......................................
Report of the Special Committee on Personnel
Policies and Practices.........................................................................
Chai rman
Emory Lockette
C. Report of the Committee to Study Board Structure................Mi I ton Weiss
PLEASE NOTE:
BOARD MEMBERS ARE ASKED TO BRING WITH THEM TO THE MEETING THE MATERIAL CONTAINED IN THIS PACKET AND ALSO THE MATERIAL MAILED TO MEMBERS SEVERAL DAYS AGO.
ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY BOARD OF CLARK COUNTY
July 27, 1966
TO: Board Members of the
Economic Opportunity Board of Clark County
FROM: W.F. Cottrell, Executive Director
SUBJECT: ATTACHED MATERIAL
Attached are copies of the following items to be considered at the meeting and for your general information:
1.
Change sheet for personnel policies and practices. This includes all of the revisions to the first draft of the new personnel policies and practices regulations, as are being recommended by the special committee appointed for this purpose. The Committee Chairman will outline each of these changes.
2.
Proposed salary schedule. (2 sheets). This is the proposed salary schedule for all positions on the Board’s staff, the Neighborhood Council project staff, and the NYC staff. We must submit a salary plan to the Regional office along with the personnel policies and job descriptions for all positions, by July 31. The Chairman of the special committee will explain the salary schedule and the assignment of positions within the schedule at the meeting.
3.
Job Descriptions. Copies of the description for each position are attached. These were previously approved by the Board, and have been brought up to date and put into a standard format for the purpose of submitting them to the Regional Office. These copies are for your information - no further action is required on them.
4.
SFR-46. "Travel Outside of the Western Region." This regional bulle+ln is for your information, and states the policy of the Regional Office on this matter.
CAP Memo #29 - "Policy Governing Expense Reimbursement for Members of Policymaking Bodies". This Office of Economic Opportunity memorandum sets forth national policy in regard to such expenses. You will note that official representatives of the Board can make trips to other communities for conferences or other purposes when specifically authorized to do so by Board action. Money for Board expenses wilI be requested in the application for funding for the last four months of this calendar year.
MEMORANDUM
ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY BOARD OF CLARK COUNTY
301 South Highland
Las Vegas
TO: Board Members
FROM: Charles W. Spann Chai rman
RE: Monthly Board Meeting July 27 — 7:30 P.M.
Members of the Board of Trustees of the Economic Opportunity Board of Clark County are hereby notified that the regular monthly meeting of the Board will be held as follows:
WEDNESDAY, JULY 27, 1966
7:30 P.M.
AUDITORIUM OF THE CLARK COUNTY
DISTRICT HEALTH DEPARTMENT (625 Shadow Lane)
Enclosed herewith is material relating to that meeting and a covering memorandum from the Executive Director.
CWS:sdl
MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY BOARD OF CLARK COUNTY
July 27, 1966 Clark County Health Dept. Auditorium
7:30 P.M. Las Vegas, Nevada
PRESENT: Charles Spann , (Chairman), Thomas Wilson, Sr., Don Hampton, Emory Lockette, Vernon Bunker, Ferren Bunker, Harvey Dondero, Father Charles Shallow, Stella Fleming, Isaac White, Newton Tigner, Jesse Williams, Lee Walker, J.R. McPherson, Mrs. Curtis Spencer, Karl Harris (representing Douglass Pushard), Charlotte Hill, Joseph Mankins, R. Guild Gray, Marvie Smith
Guests: Beatrice Sanchez, Alice Dexter, Sarah Ray, Gloria Collins, Diana Williams, Russell McConnell, W. E. Kearns, Gene McCoy, Robert Fahey, Esther McGIothen, Charles M. Jones
Technical Advisory Committee Members: Gene McCoy, Al Landsman
Staff: Wi11iam CottrelI, David Hoggard, LaMar McDaniel, Doyle Longhurst, Ann Maius, Evelyn Mauldin, Sylvia Leon, Bill Carlos, Dudley Evans
Prior to official opening of the meeting, Mr. Mankins suggested that Board Members be provided copies of addresses and telephone numbers of members of the Board. This was noted by the Secretary. The Chairman also advised Board Members that duplicate copies of material which had been mailed to them would not be provided again at meetings, and that members would be expected to bring with them to meetings all material which they had received in the mail.
Chairman Charles Spann called the meeting to order. He introduced the new Executive Director, Mr. William Cottrell, to members of the Board.
APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF JUNE 29: In discussion, it was advised that the following names of Board Members had been omitted from the list of present: Charlotte Hill, R. Guild Gray, Don Hampton, and Robert Bellis representing the Mayor of Boulder City.
Motion: It was moved by Mr. White, seconded by Mr. Dondero, that the minutes of the meeting be approved as corrected. Motion carried.
FINANCIAL COMMITTEE REPORT: A copy was provided each Board Member and is made part of these minutes. There being no questions, Dr. Gray moved that the financial report be accepted as presented. Motion seconded by Ferren Bunker and carried unanimously.
PROJECT STATUS REPORT OF THE ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY BOARD:
Conduct and Administration of the Economic Opportunity Board: Mr. Cottrell advised that this grant, which funds the administration of the EOB office, expires August 31. This grant was funded for only six months; however, it covers a six and a half month period. Because of the half month which
is unfunded and some other unanticipated expenditures, there was a necessity to request San Francisco to either provide additional monies or accelerate the grant.
Regional Office has suggested that the most feasible means of obtaining the needed additional funds might be by requesting unused funds from other components of EOB grants. If this is done, an application to fund the last four months of the year — September through December — will probably not be necessary.
Migrant Community Service Center: Mr. Cottrell advised this project has been funded and is expected to begin in September. The educational aspects of the program are now being worked out with the School District. Mr. Ferren Bunker noted that there has been some concern as to why the project is not yet in operation. He cited the problems involved; one, that a School Board member has stated that this project should be administered by the School District in order not to have duplication. The school administration is now reviewing the project and will then make a recommendation to the school board of trustees. Mr. Bunker stated that it if is determined that it would be better for the School District to administer it, this will meet with the approval of Cooperative Extension Service.
Mr. Bunker pointed out that the Economic Opportunity Board, as the sponsoring agency, will have the responsibility for the construction of the faciIities.
Mr. Cottrell noted that he and Mr. Bunker had attended a meeting which included representatives of other interests in the Moapa Valley, the purpose of which was to discuss better coordination of all projects directed toward health in the Moapa Valley.
Manpower Project: Mr. Cottrell advised that the last information, which had been received several days ago from the Regional Office, is that this project is in the process of review in San Francisco; and it is anticipated this review will be concluded shortly. While there is no guarantee this will be funded, it appears that it will be, probably with special conditions attached to it.
Hot Lunch Program for West Las Vegas Schools: Mr. Cottrell advised that the School District is making preparation to install kitchen facilities so that this program can be carried out in September.
Senior Citizens: Mr. Cottrell stated that this project has been submitted to the Regional Office; however, because no new project can be funded at this time, the only possibility of funding in the near future is through discretionary funds.
Mr. Cottrell asked Mrs. Ann Maius, Program Assistant who is coordinating the senior citizens projects, to report on activities of the senior citizens which were being carried on by volunteer workers. Mrs. Maius advised that a contest is being conducted to name the center. The purpose of this contest is to acquaint the entire community with the existence of the senior citizens office, and to prepare future contact with the commun i ty.
-2-
The senior citizens group hope to reproduce a newspaper and are soliciting paid advertisements for it. She advised that when a state plan for the aging has been approved, funding can'be applied for through the Administration on Aging.
Legal Aid Program: Mr. Cottrell advised that he had received a call from the Legal Aid representative in San Francisco that afternoon requesting further information on this project. It has also been advised by the Regional Office that though the review process on this project will be completed fairly soon, it probably will not be funded until discretionary funds can be obtained, or until Congressional action on new funds is completed.
Neighborhood Counci I Project: Acting Project Director, LaMar McDaniel reported on the status of council formation. He reviewed that the purpose and function of the Neighborhood Councils is to reach out and grasp the persons in low income areas and acquaint them with the anti-poverty program and its projects. This is accomplished by meetings held in the neighboi hoods where people can come and talk about their problems and grieviances. These problems are then worked out or people are directed to the agency which can help in the particular case.
In the formation stage of the Councils, meetings are held often; as Councils become more mature, meetings will probably be held monthly. Mr. McDaniel cited the progress made in that the people are concerned about themselves and the conditions, but they do not know where to go and how to go about solving their problems. He stated that if the Economic Opportunity Board can make the community aware of these programs, it will reach some of its goals.
In answer to a question from Mr. Fahey, Mr. McDaniel advised that there were eight Councils and one or two have elected permanent officers.
Mr. Fahey asked how it was possible to have three representatives seated on the Board when there was only one or two Councils which had elected permanent officers. The Chair recognized Mr. Hoggard who advised that there is no requirement that permanent officers need to be elected before a representative can be elected to the Board.
Motion: Mr. Mankins moved that the proper authorities in Washington determine if the Councils must have permanent officers before a representative to the Board is elected. Seconded by Jesse Williams and Father Shallow.
Mr. Lockette stated that it had never been indicated whether officers had to be permanent or temporary; and if the Council did have to elect permanent officers before seating a representative this would delay the representative’s participation as a Board Member and he would be behind in the programs.
Mr. Lockette added he saw no need to change from any of the practices that had been carried out in the past.
Mr. Williams stated that if this be so, all the Councils should be represented on the Board on a temporary basis, not just a few.
-3-
Ferren Bunker stated that these people were sent to the Board by their Neighborhood Councils. Whether this was done through permanent officers or temporary ones is immaterial to the Board. He stated that when a person is seated on the Board, the Board acts in good faith in seating them, and he did not feel this Board should consult Washington regarding it.
Mr. Williams stated that all Councils have not been informed to this effect. He said that he knows of no Council that has only met once or twice as he has attended the meetings. He said that it should be clarified whether the Board is to elect permenent officials to the Board or temporary ones.
RuIing: The Chairman ruled that, subject to objection by any member, the precedent established continue to be followed — that as representatives of Neighborhood Councils are presented to this Board they be accepted and seated regardless of their method of selection. The Chairman amended this ruling, at the suggestion of Mr. Bunker, to include that the representative be seated subject to certification of the Neighborhood Council.
Mr. Al Landsman advised that he was speaking as a member of the Clark County Housing Authority and wished to state that there will be ten men, under Title V Program, to work on cleaning up Victory Village and Carver Park.
Mr. Dudley Evans stated he wished to go on record as saying that he disagrees with many of the things said. He also said that the neighborhood people were going to clean up Victory Village and Carver Park themselves.
Day Care Services Center Report: Mrs. Esther McGlothen was introduced as the Acting Director of the Operation Independence Day Care Centers. She stated that she was in this position while Mrs. Lubertha Johnson was in New York attending a two-month Head Start training course.
Mrs. McGIothen reviewed the day care centers stating that Operation Independence was first formed as a community self-help program and children at that time were accepted in the day care centers without regard to income. However, it is now required that the day care centers be under Head Start criteria which includes an income criteria to be met for the children served. She advised that Neighborhood Council personnel have been assisting with recruiting children who are below the income standard required. Steps will now need to be taken to drop those children whose parents are above the income standard.
Mrs. McGIothen concluded her report by advising the Board of the location of the three centers and the capacity for the children each served.
Neighborhood Youth Corps Report: Mr. Doyle Longhurst, Project Director, reported that in the NYC fall-winter program, work stations had been funded for 100 out-of-schooI youth and 200 in-school youth. On the last day of the federal fiscal year, Clark County was given approval for 500 additional work stations. This brought the total funding since last November to approximately $625,000.
-4-
A program outline has been submitted for next year under guidelines which have been established by Regional Office and which permits 120 in-school and 70 out-of-schooI youth. This would start the first of the school year. Mr. Longhurst further advised that there is a beautification crew of youth working in Bunkerville, and one is being planned for Pahrump Valley.
Mr. Bill Carlos congratulated the work being performed by the NYC program and commended the youth who were working in the North Las Vegas Neighborhood Council. He introduced the four enrollees: Beatrice Sanchez, Alice Dexter, Gloria Collins, and Diana Williams.
Consumer Education for Operation Independence project: Mr. Ferren Bunker advised that in the project which had originally been proposed as the Operation Independence Communtiy Service Center, there had been a consumer education component. He asked whether there was any need for this program to be carried out now on a separate basis or was it anticipated for incorporation in another project.
The Chairman deferred this question, and directed the Executive Director to report on the status of this project at the next meeting.
Cooperative Consumer Project for Clark County: Mr. Fahey noted that about four months ago Catholic Welfare had submitted a project that was sent to committee for study and evaluation. He noted that the committee has never met.
The Chairman asked Mr. Snowden, Chairman of the appointed committee, what the status of this project was. Mr. Snowden stated that the committee had not met.
SUGGESTION REGARDING AGENDA: Mr. Lockette suggested that persons wishing a subject discussed on the agenda should call the office and ask to have it included, and then that items should have a time limit for discussion. The Chairman deferred action on this, stating that it will be discussed by the Executive Committee.
RATIFICATION OF NEIGHBORHOOD COUNCIL DIRECTOR: The Chairman noted that according to the personnel policies "Vacancies in positions on the professional staff of the Board or the professional staff of any projects directly administered by the Board shall be filled by appointment of the Executive Director, subject to approval of the Board." The Chairman advised that Mr. LaMar McDaniel had been employed to fill the position of Project Director of the Neighborhood Councils, and the Chairman asked for Board ratification of his appointment.
Father Shallow objected that anything that needed to be ratified be pushed through.
Motion: Father Shallow moved that this appointment not be ratified without further discussion. Seconded by Jesse Williams.
-5-
Dr. Gray pointed out that this was a very unfair thing to the person or persons involved. He stated that such discussion should take place in a closed session. Father Shallow withdrew his motion.
Motion: Mr. Snowden moved that ratification be referred to the Executive Committee. Seconded by Reverend Tigner. Motion carried.
There was further discussion during which Mr. White made a motion to ratify Mr. McDaniel for the position. However, the Chairman noted that a motion had been passed which determined the situation, and he ruled that ratification would be deferred until a recommendation is obtained from the Executive Committee.
OFFICIAL TITLES TO DESIGNATE NEIGHBORHOOD CENTERS; The Chairman called for discussion and suggestions for standard wording to designate the Neighborhood Service Centers throughout the community.
Motion: Mr. White moved that each Neighborhood Center take the name of the neighborhood; eg. North Las Vegas Neighborhood Center, which it represents rather than represent a group or organization. Motion seconded by James Snowden.
In discussion, Father Shallow asked if the Board was not dictating to the delegate agency in doing this.
Mr. Snowden noted that Mr. Van Horn had cited an incident where a Council was being named for an organization and had advised that Councils should be named for the neighborhood rather than for a group. Father Shallow stated that if we are going to take Mr. Van Horn as an expert, then we are taking orders from Washington again. He said that the name is not important — but what is important is that the Board is telling the delegate agency how to run the Councils. The Chairman quoted from the Neighborhood Counci I project
"that three of the centers will be located in facilities administered by the delegate agency, Operation Independence. The other two facilities in North Las Vegas and Henderson will be administered by the applicant agency."
The Chairman stated that the applicant agency is this Board.
Father Shallow noted that Catholic Welfare is a delegate agency and PAL is not separate from it.
The Chairman called upon staff for further discussion. Mr. Cottrell advised that when this question first arose, he had referred to both the original application for a Community Service Center and the amendment to fund the Neighborhood Councils. He advised that the only delegate agency named for the Neighborhood Councils is Operation Independence. Mr. Hoggard added that the reason Catholic Welfare was asked to organize North Las Vegas and Henderson was that the then Acting Executive Director (Morris Peltz) had asked the organization to do so since they were already working In North Las Vegas and Henderson.
-6-
Vernon Bunker stated that designation by location would make it much easier for the Centers to be identified. Father Shallow said that if the idea is to exclude the names of PAL or Catholic Welfare on the signs, he did not feel that the Board had the right to do this.
Mr. White stated he felt that the Board did have the right to determine what the Centers should be called, and that other organizations’ names should not be brought in. He stated that this Board did not fund PAL or Catholic Welfare.
Mr. Jesse Williams stated that it is not the function of the Board to designate such a small thing as the name of the Center. He stated that the Councils which are in the process of being formed should have this right to name their own centers. He noted that according to guidelines the Councils are to be autonomous, and that this meant that this Board nor any other Board should designate to them what their policies or actions are to be. He added that if this be so, then it is not the perogative of this Board to dictate to Catholic Welfare what they shall name their Service Centers or anything else.
Vote on the motion: Roll call vote was taken. Motion carried with 18 yes votes, 2 dissenting votes by Father Shallow and Jesse Williams.
EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE REPORT: The Chairman reported on the meeting of the Executive Committee which had been held Monday, July 25. He stated that members had discussed SFR Bulletin No. 48 in which Regional Office has advised that until there is further Congressional action, "grants to agencies presently funded up to their 1966 expanded guidelines will be limited to the amount necessary to refund existing programs." Clark County's expanded guidelines last year were $369,000 and this Board now has guideline programs which total more than $450,000. The only chance for funding the projects already submitted — the Legal Aid and the Senior Citizens — is through discretionary funds.
The Executive Committee discussed financial committments which had been made by the Acting Executive Director, Mr. Peltz. A young man, Mr. Hosie Oliver, had been employed without authority or funds to cover his salary. The Executive Committee recommended that Mr. Oliver be terminated but that he be considered for re-hiring if a Youth project ever became funded.
Another financial commitment which Mr. Peltz had made was to have a record cut which totaled about $650. Because this also was an unauthorized expense, the Executive Committee recommended it be referred to Regional Office for their consideration and advice before payment would be authorized.
The Chairman also noted that personnel policies and a salary schedule had been discussed at the meeting. This item would be next on the Board’s agenda.
Travel reimbursement for Board Members to travel to and from meetings was discussed. The Executive Committee determined that members should continue paying their own travel until a hardship arises.
-7-
In discussion, Father Shallow stated that on the situation of referring the unauthorized expenditures to San Francisco, the Board will look bad. He said that even though this was not a wise expenditure, it seems that there should be some leeway given the Executive Director. He stated that he feels the Board might have to be responsible for these bills. He noted that they were largely for services performed, rather than materials.
Mr. Snowden advised that the Executive Committee had not ruled not to pay the bills, but that they be referred to San Francisco for decision.
Mr. Williams disagreed, stating that the Executive Committee had denied the bills and stated that he had heard the secretary tell this to one of the persons who had called to request payment. The secretary said she had done this; however, it was in error, as further discussion of the Executive Committee recommended that persons not be told that billings had been denied. The secretary was instructed to inform each individual that payment had not been denied, but only referred to the Regional Office.
PERSONNEL POLICIES AND PRACTICES: The Chairman noted that Board Members had all received copies of the first draft of these policies in the mail, and he called upon the Chairman of the Committee, Mr. Lockette, to review the action taken by his committee.
Mr. Lockette individually reviewed each change which had been recommended by the committee.
The Chairman called for discussion or questions on the Personnel Policies. Dr. Gray suggested insertion of a word to clarify the meaning. This was so incorporated in the policies.
On the recommendation to change office hours from 8:30 to 5:30 to from 8:00 to 5:00, Lee Walker suggested that persons getting off work at 5:00 might wish to come into the office or call between 5:00 and 5:30. The staff advised that this was so. It was determined that office hours would be 8:00 to 5:30 and employees hours would be staggered to have the office covered during these hours.
Motion: Father Shallow moved that the Personnel Policies and Practices for the Economic Opportunity Board of Clark County, as amended by the Committee, be accepted. Seconded by Jesse Williams, Motion carried.
SCHEDULE OF ANNUAL SALARY RATES BY GRADE: Mr. Lockette advised that Mr. Weiss and Mr. McPherson had worked with the committee at the committee’s request. He reviewed 0E0 guidelines which were used, and advised that the table had been worked up on a 3^ step increase basis. This does not mean that if there is an individual in a certain step and range that duties cannot be re-evaluated for an increase in responsibility. At this time then, Mr. Lockette advised, the duties would be audited and if it was determined that the responsibilities had increased and necessitated a larger range than that presently received, that individual would be considered for promotion to the appropriate step. If there was not a promotion, the individual would go to the next 3$ step increase.
-8-
Motion; Dr. Gray moved that the Committee's recommendation for salary and pay schedule be adopted. Seconded by Vernon Bunker, motion adopted unanimously.
Mr. Lockette advised that the committee had listed the existing positions of the staff of the Board. He noted that job descriptions which were furnished by the Executive Director were checked to determine where each position would fall in the salary schedule based on Federal classifications. Those positions which note two grade ranges mean that the job description showed that the position could be fitted in either of two grades, and this could be determined by the Executive Director.
Motion: Father Shallow moved that this table be adopted. Seconded by Mrs. Fleming. Motion carried.
The Chairman stated that placing present staff in the proper category would be determined at the next Executive Committee meeting.
Mr. Lockette advised that the committee had recommended that a new committee be appointed in twelve months to again study the personnel policies, job descriptions, and salary range plan.
OTHER BUSINESS: Mr. Williams asked about the time element involved in the forming of Neighborhood Councils, according to federal guidelines. The Executive Director advised that this would be determined on an individual basis, and that the only information he had was that a council would become autonomous when it had become mature and elected its permanent officers.
Mr. Al Landsman asked what disposition had been made of the $2500 cash contribution given by the Sahara Hotel Corporation to be used for the Small Business Development Center project. The Executive Director advised that it is in the EOB checking account and will not be used until an SBDC is funded.
Respectfully submitted,
0 T
W. F. COTTRELL
Executive Director
MEMORANDUM
ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY BOARD OF CLARK COUNTY
August 23, 1966
To: Executive Committee Members
FROM: W.F. Cottrell, Executive Director
SUBJECT: Items for Discussion, Committee Meeting of August 29, 1966
I.
Integration of Present Staff Pay Rates Into New Schedule.
At the last Board Meeting the new pay schedule was adopted, and the question of integrating present rates of pay into the new schedule was referred to the Executive Committee. Enclosed are copies of the schedule along with a listing of positions and present rates of pay for the Committee's consideration. There are some additional factors which should be discussed at the meeting.
2.
Discussion of Confirmation of Neighborhood Council Project Director Appointment.
This was referred to the Committee at the last Board Meeting. The position was advertised with the Employment Service, in the papers and on radio. A total of some 22 persons either made application or submitted applications, and 13 of these were interviewed. Three persons were given final consideration, and Mr. McDaniel was selected (by the then Acting Executive Director) from these three. We wilt be happy to submit any further information the Committee may desire, including information on Mr. McDaniel's background and experience.
3.
Board Meeting Agenda.
It was suggested at the last Board meeting that an agenda procedure be established, and that each agenda include a period of time for hearing from persons from the floor. Without objection, this procedure will be established and followed.
4.
Out-of-State Trips for Board Members.
Expenses for trips out of state for members of the Board who are officially authorized to travel (in accordance with applicable regulations) may be reimbursed from Federal funds. Since such expenses have not been reimbursable in the past, does the Committee wish to recommend a procedure at this time? Regulations specify that such travel must be specificaIly authorised by the Board, and that Board members must officially represent the board in any travel authorized.
5.
"Get Out And Vote" Record.
Attached is a letter from Harold Moore of the Regional Office concerning this question. You will note that he recommends that the Board continue to withhold payment pending action to request a program change to authorize production of
the record, a request for transfer of funds to pay for the work, and approval of the Regional Office to make the program change and transfer the funds.
You will note also that 0E0 will approve such requests only on the basis of additional information which will demonstrate that such a program change is in the best interests of the residents of target areas and will be in line with 0E0 program guidelines and goals.
6.
Supplemental Request, Conduct and Administration Grant.
A supplemental request for funds for the period ending August 31 was submitted on August 4 (a copy is enclosed for your information). We believe this will be approved in substantially the form submitted. Funds will be transferred from components which have been funded within the program year, but which have expired (such as the C. & A. grant which expired February 15, the NYC component which expired June 30, etc.). The explanation attached to the request sets forth the information which was given to the Committee at its last meeting.
7.
Planning and Priority Report.
The Board is required to make a planning and priority report to the Regional Office, to establish general guidelines for the scope of the Board’s activities and to give the Regional Office an idea of local thinking on priority of programs to be considered. What action does the Board wish to take to acccmpIish this?
MEMORANDUM
ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY BOARD OF CLARK COUNTY
August 23, 1966
TO: Members-of the Economic Opportunity Board
FROM: W.F. Cottrell, Executive Director
SUBJECT: Items for Meeting of August 31, 1966
1.
E.O.B. Administrative Report. The following informational items include all changes in status of the projects listed since the last report at the July meeting:
A.
Manpower Project. This has been funded for the period ending December 31. There are several special conditions attached to OEO's approval, none of which are objectionable from the staff's point of view, being primarily procedural in nature. This project has been funded from July 1. However, since most of the program will be operational for only 3 months, a portion of the funds alloted for the period from July 1 to October 1 will be transferred to fund the Board's Conduct and Administration grant from September 1 to December 31. This means we will not be required to submit a formal application for this four month period.
B.
Moapa Vai ley .Migrant Community Services Center. Discussions are continuing with the School District in regard to the question of transferring operational control and responsibility from the University Cooperative Extension Service to the District. The question of the District's participation in the project has been approved "in principal" by the School Board, pending further discussion and the working out of administrative agreements, which will then be submitted to the School Board for final approval.
These changes would include the following: (1) physical relocation of the Center to the Logandale School site — the location of the District's educational program for migrant children; (2) substitution of more substantial demountable structures for those originally proposed, at no increase in cost of construction; (3) use of the Logandale School auditorium for community and social functions, rather than construction of a separate facility as originally proposed; (4) reduction of the number of home demonstration units from 6 to 1 or 2 units; (5) use of school kitchen and cafeteria facilities, rather than construction of separate facilities as previously proposed. All of these proposals are also subject to approval of the Migrant Desk, 0E0, Washington.
C.
Conduct and Administration Component. As noted above, the final four months of the year will be financed as an extension of the present grant, with no change in program, staff .or operations. We will be preparing a budget and related documents for funding for the coming program year (January 1-December 1, 1967) very shortly. (All applications for funds
for all projects sponsored by the Board will be based on this program year, and are to be submitted to the Regional Office by October 15). Documents supporting the budget for the four-month period were submitted on August 17, based on the budget approved by the Board at its meeting of June 29.
D.
Senior Citizens and Legal Aid. We have received information that Senior Citizens will probably not be funded. We have been asked to submit supplemental information on the Legal Aid proposal, and have done so, to clarify several questions in the proposed program. While no new programs are currently being considered for funding, there is a good chance that this program will be approved after Congress acts on the appropriations for OEO for the current Federal fiscal year.
E.
Operation Independence - Consumer Education Program. A question was raised at the last meeting concerning the status of this proposal, inasmuch as it did not appear to be included in either the Neighborhood Council or the Manpower projects. In checking we find that this was approved in the supplemental request submitted for Day Care Centers, to be funded and administered locally through Operation Independence.
2.
Status of Catholic Welfare as a Delegate Agency - Neighborhood Council Project.
Enclosed is a letter from Mr. Harold Moore of the Regional Office concerning this question. You will note that some action will be required of the Board before this matter can be fully resolved.
5. Criteria for Development of Neighborhood Councils. At the last Board meeting there was considerable discussion of OEO "guidelines" for development of Councils. Enclosed is a letter from the Regional office which clarifies this matter, pointing out that OEO has no criteria or guidelines, apart from those submitted by the Board and approved by the Regional Office. Also enclosed is a copy of the guidelines which have been adopted locally and have been used in development of each of the eight councils. These are based on the broad guidelines included in the original proposal for the component.
4.
Approval of Recommended Bay Rates. At the last Board meeting the question of integrating present and recommended rates of pay for individual positions into the new pay schedule was referred to the Executive Committee. We would appreciate board action on this question, so that the new pay rates and the bi-weekly pay periods can be instituted on September 1.
5.
Approval of Chairman’s Travel Out-of-State. A regional meeting of Executive Directors and Chairmen (or their representatives) is to be held in Fresno September 18-20. In order to provide for reimbursement of the Chairman’s expenses, formal Board approval is required at this meeting.
6.
Current List of Board Members. At the last meeting a current list of members, their agencies or positions, and telephone numbers was requested. Enclosed is a copy of our current listings. If there are any corrections or changes, please inform Mrs. Leon in order that our records can be brought up to date.
-2-
7.
Required Change in Bylaws. A special condition attached to the Conduct and Administration grant requires that "evidence must be submitted that the bylaws of the C.A.A. have been amended to provide that.... representatives of the groups being served shall be represented by a minimum of 1/3 membership of the Board and on all committees and sub-committees of the Board of the C.A.A. in at least the same proportion as they are represented on the Board itself."
The By-laws presently provide (Article III, Sec. 1) that of the total membership of the Board of Trustees, "no less than one-third shall represent the target areas to be served. The proposed Trustees in the third category shall be recommended to the Board from Neighborhood Councils which have been established in the target areas. Each Council shall have a minimum of one Trustee represented on the Board. The voting power and rights and interests of each Trustee of the Corporation shall be equal."
In order to meet the requirements of the special condition as it pertains to committee membership, it is proposed that the by-laws be amended as fol lows:
Article VI, "Committees", Section 1 - Standing Committees. Insert after the listing of the three standing committees the following words: "one-third of the members of each committee shall be representatives of the groups being served in the target areas."
Article VI, Section 1, paragraph three, add the following words to the first sentence: "subject to the provision that one-third of the members of each such committee shall be representatives of the groups being served in the target areas."
Article VI, Section 3, Execut i ve Comm i ttee, add the following words to the second sentence: "subject to the provision that one-third of the members of the committee shall be representatives of the groups being served in the target areas."
Article VI, Section 4, Finance Committee, add the following words to the first sentence: "subject to the provision that one-third of the members of the committee shall be representatives of the groups being served in the target areas."
Article VI, Section 5, Nominating Committee, add the following words to the first sentence: "and not less than one-third of whom shall be representatives of the groups being served in the target areas."
Article VI, Section 6, Special Committees, add the following words to the end of the present wording: "subject to the provision that not less than one-third of the total membership of each such special committee shall be representatives of the groups being served in the target areas."
-3-
AGENDA
EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MEETING ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY BOARD OF CLARK COUNTY
August 29, 1966 3:30 P.M.
EOB Offices
Las Vegas, Nevada
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Integration of present rate of pay into new pay scale .
Confirmation of appointment of Neighborhood Council Director.
Nevada Catholic Welfare as a delegate agency.
Establishment of Format and Procedure for Board Meeting Agendas.
Establishment of Procedure to give permission for Board Member Travel.
Question of payment of services for Voter Registration Record.
Approval of Travel for Executive Director and Chairman to attend Conference in Fresno.
How the Board will establish project priority.
Status of Consumer Cooperative Club for Las Vegas.
execuws co^inxe hestihg GF THE
ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY BGW OF CUftK COUNTY
August 29, m-6 5:30 P,M.
set S. Highland
Las ¥•$»«. *®v<ada
PRESENT; CMrles Spann (Chalrren), Joseph Haaitlfta, Harvey Ooedere, /»«•• Wllllem*, Isaac tfMte, Jams Snowdan, Ttans Si lac®, Emory Loctastte, Father Charles Shallow, Lev Vai her, Tad law*«n
Staffs William Cotfret I, Oevld Hoggard, Sylvia teen
Guest*? Stobert Triable
A Quorum was declared present, and th* westing called to order by Chairman Spann.
INTEGRATION OF PRESENT SALARIES INTO FAY SCALE: Th* Cha Irwin reviewed the Fby Seale that Md been approved by the Board of Trwatoas at It* la»t meeting. It had been decided by the board that tfw Ew*cutfva Coemlttee would place each wl®r*» Into the »t«p of the pay range cloMetlfc which hie salary was under th® former ace Ie.
»r. Cottrell pointed out that the Board had recaamndad salary raise* for three position# which level ved chahfia In Job classifications and duties; the#® three were Program Coordinator, AMInlstrstlve Assistant, and finance Officer. Tiwsa Increase* were approved by Beard actio® at th* Jun« greeting
It was also acted that a pay l«crea»e Md baa® slwm th» arc Project director effective July t. Mr, Cottratl atated that If tM Board ware to approve tha MYS director’# ra!»a. tbaa tM Soard-approved lncrss»es for the ether three ffaltlons should ba Included mwsII.
The approved raises wera? Prograe CMrdtftator,, SS^O <frw $WG); AdwlMstmiro AmUW, tad Finance Offtear, JWO
(from $5400).
The Chairman ruled that Inestweh at these talarlas had been approved by the Board, subject to The objection of toy e«mr Commit tee would act
on these salaries «a previously approved by the BooH*
^otloa: Mr. Snowden moved that the Fringe Coordinator, Administrative Assistant, end Finance at fleer receive the new set ar Ie# •• reconrwnded. Seconded by Tmmws «l Ison, action carried enenlmwsly.
- ■ . ■ ■ '
The salerlas of the present employees wore ostabljMad ihs’tdslIcms: Eaeewtlvo Streeter to be In Range 12, Step lj Frogrem Coordinator t© be tn ®»ai»fje 13, Step ?; Pragree Assistant to be In Range P, Step 6, Adaln1s-> tratlve Assistant to ba In Mn.90 T, Step Sj Finance Officer to be In ^engw 7, Step 7i Secretary to he tn Range 4, Step 5,
MMghtorteOd Councl I director to to Im Pang® 10, Stop h Mhhtorlmd Council Secretary to to In &ange 3, St«^ 2} Council A Idea tod Workers t® Mn In Range 3, Stop 3.
WfG Project director to b® In tonga to, Step tj Senior Coordinator to he Jn mftfe® 8, $f#s 4 Ceordtoators to to In Megd 4, Stop S> tookka»Mr to m in tongs », Stop 5.
mUn; W*. Snowden wv*d and Mr. maklns soroaded that those salaries be fotegratad Into to® pay scale 4a the range* and atop* «« noted. mtlon carried unsnlmusly.
PAT I Fl CATION OF APPOINTMENT OF HEICHm^ CWCIU PROJECT Mft£CTCm> The CMIroen stated tMt according to too Persoeml Pel teles end Practices, the Executive director Is authortoad to epjwl«t >rotos»1&nal poramaM aubject to rotHI- eatlon of toe Soard. At toe l»»t doord meting the #M*t MUM that <$eellfleatfoM of »Bpolnt«<u should not ba dlsc«**®4 la an open sosalon and that toe eattor of ratification ot toe MlgMorMod Council Project Director M referred to toe EMacutlvo Cowalttoa ter dtadosfelM »M recoemndatlon at the newt Etoard meting.
Hr. Snowden iwtflcwd whether tM» position Md bean epeaiy advarHsed to the mile. Tm Chalrmn referred to toe «em tent to fewestlm Csw^lttee Heebera by Mr. Cottrell edvUIng toet It hto been edvertlead, tost 22 application* er la^etrlao were reeelwaMl and 13 ape I leant* I utorviewed, Mr. Cottrell reviewed toe mH fleet Ion* ef fir. lesser McOenlah who toe town working a« toe 3 tractor of tolghtortoed totoeil, eto ttto tot to I fig raewwetoto for the epRfntMtot.
Father Shallow matlonto vto tod etotofto toStolei, tod It wet noted tnat the appointment wee m« fey Mr. Merril Pelts, then toting Ejtecvtlva 31 rector. Mr. Uckatta etatto that toe point of iepcrtanca now waa whether or not m pr«wnt Exacwtlva director eetoorrto la tola aipolntwnt.
Cottrell etatto that to did *M wto rocewaeMt^ that Hr. McCentsI to ratified fey the toard.
<*r. idfeltw etated that It eayom dlaagreto ttot W* HcSaalel to aptolhtwd, rwasce* should to stated. Ttore wae len|toy dlsetttoloa regarding s«r. MeOsnlePa Qiall float lone, with efejaetlem toteg wleto fey Mr. Mankina that «r. toftiMlai cent I sued to Interfere with Menpe*^ fiavetopioont programs, sM that to end a mnpowsr cofttolftot (Mr. Sawtmal Md Interrupt to toe of tne training cUtoas without any prter approval to do to. Mr. MenMto stotw that to tojestto to anytody letortorlag la an oagolag project under tha shitootor Mmlnlatreflto.
8 Mr, Cottroll said that ho wlahsd to ante eloer wtof the position ©I
> toiffttortoto Council Director It, and aetod that the Stroctor fetvas toltonca and counsel to the aoatort of tto Council* to to Ip selva the proMaes of people In poverty. He stated that ho had ottondto Mlghborheto Council mewftoga at which tto qetotton of training prograro Md feeea raised and discussed fey peopto In the Council*.
Cortrail further acted that wft«n str. Eastman was fa U» tesas he Me expressed the de* I re to talk with the people Involved la ftlT ate teaser training prograe®. Appolntoants ware sede win tte persons presweed to
Involved, and Mr. Peder of Fair Practice and Training Co use f I had teen advised that the Manpower Consultent wI shad to visit the c|«>, which wot a part of tte pr^rew wader Mr* Coder’s Jurisdiction. A complaint wes later received iron the fcdwl district In thef they ted &>t teen net! tied of the visit; however, tM* wee the flraf tawledge tte «08 ted that tte School district was Involved Ie !N» trail a tag program.
Mr. 4<»te VII>Ish sllepod that Here tee teen dosenslon tetvean
Mr. teteaiol and the Councils, that them seared to te a lack of ccawunlcafUn, end that Obo Council* wore loalnp people Inafete of drawing thee.
^r. Tteam dlUon, repfusentthf the teetotdeCouncil, stated that so far as ha ha* teen sMa to wternlm, Hr. tetenlala U a fine w and that tte testaUa Council ted te prrth* In fMs regard. He Acted ttet If there la • va!H tejaetlm te Mr. teCenlefs, It Should te Stated exactly;
otherwise, te should te ratified as JrteteteteM by tte fme at Iva director.
There tea dlstesslon on whether tte ratification *t this tfo are Id prevent diselssal If he were not doing an stespftele Jefe. It was polntte tet that thern was a *lw tenths probationary period **tsblisted H tte p*r*o«nel jollclte, sftectlw aa of tte tire of tte Project &lrooter^ tepoistetet.
hq»lent Mr. tenter* eoved that tte h Hr. Uter tetenUI t® the posltlte of te approved fey tte tees at Ite &mlttte a^lrtewt te rotettastete to tte 3ter Executive plracter will work with Hr. tet his tetlea properly, teflon w«» i
Ib dlwmlte mt. Cottrill oofod ttet te tehtet te anything regard I a ewlolat If te Is net ewte of It *M advised ttet te ted only teen swam of tte tetelalnt snide by dr. teteln*. te wofte Sis* ttet there was n© way In which to jud^a which person night te test cteMfled as there ore te otter P05ttlea» fa cuaaare |f wlW te teld te eeawned ttet peraona wte screened oppllteof# felt Mr. teStelel tec tte teat Stell fled, ted tefte that w. Fatey of Nevada Cette lie tel fore was one of tte porsono who ted telted with Mr. Mctenlah He referred t® Mr. Hogjard wte ted Soon la charge of sertanln^ and Ifttervtwwlna applicants for tela position.
tfr. teppard noted ttet one of the rotete* tetenlal was oteaen was te&me ha was a little short «f pat I wear tetewoe la poverty yew are working with people wte have teen kteted srcwid. te Sold this position needed soesona who would state up for tte poop** *kl let thee te«w that ttere vss soBjeone to tel? ttew. Hr. Howard stwfte ttet there could te hotel Ines eapoefad atewf telghterhecd Ctetel Is If they are doing ttetr
ecwtive iHrocter’s oppointwant of Mol^terteed Council Project g>lreefer . Ote ttet ratification of tte <* Hth tte wteerstaMUa ttet nw teOaploi to steers ttet te carries •ceased Oy «r» Snowden.
J*** This u what co wants, and this l« Mm thay beHaue people tfw hew tHwn denied can going to leers to iM»lp ttamelros out of poverty.
MgtlW Gnawll e«ll vete. Mr. ^Oanlai was ratif|»< unanimously.
STATUS & m£VA3A CAlWMC WlfABE AS A DELESATt AGSMCY, The gMoetlve director rtvlmd that «r. fistti. then Acting bsctflw Olrsctor hod written t Utter to 0€’J In June ashing that hewada Catholic deifare be RCMd • dsle^te agency for the Melghhorhood Cauncll project. A reply Me Men receive from the Ska fwclsw office (copies dlstrlbatae to severs) adwHIhf tMt there mast be skwrd action to .wks Catholic Welfare a CaUjeta ®9«ncy before a rwquaat H ewMltted to CCO to Ca w>. The CM I man noted tMt Catholic Mitera It now actually operating toe two dwells tn Henderson eM north Us Vegas »« «« Informal Msllu
*ML«*V I* •«« «*M by Hr, uwson a«4 seconded by Hr. fioMwro that ftl» setter M pet on the agenba for the aosrt with the racowmndstlcn by the Executive Committee that Catholic *elfare M made • deleft* agency for the MlgMorhooc Cotmll project.
Mr. Ccttrwl I noted that to M • delegate e^A«y, there west he « coetrect between the Sconeelc Opoortwalty Uerd cm the Cai^eto e$eecy end there prewttly i» wm.
Mr. Trfeble noted that the MelyMerMod Ceetere alecys seem to be HeetWIed as tether Shallow bteted that F.AA. I» not M^oreto fro® Catholic
veltere.
carried unewiemwely.
W4AT A^© PWCSOU^ F$A «niHS It M« noted by the CM I man that
Mcewee of weey interruption* daring the »r»vl«e« Board Meeting It hed been »u^sfed that • procedure bo establlehed In fol lowing the ejende, and btwldlog an opportunity for visiters to OMgrata t»alr vlaws. Tha Chalroea called u Hr. Uefette to dlea^Ma oimotlo* lot Uard
meet f r^. Mr. UdUtta aw^fai Hat ear£i bo jmnM out for gooata to note what they wtmid liU to dlscwe: the oarda than ba glveo to the CMIre&t and a certain amownt of tlmo allotted for thia Hlaowatao. It mi noted that this procedure U» eerkad uary well for the School 3latrlct< however, there was dl scuta ion ra«ardfftg the wMsablllty ©f thf» boeausa of Hh prograa HI** th* Her on fttwrfy.
w
■ • ■ -t 'a : ■/,.'■
The Chairmen ruled, subject to the Ejection of any mmabar. that visitor*
Md item to discuss would be altowad to do so prior to consideration of The formal for the mating, within roaaoMMe tlm I lefts. There
was «o objection to thia suggestion.
TO SI ESTABLISHES FGft SOARO TRAVSLs Th* Chairmen advIsod that ®on»Y 1a aval labia for out-of-etete travel ter Soard Moaben bet according to provisions of CAP ?>, such treval wist be ^proved by the Beard. In dltcusslcc Manors pointed out that It was Impractical te haw the entire Soard approve dll travel at the ^rd moot* only once a month and a necessary occasion lor trawl eight ar I co between eaattn^a,
Motion; following discussion, It was ©owed by Father Shallow that the exacut Iva Olrecter and Chairmen bo authorised to $lw perofebfen for trawl of Soard members, bubjoet to ratification by th* Board, Seconded by Mr. RanMna, ®ot1cn carrird ww>fi*ou*|y.
PAYMENT $F SEftVfQ£^ pm VCTEP REGISTRATION MORO* A copy ef tee totter received from San Franolaea QEG office oa this r.uastloa was provided to oarers. fcr. Cottrell discussad ths Uttar. atatlng that th* procedure cutIload by OEO was that the Soard ten aubelt • program ebthje te Son Fraaotae® ashing ter funds to pay tor this. CEO will than eensWar ths program change. Mr. «Mte noted that If this record h paid for wjte SEO funds, ho would Mpe that It would bo mad* useful.
mt I co, Mr. Pankins roved that the Executive SI rector bo •vthsrUod to •uboft a are^rao chanya and a rc^urst for authority f© franafar funds to pay for the TfOdordlhg. Seconded by «r. motion carried unaaliacusty.
OEO CCHFER&IICE IS FREW* Wr. Cottrot I noted thof • ddoforoM* h scheduled In Frwuw September IS through 20 for Executive Clroctara and Chairmen of CAP Soards. Me adv Had that the CMlrwaa heeded the autfiorlietlcn of the Board of SI rectors to attend thU cenfaronco.
Motksnt It was ww« by Mr. Manktns, seconded by Mr. Umon that approval for t&TS&lnaan’s travel to the c©aforea<w In Fresno be rRtmtsd at tM Soard aeotlaf. Motion carried unanimously.
miter PRI©MITY to < ESTaSLISHEO ay THE ^AR0t Tho Owfrean adviaad mt OEO re^ulra- wants call for the Soard to establish project priorities. TM* la adeesaary for 080 plaanlns. and also la the event ef aortal leent ef funds, In thU case, CCO «uet hmw what projects the 9wrd feela to bo ef basic loportanee to the eaeawnlfy.
Mr. Snowden au^estod that bmuM ostablb^«S priorities Involved funding, this could beet be »cccwyl!«h®4 by TM Finance CwsntttM. Fol lowing brief dUeuexlea, the Chairman ruled, subject to object I on by any metaber, that tr*e estab Hshmnt ©f project priority be studied by the Fl banco Cwdttae and that a rucowaondatlon be submitted to the Soard at Its September meetly. Tharo was no objection.
-S-
STATUS OF CGeSWR COOPGUTIVC CLUBS FGH LAS W&AS: The Chelms* ravtevac this project which was an *^|| cation stftotfttea far lun4U$ &y Havana Canells ateifaro. The Soard M4 receemsdad that If be Studied fty a ccwalttee. The etnas! ties was established tv tM Meeting Qamlttea to be chaired &y Hr. Snevdsn. The Chart man esus ar, Snewden to revert en the state* of this project.
Hr. Snowden net** that ha M4 $rsvl4M *>?!« at the ^reject script I on to tM swe’jer* of the comittao, r»#erts have saaa Facts I vx> 4 frees wholes* Urs j however, «te corawlttae has net yet been eh Ie to eset. «r. tsewtfen rawest** that Father Sha I lew met with the caomlttwe so that In tarnation rawsted »y comltm ffleeUen eooltf be prided. Father Shailw stated that h» would at tenet a esetf^ t© <^
Mr. smjwcen advises that ths eossalttea W»I4 report at the $e^f«®ar eeetls^.
ACJC’imOTr Twa Seine ne further supines*, tae meting wes aajaerned.
fSessectfeHy fussttttted, fo.4.G«2M ^F> ®TWU Executive ©Inseter
AGENDA BOARD MEETING ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY BOARD OF CLARK COUNTY
TO: Members of the Board
FROM: Charles W. Spann Cha Irman
RE: Monthly Board Meeting
This Is official notice of the regular monthly meeting of the Economic Opportunity Board of Clark County. The meeting will be held as follows:
WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 31, 1966
7:30 P.M.
AUDITORIUM OF THE CLARK COUNTY
DISTRICT HEALTH DEPARTMENT
Following is the Agenda:
I.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF JULY 27, 1966.^
2.
ACCEPTANCE OF FINANCE REPORT FOR THE MONTH ENDING JULY 31, 1966.^
3.
SEATING OF NEW NEIGHBORHOOD COUNCIL REPRESENTATIVES.^
FOR INFORMATION:
4.
ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY BOARD ADMINISTRATION REPORT
a.
Manpower
b.
Migrant Community Services Center
c.
Senior Citizens and Legal Aid
d.
Consumer Education Component of Day Care Centers
FOR ACTION:
5.
ACTION ON CATHOLIC WELFARE’S STATUS AS A DELEGATE AGENCY FOR NEIGHBORHOOD COUNCIL PROJECT.
6.
ACTION ON RATIFICATION OF NEIGHBORHOOD COUNCIL DIRECTOR APPOINTMENT.
7.
ACTION ON EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE’S RECOMMENDATION FOR PLACING EXISTING EMPLOYEES’ SALARIES IN SPECIFIC STEPS OF PAY SCALE.
8.
ACTION ON CHAIRMAN’S TRAVEL TO CONFERENCE IN FRESNO.
9.
OTHER BUSI NESS A
8/24/66
MEETING OF THE ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY BOARD OF CLARK COUNTY
August 31, 1966 7:30 P.M.
Clark County Health Department Auditorium Las Vegas, Nevada
PRESENT: Charles Spann (Chairman), Douglass Pushard, Ferren Bunker, Stella Fleming, Emory Lockette, Father Charles Shallow, Isaac White, Thomas Wilson, Charlotte Hill, I da Be I Ie Riggins, James Snowden, Newton Tigner, Mary Spencer, J.R. McPherson, Laura Lomprey, Jesse Williams
Guests: James Carmody, Ravenna Van Houten, Elizabeth Tully, George O’Keger, Corine Jackson, Mayor W.R. Hampton, Lubertha Johnson, John T. Spann, WiI Iiam Carlos, Dudley Evans
The Chairman advised that the Executive Committee had recommended that in order to expedite the Board meetings, visitors who had items to bring before the Board be given an opportunity to do so before the official opening of Board matters. He invited guests present to do so.
INTRODUCTIONS: Chairman Spann called the meeting to order. He introduced Mrs. Van Houten, the new Director of the Las Vegas District Office of the State Welfare Department, and her assistants Mr. Jim Carmody and Mrs. Betty Tully. Mayor William Hampton of Henderson was present and introduced to the group.
MINUTES: There being no corrections, additions, or deletions to the minutes, Father Shallow moved for adoption of the minutes of the meeting of July 27. Seconded by Mr. Lockette, motion carried.
FINANCIAL REPORT: There being no questions, Mr. Bunker moved that the financial report for the period ending June 30, 1966, be adopted. Seconded by Father Sha I low, motion carried.
SEATING OF NEIGHBORHOOD COUNCIL REPRESENTATIVES: The Chairman noted that at the last meeting of the Board, it was determined that members of the Neighborhood Councils would be seated with submission of certification from the Council that they were authorized representatives. Mr. Dudley Evans, Community Service Aide, presented certification from Henderson in the form of a petition signed by eight members of the Council. The question was raised as to why certification was by petition rather than by election of the Council members. Mr. Evans advised that it had been brought to his attention only that day that a temporary representative could be seated and so a petition was circulated and signed by eight members of the fourteen members who had been present at the last two meetings.
Following Board discussion on acceptability of the petition as proper certification, Mr. Bunker moved that the petition be accepted as proper credential for seating Mrs. Lomprey as the temporary representative from
Henderson. Seconded by Reverend Tigner, motion carried.
Formal certification was presented for Mrs. Mary Spencer to represent the Kit Carson Neighborhood Council (Mrs. Spencer had previously been seated by the Board).
Formal certification was presented for Mr. Thomas Wilson, Sr. to represent the Westside Neighborhood Council (Mr. Wilson had also previously been seated by the Board)
Formal certification was presented from the North Las Vegas Neighborhood Council to seat Mr. Antonio Montamayor as its representative.
It was noted that due to a clerical error, the wrong certification had been presented for the Jo Mackey Neighborhood Council; however, Mrs. Marvie Smith would be seated as its representative.
The Chairman noted that five members have been seated to date of the eight Counci Is.
ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT OF THE ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY BOARD: Mr. Cottrell advised that a memorandum had been sent to Board Members outlining the status of projects. Briefly, he advised that the Manpower Project has been approved providing funding for six months. He noted, however, that the project would not be in full operation until the last three months of this year. Mr. Cottrell advised that all projects will be on a program year beginning January 1 and ending December 31, and that application for refunding of existing projects will be submitted to 0E0 by October 15. This is with the exception of the Hot Lunch Program which terminates at the end of the school year, and the Migrant Project which is funded for one year ending in April, 1967.
He noted that discussions are being continued with the School District on the possibility of their becoming a delegate agency for the Migrant Community Service Center.
Mr. Cottrell advised that the final four months of the Conduct and Administration of the Economic Opportunity Board grant will be funded from monies to be transferred from the Manpower Project. He noted that with the permission of the Executive Committee, the necessary documentation has been prepared to accomplish this.
Mr. Cottrell stated that the Senior Citizens project in all probability will not be funded. The Legal Aid Program, submitted in early July, has a chance of being funded if discretionary funds are provided by Congress.
On the consumer education portion of the project originally submitted as the 0.1. Community Service Center, Mr. Cottrell advised that this had been approved as part of the day care centers budget with the provision that it be carried out with local resources or funds within the in-service training component.
-2-
A copy of a letter from the San Francisco OEO's General Counsel was provided each Board Member. Mr. Cottrell noted that this letter advised that Clark County EOB employees were not subject to the Hatch Act, but are subject to CAP Memo 23 which provides that a person, as an employee, cannot engage in partisan political activity.
STATUS OF NEVADA CATHOLIC WELFARE AS A DELEGATE AGENCY: Chairman Spann reviewed that though Nevada C'tholic Welfare has been operating the two Neighborhood Centers in North Las Vegas and Henderson, they have not been officially named a delegate agency for the Neighborhood Counci I project and have not officially contracted with the EOB to operate the two Centers.
The Chairman further noted that each Board Member had been mailed a copy of a letter from OEO advising that the Board has the responsibility and the power to name delegate agencies. Therefore this matter is now being referred to the Board for action, prior to submitting it to the Regional office for approval as a program change.
Motion: Mr. Isaac White moved that Nevada Catholic Welfare be named a delegate agency to operate the Neighborhood Service Centers in Henderson and North Las Vegas. Motion was seconded by Reverend Tigner and carried unanimously.
Motion: Mr. White moved that the contracts between the Economic Opportunity Board and the delegate agencies for the Neighborhood Counci I and the Manpower Projects stipulate that (1) the Centers be identified as funded through the Office of Economic Opportunity and that each center be named for and identified with the geographic area served; and (2) that no organizational names, other than that of the delegate agencies, Operation Independence and Nevada Citholic Welfare, shall be used in connection with the designation of the Centers in such as on signs, letterheads, flyers, or newsletters. Motion seconded by Mr. Snowden.
In discussion, Mr. Dudley Evans pointed out that guidelines state a certain amount of independence. Father Shallow noted that this was a situation of the Board dictating to the agency how it is going to run its project. He stated that all the subterfuge about PAL results in complete misunderstanding about what it is. He said that when it comes to administration Catholic Welfare does it, not PAL, but that the the ideas are from people who come from PAL, and if they are going to learn leadership, then they have to retain a certain identity. He noted that if mistakes are made, Catholic Welfare will be at fault; however, they would try to see that mistakes were not made. He stated that he did not like the idea of trying to make a big cleavage that does not exist.
Mr. Lockette asked to have the Secretary read the motion made at the last Board Meeting regarding naming of the Centers. The Chairman noted that the motion just made by Mr. White was extending that made at the last meeting and asking that it be made part of the contract with the
-3-
delegate agencies. Mr. White stated that he did not wish Father Shallow to feel that this is just for Catholic Welfare, that it is meant to apply to Operation Independence as well.
In further Board discussion, Mr. White noted that the motion made at the previous Board meeting was intended to remove the PAL signs from the Neighborhood Service Centers. He noted that the signs still remained, and that the telephone had been answered as PAL Neighborhood Service Center. Mr. Williams stated that the signs are not over the Service Center but over a portion of the building that was contracted for directly with the School District. Father Shallow noted that if the telephones were still being answered as PAL Neighborhood Service Center, service centers employees would be instructed to change to Henderson and North Las Vegas Service Center.
Mrs. Riggins noted that it would seem more advisable to have the Centers named only for their geographic area.
Vote on the motion: On a roll call vote, there were 9 yes votes; 6 no votes. Motion carried.
GUIDELINES FOR THE ESTABLISHMENT OF NEIGHBORHOOD COUNCILS: Chairman Spann noted that Board Members had received a copy of a letter from the San Francisco 0E0 regarding guidelines in the establishment of Neighborhood Councils and had also been provided with a copy of local guidelines for the establishment of Neighborhood Councils. Subject to objection by any member of the Board, the Chairman ruled that this letter and the local guidelines established be noted and made a matter of record.
RATIFICATION OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD COUNCIL PROJECT DIRECTOR APPOINTMENT: The Chairman advised that at the Executive Committee Meeting of August 29 the qualifications of Mr. McDaniel were discussed, and the Committee unanimously determined to recommend his ratification to the Board, subject to the six month probationary period. He stated that if the Board now wished further discussion of Mr. McDaniel's qualifications, this would be done in closed session.
Motion: Mr. Bunker made a motion to accept the recommendation of the Executive Committee. Seconded by Mr. Pushard, motion carried unanimously.
Mr. Lockette asked that it be noted that all employees are automatically put on six month's probation and that this was not a reflection on this particular appointment.
INTEGRATION OF EXISTING SALARIES INTO THE RECENTLY-ADOPTED PAY SCALE: The Chairman advised that the Executive Committee had placed existing Board approved salaries into the pay scale according to the nearest step but in such a way that no employee suffered a cuty in salary.
-4-
Mo+ ion: Mr. White moved that the existing salaries as placed in the pay scale by the Executive Committee be approved by the Board. Seconded by Mr. Bunker, motion carried unanimously.
AUTHORIZATION FOR TRAVEL FOR CHAIRMAN OF THE BOARD: Mr. Cottrell advised that Board Members are now permitted to make official trips and be reimbursed for such; however, such travel requires authorization by the members of the Board. He discussed the Conference to be held in Fresno September 18 through 20 to which CAP Di rectors and Chairmen of their lay boards were invited.
Motion: Mr. Bunker moved that Mr. Spann be named as the official delegate of the Board to make this trip. Seconded by Reverend Tigner, motion carried unanimously.
OTHER BUSINESS:
Travel by Board Members: Chairman Spann stated that funding is provided for Board Member travel; however, prior authorization by the Board is needed before a trip can be taken. At the Executive Committee meeting, Mr. Dondero had pointed out that necessary trips might arise when it was advisable to complete a trip prior to a monthly Board meeting.
Following discussion of this condition, it was recommended by Executive Committee members that the Chairman, in consultation with the Executive Di rector be authorized to approve Board Member travel subject to ratification by the Board of Directors.
There was Board discussion on this recommendation. Mr. Lockette noted that this should be so only if it was specifically requested that there be representation from the Clark County Board. Several Board Members pointed out that this recommendation was meant only for those tri
which might be necessitated between
Motion: Mr. Snowden moved that the that the Chairman and the Executive Board Member travel for trips which Meetings, subject to ratification b\ entire Board. Motion seconded by Mt
Board Meetings.
suggestion of the Executive Committee Director be authorized to approve would be necessary between Board < the Board, be approved by the
-. White and Mr. Pushard.
Mr. Lockette asked that this motion be amended to state "travel to conferences or meetings pertaining to the Economic Opportunity Board." He noted that this was authorizing the Executive Di rector and the Chairman to approve necessary travel; however, he questioned what would be constituted as necessary travel.
-5-
Several Board Members cited examples of trips which had been taken that were of benefit to the Board. Mr. Bunker stated that it was difficult to conceive that the Executive Di rector or the Chairman would
authorize travel for any Board Member was not in the interest of the Board, the members that this travel would be Board; therefore, it seemed that this and may in some instances expedite an information which the Board would not
to pursue any kind of program that He noted that he would also remind subject to ratification of the motion is perfectly in order important trip that would bring otherwise get.
Mr. Lockette again noted that anything outside of 0E0 trips should come before the Board prior to any travel taking place. He stated that a Board Member should know about a trip in enough time to have it brought before a Board Meeting.
Vote on the Amendment to the Motion: On a roll call vote, there were
8 yes votes; 7 no votes. The amendment to the motion carried.
Vote on the Motion as Amended: On a roll call vote, there were 8 yes votes; 7 no votes. Motion carried.
Procedure for Making Changes in Grant Action: The Chairman stated that in order to obtain approval of changes in grant actions, such as shifting of money within or between components of a grant, this Board must indicate to 0E0 that the governing board approved each specific change, or must indicate to OEO that the governing board has given the Executive Director administrative discretion to seek requested changes. The Chairman called for discussion on this.
Mr. Cottrell briefly explained situations which might necessitate transfer of funds between components.
Motion: Mr. Bunker moved that the Board delegate the authority to the Executive Director to take the necessary actions in the distribution of funds and related matters to meet emergencies. Seconded by Mrs. Lomprey.
In discussion on the motion, Mr. Lockette stated that he was concerned about the amount of authority that is delegated. He asked the Executive Director if the problem could not be solved by re-programming at certain intervals. He noted that the re-programming could be brought before the Board, but he did not feel that this type of authority should be given within the office. He stated that he is against giving a blanket grant of authority to cover any situation.
Mr. Cottrell cited several examples within the past several weeks involving 3 program changes which have been necessary in the NYC program. He noted that if these actions had been delayed until the Board acted at the monthly meeting, there would be numerous delays in the NYC
-6-
program. He stated that authority to make such emergency changes by the Executive Di rector was necessary to carry on day to day operations, but that if such authority were given it would be used only in the event that a decision or action could not be delayed unti I the next Board meeting.
Vote on the Motion: On a voice vote, motion carried with one dissenting vote.
Change in By-Laws: The Chairman noted that the proposed changes in the By-Laws distributed to all members were necessary to meet a special condition of 0E0 to ensure that there was representation of the poor on each committee in at least the same proportion as represented on the Board. He further stated that there would be a vote on such change at the next Board Meeting as the By-Laws required 30 days notice to members in order to approve amendments. Board Members have been mailed the proposed changes.
Statement by Father Shallow: Father Shallow stated that in regard to his statement that Catholic Welfare would issue instructions regarding the manner in which telephone calls were answered at the two Neighborhood Centers, in view of subsequent action this decision will be reconsidered and postponed pending further study.
ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business to come before the Board, the meeting was adjourned.
Respectfully submitted,
W.F. COTTRELL
Execut i ve Di rector
WFC:dj
MEMORANDUM
ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY BOARD OF CLARK COUNTY
September 20, 1966
TO: EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MEMBERS
FROM: CHARLES W. SPANN CHAIRMAN
RE: EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MEETING MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 26, 1966
You are hereby notified that the regular monthly meeting of the Executive Committee will be held as follows:
MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 26, 1966
3:30 P.M.
EOB OFFICES (301 S. Highland)
Your attendance will be appreciated. Following is the Agenda for the meeting:
I.
PLANNING AND PRIORITY REPORT
2.
APPROVAL OF EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR JOB DESCRIPTION
3.
PROGRAM DESCRIPTIONS AND BUDGETS FOR PROJECTS BEING SUBMITTED FOR REFUNDING
4.
CONSIDERATION OF CHANGE IN BY-LAWS TO MEET SPECIAL CONDITION
5.
DISCUSSION OF SALARY OF NYC DIRECTOR AND STAFF, AND STAFFING OF NYC PROJECT
6.
REPORT OF THE STUDY COMMITTEE ON CONSUMER COOPERATIVE PURCHASING CLUBS FOR LAS VEGAS
7.
RELATIONSHIP OF EOB BOARD MEMBERS TO STAFF OF DELEGATE AGENCIES
ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY BOARD OF CLARK COUNTY
September 21, 1966
TO: MEMBERS OF THE BOARD
FROM: CHARLES W. SPANN
CHAIRMAN
RE: MONTHLY BOARD MEETING
You are hereby notified of the regular monthly meeting of the Economic Opportunity Board of Clark County to be held as follows:
SEPTEMBER 28, 1966 (Wednesday)
7:30 P.M.
CLARK COUNTY DISTRICT HEALTH DEPARTMENT AUDITORIUM
AGENDA
I.
APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF AUGUST 31, 1966.
2.
ACCEPTANCE OF FINANCIAL REPORT FOR THE MONTH ENDING AUGUST 31, 1966.
3.
SEATING OF NEW NEIGHBORHOOD COUNCIL REPRESENTATIVES.
4.
ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY BOARD ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT.
5.
REPORT OF THE STUDY COMMITTEE FOR THE CONSUMER COOPERATIVE PURCHASING CLUBS PROJECT.
6.
PROGRAM DESCRIPTIONS AND BUDGETS FOR PROJECTS BEING SUBMITTED FOR REFUNDING.
FOR ACTION
7.
PLANNING AND PRIORITY REPORT.
8.
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR JOB DESCRIPTION.
9.
CONSIDERATION OF CHANGE IN BY-LAWS TO MEET SPECIAL CONDITION.
10.
OTHER BUSINESS.
ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY BOARD OF CLARK COUNTY
September 21, 1966
TO: Members of the Economic Opportunity Board
FROM: W.F. Cottrell, Executive Di rector
SUBJECT: Items for Meeting of SeptemberJ>8, 1956
1.
Informational Items Enclosed: The following items are enclosed for your information and/or action:
A.
Executive Director job description: A job description for the position was not included with those approved by the Board at the June.meeting. We are required to submit an approved description as a condition of our current Conduct and Administration Grant.
B.
Program descriptions and budgets for refunding of the Conduct and Administration, NYC support, and Neighborhood Council components. These programs, all previously approved by the Board, are to be submitted to 0E0 San Francisco no later than October 15. Within the next day or two we will also send you copies of the program description and budgets for the Day Care Center and Manpower components, which also must be submitted by October 15.
C.
Proposed changes in By-laws. These were submitted to you with the other material for last month’s meeting. In order to amend the Bylaws, at least 30 days notice must be given. The Board should act on these changes at this month's meeting, in order that we may include the revised By-laws with the applications for refunding next month.
D.
A resume of emergency actions taken since the last Board meeting. There was considerable discussion of this item last month, and the enclosed information will give you an idea of the numbers of items of this nature with which we must deal constantly.
E.
A table (entitled "Program Allocation Summary") which shows the total amounts of money received since inception of the program, and the components which have been funded. The table also shows, in a general manner, how these funds were spent for programs affecting different sectors of the county and for different recipient groups — youth, older citizens, etc. Some of these categories are not mutually exclusive, however — the older citizens, for instance, was also county- wide^ and the "other" category (which specifically identifies programs for Las Vegas, North Las Vegas, and Henderson) also benefited from county-wide and other programs such as youth.
F.
Excerpts from telegram received September 13 regarding refunding for the next program year. This gives a good idea of what the picture is for the 1967 fiscal and program year. The Chairman and Executive Director will also have a report on this matter after attending the Fresno Regional Conference.,
2.
Administrative Report.
There is little to report this month, other than preparation of all guideline components for refunding. We have continued discussions with the school district regarding the Hot Lunch Program, and it appears that any final solution to the funding problems we have encountered here will depend on Regional reaction to the proposal of the District to go to a so-called "box lunch" rather than the hot meals originally proposed. (The box lunch would also be a hot lunch, and would be a Type A lunch which would be eligible for Federal subsidy). This matter is now being considered by 0E0 San Francisco.
The question of the delegate agency for the Moapa Migrant Project is still undetermined. Mr. Norman DeWeaver of the Migrant Desk, 0E0 Washington, will be here during the third week of October, and we hope to resolve this question at that time. The School District has encountered a number of legal and adminstrative questions, which they must resolve before a recommendation could be made to the School Board of Trustees as to whether or not the District becomes the delegate agency.
All other components are functioning and operating in much the same manner as was reported at the last meeting.
MEETING OF THE
ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY BOARD OF CLARK COUNTY
September 28, 1966 7:30 P.M.
Clark County District Health Dept. Auditorium Las Vegas, Nevada
PRESENT: Charles Spann (Chairman), Lee Walker, James Snowden, Thomas Wilson, Sr., Emory Lockette, Don Hampton, Marvie Smith, Douglass Pushard, Ferren Bunker, Charlotte Hill, Stella Fleming, Karl Harris, Harvey Dondero, J.R. McPherson, Antonio Montemayor
Guests: Pat Fahey, Richard Brenneman, Quentin G. Klingler, Cynthia Klingler, Jesse Williams, Susie Green, Ethel G. Lucas, Mr. and Mrs. Elmer W. Crickon, Mrs. J. David Hoggard, Sr., Lubertha Johnson, Harold S. Moore, Louis A. Ruybalid.
Staff: J. David Hoggard, W.F. Cottrell, Doyle Longhurst, Lamar McDaniel, Sylvia Leon
Chairman Charles Spann called the meeting to order.
APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF AUGUST 31: Mr. Bunker moved to adopt the minutes as presented. Seconded by Mrs. Hill, motion carried.
FINANCIAL REPORT FOR THE MONTH ENDING AUGUST 31: Mr. Bunker moved to accept the financial report as presented. Seconded by Mrs. Fleming, motion carried.
SEATING OF NEIGHBORHOOD COUNCIL REPRESENTATIVES: Though no new representatives were seated, Mr. Antonio Montemayor was introduced to the group. Mr. Montemayor’s certification had-been presented at the August meeting.
ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT: Mr. Cottrell reported that administrative activity since the last Board meeting has been concerned with writing descriptions and budgets for components to be placed on a program year beginning January 1. The deadline for submission of these five components is October 15. In addition staff have been working further with two other programs which have been funded but are not yet operational.
Meetings have been held with school administrators concerning the hot lunch program, and a revision is now under consideration by the Regional office which, hopefully, will solve a financial problem created by a reduction of about $8,000 in OEO funds.
The revision would involve a change from use of a central kitchen (with equipment purchased by the school district at a cost of $38,000) to prepare hot meals which would be transported by insulation carts, to a program calling for boxed hot lunches prepared either in existing school kitchens or in a central kitchen made available outside the school system. The alternative proposal would provide a Class "A" lunch which would meet the requirements of the Federal lunch program for subsidy.
Mr. Cottrell further reported on the Moapa Valley migrant project which contemplates a change of delegate agency from the Cooperative Extension Service to the School District. It appears that problems encountered can be overcome, and the school administrative staff is now in a position to prepare a program description to submit to the School Board. Funds from the Housing and Urban Development Department for construction of a permanent building for the Center are a possibility though there has been no committment on this.
COOPERATIVE PURCHASING CLUBS FOR LAS VEGAS: The Chairman called upon Mr. Snowden, Chairman of the Committee to study the project on Cooperative Purchasing Clubs for Las Vegas, a project proposed by Nevada Catholic Welfare.
Mr. Snowden stated that a report has not yet been prepared on this project due to not yet having obtained certain information. The Chairman asked if the report would be prepared for the next Board meeting. Mr. Snowden noted that if the report was ready, he would so advise the secretary.
Mrs. Pat Fahey advised the Board that the PAL Committee has requested Nevada Catholic Welfare Bureau to submit the Purchasing Club project directly to the Research and Demonstration Section of 0E0 in Washington, D.C.
She noted that the project was written December 31, 1965; by Jesse Williams, Mrs. Fahey, and Mr. Peltz as a demonstration project under Title II, Section 207. Projects submitted under Research and Demonstration are to determine the feasibility of whether they will work and to attempt to judge whether or not they will work in advance; therefore, PAL has asked that Catholic Welfare, noting the cooperation of the Economic Opportunity Board and the amount of time and energy spent on this project, submit the project directly to Washington. She added that Catholic Welfare has not yet acted on this request.
Chairman Spann ruled, subject to objection by any Board Member, that this Board would continue to investigate the project; however, PAL was certainly within their perogative to submit the project to another department.
Mr. Snowden further advised that his committee has been in contact with two other si mi I ar operations. Of these two, over the last 2? years, one is in very bad shape, the other is making it. He advised that he has requested information from these two projects.
PROGRAM DESCRIPTIONS AND BUDGETS FOR PROJECTS BEING SUBMITTED FOR REFUNDING: Mr. Cottrell noted that each Board Member was furnished with copies of five components along with a memorandum summarizing the significant changes in the budgets and descriptions for these five components. He reviewed each program individually and noted the changes in each and the increase or decrease in budget for each. He noted that there are only two basic changes in program: (1) In the Day Care Centers, emphasis was now placed on upgrading the child enrichment aspects while continuing the custodial aspects. (2) The other major change is in the Neighborhood Councils wherein the proposals for next year have eliminated the delegate agencies.
-2-
There are two reasons for doing this, Mr. Cottrell noted. At the present time the Councils are served by Community Service Aides; however, after they mature each Council will elect its own Neighborhood Service Wroker who will be responsible to that Council, which means that person could not be responsible to a delegate agency at the same time. Also, a number of administrative problems have come up because the Project Di rector is responsible to this Board and yet the employees are responsible to the delegate agencies. Mr. Cottrell stated that this problem will be overcome with the elimination of the delegate agencies.
He noted that commencing with the new program year, the Project Di rector will continue to exercise coordinating functions between the Councils, and will also serve as a resource person to aid the workers in doing their job for their Councils.
REGIONAL REFUNDING PROBLEMS: Mr. Cottrell stated that refunding existing programs will cost more than $39,000,000 above what this region is expected to get. There are guidelines for each CAA, and the one for the EOB is $246,000 with expanded guidelines at $369,000. If the EOB refunded all of the existing projects as previously budgeted, it would have had $476,000 worth of projects; however, it was indicated that year-round Head Start and the Day Care Centers would be outside of guidelines. Also, it is not known if expanded guidelines will continue.
The Chairman noted that through careful planning, the staff has been able to reduce expenditures by some $54,000 without reducing service to the poor of the community. He commended the staff in doing an exceptional job in accomplishing this.
PLANNING AND PRIORITY REPORT: Mr. Cottrell advised this is a report required by Region VII to the effect that in the event funding is curtailed, the regional office would have guidelines to know which of Clark County’s projects this Board gives priority to. Although this is a critical item, the Executive Director determined that it could be deferred until a report can be brought before the Executive Committee and brought to the Board at the next meeting.
JOB DESCRIPTION FOR EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR: Mr. Cottrell advised that OEO requires a job description for each staff member, and that all descriptions have been sent forward to OEO with the exception of the Executive Director's. This description now requires Board approval before submission. Mr. Snowden moved to adopt this job description. Seconded by Mr. Dondero, motion carried.
CONSIDERATION OF CHANGE IN BY-LAWS TO MEET SPECIAL CONDITION: Mr. Cottrell stated that a change was proposed to meet the special condition which provides that one-third of the membership of committees shall be representative of the groups to be served in the target area. In accordance with the requirement of a 30-day notice to change by-laws, this proposed change had been mailed to Board Members a week prior to the August Board Meeting. Mr. Snowden moved that the revisions be adopted as presented. Seconded by Mr. Walker, motion carried.
-3-
OTHER BUSINESS: Mr. Lockette referred to the minutes of the last Board Meeting and the motion made by Mr. Bunker regarding delegation of authority to the Executive Di rector to take necessary actions. Mr. Lockette stated that he was requesting to amend the motion to insert the word "temporary" before actions. Motion was seconded by Mr. Snowden.
Mr. Cottrell called the Board’s attention to the resume of actions which became necessary between the August and September Board meetings and pointed out that these things were not temporary. Mr. Lockette noted that the motion which had been passed deals with transfer of funds. Mr. Cottrell stated that some items did involve the transfer of funds. Following further discussion, the motion was withdrawn by Mr. Lockette; second withdrawn by Mr. Snowden.
INTRODUCTION OF REGIONAL OFFICE REPRESENTATIVES: The Chairman introduced Mr. Harold Moore, Field Representative, and Mr. Luis Ruybalid, Area Coordinator, from the 0E0 Regional Office. Mr. Moore told Board Members that he has been representative for two months, and that Mr. Ruybalid has just been transferred from the Greater Los Angeles area to the Arizona-Nevada area.
APPROVAL OF PROGRAM DESCRIPTIONS AND BUDGETS: Mr. Cottrell advised that though discussion had previously taken place on these components, Board approval was required for submission. Mr. Walker moved that the projects and budgets as submitted to the Board be approved. Seconded by Mr. Bunker, motion carried unanimously.
Respectfully submitted,
& f @U<L
W.F. COTTRELL
Execut i ve Di rector
ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY BOARD OF CLARK COUNTY
MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE
October 19, 1966 E0B Offices
3:30 P.M, 12,3 Vegas, Nev.
PRESENT: Chairman Charles Spann, Ted Lawson, Joseph Mankins, Thomas Wilson, Sr., James Snowden, Emory Lockette, Lee Walker, Isaac White Guests: Leola Armstrong (State Department of Economic Opportunity) Staff: W.F. Cottrell, David Hoggard, Sylvia Leon
The Chairman called the meeting to order and declared a quorum present.
PLANNING AND PRIORITY REPORT: Members were provided with a proposed Planning and Priority Report by the Executive Director. Mr. Cottrell advised members of the basis on which this report was developed. He stated that past statistics seemed to Indicate that one of the most Important problems was employment and Job development. Secondly, the Board needs a staff In order to meet 0E0 requirements and Neighborhood Councils are a special condition set forth by DEO. Thirdly, It has been Indicated by 0E0 that hot lunch will not be refunded.
Two sets of priorities have been established; those projects which have been funded and are ongoing, and those projects in which there Is some expectation of funding. Mr, Cottrell discussed the form listing priorities which would be submitted to 0E0 (This form Is made part of these minutes.) Discussion followed on the two major projects of the Economic Opportunity Board — Manpower and Day Care Centers. Mr. Lockette stated that he felt It more Important to do a good Job with the youngsters and thus Summer
Head Start should be given more than medium priority. Mr. Cottrell advised
that Head Start will probably be "earmarked” and have twice as much money as last year, and further noted that even though funds for certain projects
such as this were fixed, there was a limited amount of money to be spent.
Mr. Mankins noted his opinion that Head Start should have the highest priority.
In answer to a question from the Chairman, Mrs. Armstrong stated she felt that Manpower serves a total family need. She said there Is nothing else In Nevada In welfare that operates In this manner. She noted that If the head of the family Is taken care of, the children are going to be.
Mr. White stated that the Head Start Program has accomplished much In the few years of Its existence; and If better citizens are going to be developed, we must start with the kids.
Mr. Walker noted his opinion that the long-range Manpower Program would be more beneficial.
Motion: Mr. Walker moved that Manpower be placed as first priority and that Day Care Head Start Programs be second priority. Seconded by Mr. Snowden, motion carried by a 4 to 3 vote.
DISCUSSION OF NEIGHBORHOOD YOUTH CORPS STAFFING: The Chairman noted that he was bringing before the committee consideration of whether or not It would be feasible to cut the NYC staff and the salary of the NYC Project Director. He reviewed the NYC program, advising that during the summer the program had 500 out-of-school work stations which were reduced to 70 during the fall and winter program. There are five persons on the staff and the Project Director's salary is $850 per month. It was pointed out that the Project Director’s salary had been established before the committee to study salaries had set up a pay scale. It was also pointed out that prior to July, this had been a half-time position.
Mr. Cottrell noted that the number of agencies Involved Is the same with the smaller number of work stations as It Is with the larger number, and that NYC Coordinators deal with the agencies rather than with the enrollees.
The Chairman noted that this Is a fluid project and asked If the same staff should be retained for 70 enrollees as for 500.
Following further discussion, Mr. Mankins moved that there be no reduction In staff or Director’s salary In the NYC program- Seconded by Mr. Lawson, motion carried unanimously.
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR’S PROPOSED TRIP TO PHOENIX: The Committee noted the trip proposed by the Executive Director to the Phoenix Conference of the International City Managers Association which would Include two sessions on the Poverty Program. The Committee advised however that no motion was necessary for approval of this trip If travel funds were provided In the budget.
SIGNATURE ON CHECKS: There was discussion on the three slgnators for the checks of the Economic Opportunity Board and Neighborhood Youth Corps and the problems which arose when two of the three slgnators were out of town. Mr. Lockette suggested that the three Individuals who have the responsibility for signing checks work out seme way In which they could come to the office to sign checks.
Following further discussion and suggestion by Mr. Isaac White, the Committee members concurred that this matter be left up to the three members responsible for signing checks.
Respectfully submitted,
W.F. COTTRELL
Executive Director
WFCsdj
ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY BOARD OF CLARK COUNTY 301 South Highland Las Vegas, Nevada
TO: Members of the Board
FROM: Charles W. Spann Chai rman
RE: October Board Meeting
You are hereby notified of the regular monthly meeting of the Economic Opportunity Board of Clark County to be held as follows:
OCTOBER 26, 1966 (Wednesday)
7:30 P.M.
CLARK COUNTY DISTRICT HEALTH DEPARTMENT AUDITORIUM
AGENDA
1.
Approval of the Minutes of the Meeting of September 28, 1966.
2.
Acceptance of Financial Report for the Month Ending September 30, 1966
3.
Seating of New Neighborhood Council Representatives.
4.
Economic Opportunity Board Administrative Report
FOR ACTION
5.
Planning and Priority Report
6.
OTHER BUSINESS
October 19, 1966
ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY BOARD OF CLARK COUNTY
TO: Members of the Economic Opportunity Board
FROM: W. F. COTTRELL
Execut i ve Di rector
RE: ITEMS FOR OCTOBER 26 MEETING
I.
Planning and Priority Report
Attached are recommendations and supporting data on this matter. It is essential that the Board take some action concerning the report since this Is a requirement which must be met before the Regional Office can (or will) approve applications for refunding for 1967.
2.
Administrative Activities
A.
AppIicat ions: Work was completed on the five applications which must be submitted at this time. (Work programs and budgets were approved at the last meeting.) These were submitted to the Regional Office on Monday, October 17. Due to revised requirements and forms for Head Start programs, It was necessary to rework all of the material for the Day Care Center program. However, this InvoIved no changes in program or in budget...just additional "paperwork."
B.
Migrant Program: We hope to have a report by the meeting next Wednesday on this project. We have had several discussions with representatives of the school administrative staff and the Cooperative Extension Service. Mr. Norman DeWeaver of the Migrant Division, OEO Washington, will be here tomorrow and Friday.
I met with representatives of the Department of Housing and Urban Development in San Francisco Monday, and it appears we would be eligible for their Neighborhood Facility Program which would provide two-thirds of the cost of a permanent multi-purpose center to be located in Moapa Valley. However, It Is probable that no federal funds will be available, should we submit an application, until fiscal 1968 (after July I, 1967). We will discuss this and other matters concerning the project with Mr. DeWeaver.
C.
Hot Lunch Program: The School District Is presently reworking cost figures on the basis of using an existing central kitchen located outside school facilities. We are awaiting reaction from the Regional Office to our alternate proposal to use hot "boxed" lunches rather than the original proposal.
We have just learned of a newly-authorized Federal program (with funds totalling $540,000,000) which is designed to provide breakfasts and lunches to school children. However, we have been unable to date to locate the appropriate agency. It appears that this program could be the source of funds to put our lunch program on a continuing basis. We and school administrators will continue to work for a solution to this question.
D.
Senior Citizens: A representative of the State Welfare Division met with staff members and the Senior Citizens Council last week to discuss the State Plan on Aging, which is necessary before we would be eligible to seek funds from the Department of Health, Education and Welfare to fund this project. We will continue to explore the possibilities of funding from this or some other source inasmuch as 0E0 will not be able to fund new proj'ects.
E.
Legal Aid: It still appears that this program may be funded. However, nothing will be done by Region until national policies are clearly defined, and this action awaits completion of congressional action on appropriations.
F.
Conduct and Administration: Formal approval of the budget and work program for the last four months of the year (September I through December 31) has not yet been received. However, we have had verbal confirmation and expect to receive official notice shortly...as well as the funds necessary to permit us to continue operating.
G.
Manpower: Operation Independence is currently recruiting for the two top positions...Manpower Center Director and Training Coordinator. We anticipate these will be filled by the middle of November, and recruitment for other positions will be underway. We hope to have this program operational by December I.
H.
Summer Head Start, 1967: Dr. Caligurl is presently working on the proposal for next year’s Summer Head Start, to be operated again by the School District. This application will be submitted to San Francisco next month, and will complete the applications for refunding. The program will call for essentially the same level of performance as this past summer with 350 children in approximately 22 classes.
3.
Meeting on 1967 Fiscal Policies
We have received a telegram from San Francisco notifying us of a meeting on Thursday, October 27, to discuss fiscal policies and funding for 196? funds. This should give us the latest picture on these questions and indicate the level of refunding we can expect. The Executive Director will attend.
4.
Audits
Mr. Philip Megna, 0E0 Auditor, San Francisco, spent a week making a federal audit during the period October 3-7. A firm of CPA’s under contract to the Labor Department will audit NYC grants next week (October 24-28). Incaddition Mr. Stanford McNair, public accountant, is currently auditing our Conduct and Administration grant which expired last spring, as well as the Day Care Center program. All of these audits are required under terms of the various grants and proj'ects to which they apply.
-2-
5.
Trip to Phoenix
Subject to approval by the Executive Committee, the Executive Director plans to attend the annual national conference of the International City Managers’ Association In Phoenix from Sunday, October 23rd through Wednesday, October 26th to participate In two sessions devoted to anti-poverty programs...one on "The Policy Questions of the Poverty Program" and another concerned with "Implementing Federal Programs on Poverty." Participation is at the invitation of the ICMA Executive Director, Mr. Orin Nolting, and has the approval of the Regional Office, subject to approval by the Executive Committee. Mr. J. David Hoggard, Program Coordinator, will be in charge during this absence.
WFC:sdl
ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY BOARD OF CLARK COUNTY
501 S. Highland Us Vegas
TOt Members of th® Executive Committee
Econo®Ic Opportunity Board of Clark County
FROM- CHARLES W. SPANN
Chairman
RE * NOTICE OF B«rri*te
You ar© hereby notified that the monthly mating of th® ExacutIva Ccnmlttee of the Economic Opportunity Board of Clark County will b© held as follows-
MONDAY, NOVEMBER 28, IW
3:30 P.M.
301 S. Highland, Room 303
(E.O.B. Offices)
I.
FOR ACTION - CONSIDERATION OF NOMINATING COMMITTEE REPORT
2.
CONSIDERATION OF RECOMMENDATIONS MADE REGARDING SALARY OF
EOB EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
3.
PRESENTATION BY MR. ROBERT FAHEY REGARDING HM4POWER PROJECT
November 28, 1965 3:30 P.M.
EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MEETING
ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY SOARD OF CLARK COUNTY
301 $. Highland, Room 304
Las Yagas, Nevada
PRESENT: Charles Spann (Chairman), Emory Lockette, Ted Lawson, Jamas Snowden Harvey Dondero, Father Charles Shallow.
Staff Present: W.F. Cottrell, David Hoggard, Sylvia Loon
MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF OCTOBER 19, 1966: Th. Ch.l™n ravInM th. olnutM of th. a».tlng of October 19, 1966, Thore being no corrections, th. oInutas eero approved as presented.
REPORT OF THE NOMINATING COMMITTEE: There was discussion on the report of the Nominating committee which Is attached and made part of these minutes. There was specific discussion on the election of a representative to the E.0.9. from one of the Neighborhood Councils, resulting In a motion by Mr. Snowdon that the appointment of all Neighborhood Council representatives bo tabled until the December meeting. Motion was lost for lace of a second.
Mr. Lockette then moved to accept all of the nominations for Neighborhood Council representatives for which eertlfIcatIon has been received, with ths exception of Mr. George Keyes which will be voted on separately. Seconded by Father Shallow, motion carried unanimously.
Father Shallow moved to accept the members nominated to servo a second year term. Seconded by Mr. Lawson, motion carried unanimously.
Father Shallow moved to accept the members nominated to replace Board Members who have resigned. Seconded by Mr. Snowden, motion carried unanimously.
The Chair ruled that It was now necessary to complete action on Mr. Lockette’* wtlon that Mr. George Keyes be voted on separately. On the vote, motion carried 3 to 2.
During further discussion. Mr. Snowden noted that members cannot be sure that everything has been comp I ied with as no Board member was present at this particular Neighborhood Council election. The members noted that It would seem that a Council could have a recall election should they find It necessary to do so.
Further on the report of the Nominating Committee, Mr. Lockette stated that he would like to have the statement regarding CAP Memo No. 42 that federal employees cannot serve as Chairmen” removed from the report, noting that this was only the Interpretation of the Executive Director.
Mr. Cottrell stated this was not his Interpretation; that he had only quoted the regulation In the words of CAP Memo 42. He noted that he persorally felt there was no conflict of Interest between the Bureau of Reclamation and 0E0. but that regardless of personal feelings he felt obligated to bring this regulation to the attention of the Nominating Committee.
*
Following discussion, the Executive Director was directed to get a complete Interpretation on CAP Memo No. 42 with regard specifically to Mr. Lockette, the Soard member affected directly by this regulation.
CONSIDERATION OF RECOMMENDATIONS REGARDING THE SALARY OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR} The Chairman advised that In a conversation with a consultant from Washington, Mr. James Eastman, It had been Indicated that the Manpower Director's salary was too low, which lead Into a discussion of the salary of the CAP Director which the consultant also felt was too low. The Chairmen read a letter from Mr. Eastman recoamndlng that the salary of the Manpower Director be set at $11,500 and the salary of the CAP Director be set at $13,500. Mr. Spann also read a letter from Mrs. Leola Armstrong of the State Technical Assistance Office In which she listed annual salaries and programs administered by other CAP Directors In the State of Nevada. The listing Indicated that the four comparable positions earned $12,000 and the State Technical Assistance Director earned $15,000.
Mr. Lawson stated that ho felt the Executive Director's position was worth more than the present salary.
Mr. Lockette stated that when the salary scale was adopted by the Soard It was stated that there would be a review In one year. He noted that this scale was based on prevailing wages In the community, salaries paid to federal employees, etc. Ha stated that when a consultant comes to this area ha does nave the privilege of writing a letter of recommendation to the Soard; however, he felt the Soard should not go off on a tangent In raising salaries or changing recommendations which had been proposed. He noted also that ho felt that the Board should stick to the criteria set up Inasmuch as each member had a chance to study such and had approved It.
Mr. Snowden stated that this body had recownendad that all matters such as this be referred to committees, and he stated that he felt this should be turned over to the Finance Committee.
The Chairman stated that the question now was ’Did the Board err when It set the salary at the rate of $10,500?"
Father Shallow moved that the matter of the Executive Director’s salary and the salary of the NYC Director be referred to the Finance Committee. Motion was seconded by Mr. Lawson.
Mr. Cottrell stated that ha hoped that any decisions that are made will be made on the basis of facts and noted that the facts should be presented to more than a three-man committee.
Mr. Lockette moved to arson d the motion that the Finance Committee In their report back bo within the criteria of the personnel action sot on salaries six months ago. Th© Committee was In accord that there would bthen be no purpose to the motion.
On the vote on Father Shallow’s motion. It was carried unanimously.
-2-
PRESENTATION BY MR. ROBERT FAHEY REGARDING THE MANPOWER PROGRAM: Mr. Fahey asked that Executive Committee Members make clear Catholic Welfare’s position as e delegate agency. Ho stated that In the Manpower Program Catholic Welfare Is actually a sub-delegate because operation and control of the program rested with Operation Independence, and Catholic Welfare had no authority or power to do anything their way. Ha said that ha would like the Executive Committee to either express Itself or subject It to the entire Board’s consideration. He noted that It would notcost one cent more to give Catholic Welfare full authority as a delegate agency.
The Chairman pointed out at this time that the Director of the Manpower Program Is an employee of Operation Independence, although two of the Centers are operated by CatholIc Welfare.
The Executive Director read the two special conditions of the Manpower Program under which the funds were granted In which DEO stipulated that the Director would have complete administrative and supervisorial control of all persons employed In the project. He further reviewed the history of the project.
Mr. Lockette asked Mr. Fahey what prevents Catholic Welfare from operating Independently within the scope of the project end under the direction of the Manpower Director. Mr. Fahey answered because there Is no power to hire and fire or to direct, and the main problem Is that they have no right of selection for the Manpower Director — the sama person who will then direct Catholic Welfare employees. This Director may disagree with how Catholic Welfare analyzes the problems.
Father Shallow stated that philosophy-wlse, Catholic Welfare will not work for Operation Independence — they will work with them.
The Chairman asked Committee Members their feeling on having the Manpower Director hired by and under the supervision of the Executive Director of EOB. Mr. Fahey advised that this would be acceptable If the Manpower Director was screened and hired by the EOB.
Mr. Snowden suggested that the Executive Committee recommend a committee to work with the Executive Director to employ the Manpower Director who will work undar the supervision of the EOB Executive Director.
Mr. Cottrell pointed out that although Operation Independence has the authority to employ the Manpower Director, the EOB as the grantee agency can exercise a veto power. In answer to the committee’s questions as to how a change In program could be effected to allow the Manpower Director to work under the EC®, Mr. Cottrell answered that a program amendment would bo submitted to DEO; however, ho noted his feeling that this situation would be worse than that which existed now.
Mr. Fahey stated that ho has recommended to Father Shallow that If Catholic Welfare does not get ecuai status they should pull out completely because their Integrity Is at stake. He said that Catholic Welfare has boon In the charity business for over 400 years and thus knows a little bit about the Job and cannot be put under an agency that has been In existence for only two years. He further stated that the principle Is that the Job has to be done and for Catholic Welfare to do It any other way than the right way would ba giving In to the principles that they had hoped for.
Mr. Fahey stated 'Lot's find out If the federal government controls th® local Issue or does the local community control the federal government. He said that he Is tired of projects forgotten, otherwise tied up, tfred of being Had to and bamboozled.
Mr. Lockett® stated that he would Ilk® to see Catholic Welfare work with the EOS Office and try to got the program started. He said he could not understand anyone saying that something won’t work when they have not tried.
The Chairman asked Mr. Fahey why Catholic Welfare has come to the conclusion that the program cannot work as written. Mr. Fahey stated that when someone whom you have no control over being hired Is over your agency or your employees, It cannot work.
Mr. Lockette suggested that Catholic Welfare get the program going: and after It Is going, If things go wrong then specific points can be brought to the Board on which the Soard can then act.
Mr. Fahey stated that It seemed then that Catholic Welfare can taka It that the will of this committee Is that nothing be don®.
The Chairman noted thet there was no motion on the floor to change the status of the project.
Father Shallow roved that the Idea be clarified as to what the Interpretation of San Francisco Is on the status of Catholic Welfare as a delegate agency. Motion was seconded by Mr. Lawson. Thor® was discussion Indicating that It was not necessary to request Region to answer a situation which already seeissd clearly stated.
On the vote on the motion, motion was carried.
There being no further business to come before the meeting, same was adjourned.
Respectfully submitted,
i- ■ 4
W.F. COTTRELL
REPORT OF THE NOMINATING COMMITTEE ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY BOARD OF CLARK COUNTY
November 23, 1966
MEMBERS PRESENT: Ted Lawson (Chairman), Father Charles Shallow, James Snowden S+ella Fleming
MEMBERS ABSENT: Emory Lockette, Ferren Bunker
STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT: W. F. Cottrell, Sylvia Leon
Mr. James Snowden moved that the fol lowing be nominated to serve for a second two-year term as Trustees of the Economic Opportunity Board of Clark County. Seconded by Father Shallow, motion carried unanimously.
CHARLES W. SPANN HARVEY DONDERO STELLA FLEMING LEE WALKER JOSEPH MANKINS FERREN BUNKER
Reappointment effective 10/7/66
Reappointment effective 10/7/56
Reappointment effective 10/7/66
Reappointment effective 10/7/66
Reappointment effective 10/21/66
Reappointment effective 10/21/66
Mr. Snowden moved that the following persons be nominated to replace members who have resigned from the Board. Seconded by Mrs. Fleming, motion carried.
MRS. PAT FAHEY to represent the P.A.L. Organization
MR. KARL HARRIS to represent the Clark County Commissioners MR. WILLIAM MERZ to represent the Special Projects Divison of the Clark County School District
Following discussion on nomination of Neighborhood Council Representatives, Mr. James Snowden moved that the following Neighborhood Council Representatives be nominated subject to receipt of letters at the Executive Committee Meeting of November 28, 1966, certifying that these representatives were duly elected by their Councils. Seconded by Mrs. Stella Fleming, motion carried unanimously.
MR. THOMAS WILSON, SR. representing Westside Council
MRS. MARVIE SMITH representing Jo Mackey Council
MRS. DOROTHY KING representing Kit Carson Council
MR. ANTONIO MONTEMAYOR representing North Las Vegas Council
MRS. ETHEL LUCAS representing Henderson Council
MR. GEORGE KLINE representing Madison Council
MRS. DAISY MILLER representing Highland Council
MR. GEORGE KEYES representing Matt Kelly Council
Copies of CAP Memo, No. 42 was distributed to members, and the Executive Director noted that the major provision which would effect the EOB was the prohibition against federal employees serving as Chairmen of CAA Boards although such employees can be Board Members.
ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY BOARD OF CLARK COUNTY 301 S. Highland Las Vegas
TO: MEMBERS OF THE BOARD
FROM: CHARLES W. SPANN Chai rman
RE: NOTICE OF MEETING
The regular monthly meeting of the Board of Trustees of the Economic Opportunity Board of Clark County will be held as foI lows:
WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 30, 1966 7:30 P.M.
CLARK COUNTY DISTRICT HEALTH DEPT AUDITORIUM
THE AGENDA IS AS FOLLOWS:
MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 28, 1966
((2y) FINANCIAL REPORT FOR THE PERIODS ENDING SEPTEMBER 30 and OCTOBER 31, 1966
SEATING OF NEW NEIGHBORHOOD COUNCIL REPRESENTATIVES
ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY BOARD ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT
REPORT OF PROGRAMS UNDER TITLE I OF THE ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION ACT
ELECTION BY THE BOARD OF A MEMBER TO SERVE ON TH! EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE (|n accordance with By-Laws)
ELECTION BY THE BOARD OF A MEMBER TO SERVE ON THE
NOMINATING COMMITTEE (in accordance with
APPROVAL OF PLANNING AND PRIORITY REPORT by the Executive Committee)
(as recommen
By-Laws)
APPROVAL OF THE REPORT OF THE NOMINATING (10) OTHER BUSINESS
COMMITTEE
MEETING OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY BOARD OF CLARK COUNTY
November 30, 1966 7:30 P.M
Clark County District Health Dept. Auditorium Las Vegas,Nevada
MEMBERS PRESENT: Charles W. Spann (Chairman), Ferren Bunker, A.G. Montemayor, Reverend N.W. Tigner, James L. Snowden, Emory W. Lockette, Marvie Smith, Ruth Gould (represent!ng City of Las Vegas) Daisy N. Miller, Harvey Dondero, Stella Fleming, Isaac White, Father Charles Shallow, Ethel G. Lucas, Mayor W.R. Hampton, Karl Harris, Douglass Pushard, George Kline, George Keyes, William Merz, Pat Fahey
GUEST PRESENT: Addie Blake, James Goodwin, Frederick French, Harold Ortega, Walter E. Smith, McKinley Underwood, Lubertha Johnson, Leo Johnson, Letha Mobley, Peggy Smith, Evelyn Coleman, Ike Rome, Willie Mitchell, Cleveland Woods, Robert Fahey, Jess Williams, Hazel Geran, Mary Smith, Ethel Pearson, Terry Lee, Shirlagle Neubuerger, Tony McCormick
STAFF PRESENT: W. F. Cottrell, Sylvia Leon, David Hoggard, Lamar McDaniel, Evelyn Mauldin
The Chairman called the meeting to order, and following a count by the Secretary declared a quorum present.
MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 28: Mr. Bunker moved that the minutes of the September meeting be approved as presented. Motion seconded by Reverend Tigner and carried.
FINANCIAL REPORT FOR THE PERIODS ENDING SEPTEMBER 30 AND OCTOBER 31, 1966: The Executive Director and Finance Officer briefly reviewed the financial statements and answered several questions pertaining thereto. Mr. Bunker moved to accept the report as presented. Seconded by Father Shallow, motion carried.
SEATING OF NEW NEIGHBORHOOD COUNCIL REPRESENTATIVES: Mr. Snowden moved that the seating of representatives be delayed until the Nominating Committee report has been read. Seconded by Reverend Tigner, motion carried unanimously.
ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY BOARD ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT: Executive Director, Mr. Cottrell reported that two administrative memos have been sent out during the month outlining items which should be called to the attention of the Board. He briefly reviewed the items of the memos which are made part of these minutes. Reverend Tigner asked what has become the application for a Small Business Development Center. Mr. Cottrell advised the status of the application which seems to indicate that funding will not be forthcoming; and that these programs now will be handled through the Small Business Administration.
' Mr. Lockette questioned whether contributions would be forthcoming to meet the 20$ in-kind now required for summer Head Start programs. Mr. Cottrell advised that this will be no problem because the Head Start program has always contained more than the necessary 20$.
REPORT OF PROGRAMS FUNDED UNDER TITLE I OF THE ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION ACT: Mr. William Merz of the Clark County School District reviewed the programs which the School District is presently carrying out under this Title and which are directly related to the EOB programs. He advised that difficulties have been experienced primarily due to the late appropriation of monies by Congress. He noted that the School District is now acting on a grant of approximately 75$ of the money that was available last year, which totals $310,000. The District has recieved approval to begin operation on five activities within this project. They are: (1) Remedial reading development project for six Westside elementary schools; (2) The reinforced studies project at Roy Martin Junior High School; (3) Moapa Migrant student project which will operate for approximately 3 to 5 months; (4) Background Enrichment at Cashman Junior High School; (5) Highland School Media Saturation Assessment.
Mrs. Daisy Miller raised the question of what has happened with the money that has been appropriated to provide hot lunches in West Las Vegas schools. Mr. Cottrell advised that this program had to be rewritten twice because OEO’s reluctance to fund programs of this type. It was eventually approved with a reduced amount of money; however, the School District felt it could not operate the type of program planned on the amount of money avaiI able.
Mr. Cottrell further stated that for the past three months he and School District personnel have been working to try to find some alternative so that the School District could operate on the appropriated amount of money. Although this is being worked out, he advised the Board that the major problem is the reluctarfce of the School District to enter into a program which has no means of funding after one year. He noted then that OEO has specifically stated that this would be a one-year nonrefundabIe project.
Mr. Merz advised that if a way could be found to refund the program over a period of time, the School District would still be willing to undertake it, if the program would meet the criteria of supporting itself. Mr. Cottrell further reviewed what had been done to attempt to implement the program on the basis of providing a Class "A" sack lunch rather than the Class ”A” hot lunch as originally anticipated.
REPORT OF THE NOMINATING COMMITTEE: The Chair advised that the matter now before the Board was approval of the report of the Nominating Committee, which is made part of these minutes. On the first portion of the report, Mr. Snowden moved that the members nominated to serve a second two year term be approved. Seconded by Reverend Tigner, motion carried unanimously.
-2-
On the second portion, Mr. Snowden moved that the members nominated to replace those members who have resigned from the Board be approved. Seconded by Reverend Tigner, motion carried.
On the third portion of the report to seat those Neighborhood Council representatives which have been elected by their individual Councils, Mr. Snowden asked Peggy Smith, Chairman of the Matt Kelly Council, if she had anything to say regarding that Council’s representative. Mrs. Smith advised that she did not, noting that she had signed the documents certifying the election of the representative from Matt Kelly Council. It was then moved by Mr. Snowden and seconded by Father Shallow that the seating of all eight Neighborhood Council representatives be approved. Motion carried. The Neighborhood Council representatives and other newly designated members to the Board were introduced and seated.
ELECTION BY THE BOARD OF A MEMBER TO SERVE ON THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE: The Chairman called for nominations to elect a member to the Executive Committee to fill the vacancy created by the resignation of Jesse Williams. Nominated were: Mr. Antonio Montemayor, Mr. George Kline, Mrs. Daisy Miller. Reverend Tigner moved that nominations be closed. Seconded by Mr. Snowden, motion carried. The Chairman appointed Mr. Emory Lockette to certify the count made by secret ballot. The count showed Mr. Antonio Montemayor as the elected member.
ELECTION OF A MEMBER TO SERVE ON THE NOMINATING COMMITTEE: The Chair noted that nominations were now open to elect a member to serve on the nominating committee to fill the vacancy created by his own resignation. Nominations placed on the floor were for Mrs. Marvie Smith and Mrs. Ethel Lucas. Mr. Lockette moved that nominations be closed. Seconded by Reverend Tigner, motion carried. On the vote, which was again certified by Mr. Lockette Mrs. Ethel Lucas was elected as a member of the Nominating Comm i ttee.
PLANNING AND PRIORITY REPORT: Mr. Cottrell reviewed the report as had been recommended by the Executive Committee and which is made part of these minutes. He advised that though national policies have been established setting priorities, the Board is still required to submit this report. Mr. Snowden then moved to accept the Planning and Priority report as recommended by the Executive Committee. Seconded by Mr. Dondero, motion carried.
OTHER BUSINESS:
Statistics on Day Care Center Families: Noting that the Board had requested statistics on day Care center families, the Executive Director presented the following report which was compiled by Mrs. Lubertha Johnson, Executive Director of Operation Independence. There are 17 families with children enrolled in Centers in which both parents work. There are 43 families with children enrolled in Centers in which one parent works. There are 13 families with children enrolled in Centers because they are recipients of welfare. There are 13 families
-3-
with children enrolled in Centers because of enrollment in Title V or other work-training program which provides a living allowance during training. There are 13 families with children enrolled in Centers with two parents; but only one parent working. There is 1 family with children enrolled in Center in which both parents are unemployed. There is 1 family with children enrolled in Center in which the parent is dependent upon someone else. There is 1 family with children enrolled in Center in which there is one parent who is employed. There is a total of 102 families represented in the Centers.
The Chairman noted that the Board should be gratified with this report which shows that the day care centers are providing a much needed service.
Mrs. Johnson advised that problems were being experienced in the Centers because of having to remove some children to make room for children in the poverty income level.
Manpower Program; The Executive Director advised that a Screening Committee is now meeting to recommend a Director for the Manpower Program, and it is hoped that a qualified candidate will be named shortly. He reviewed what the Manpower Program will do and how it wiI I attempt to solve one of the basic problems in Las Vegas. He noted that the manpower aide position will be filled by people from the neighborhoods being served.
In answer to a question from Mr. Lockette, Mr. Cottrell advised that training would be provided by placing persons in already existing training programs in the community.
In answer to a question by Mr. Keyes regarding appointment of the Manpower Director, Mr. Cottrell stated that the selection would be made by the Operation Independence Board and further noted that the screening committee is comprised of members from Operation Independence, Nevada Catholic Welfare, the State Technical Assistance Office, and the EOB Office.
Neighborhood Counci I Program: Mr. Snowden questioned now that Neighborhood Council Workers were elected, what steps were being taken to phase out the temporary workers? The Executive Director advised that all workers had not yet been elected; however, it is anticipated that they will be by the end of December. He stated that the temporary workers were employed only until the staff worker were elected by the Councils.
There being no further business to come before the Board, the meeting was adjourned.
Respectfully submitted,
Execut i ve Di rector
ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY BOARD OF CLARK COUNTY
NOTICE OF MEETING
TO: MEMBERS OF THE BOARD
FROM: CHARLES W. SPANN
CHAIRMAN
RE: MONTHLY MEETING OF THE BOARD
Board Members are hereby advised that the regular monthly meeting of the Board will be held as follows:
WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 28, 1966
7:30 P.M.
CLARK COUNTY DISTRICT HEALTH DEPARTMENT AUDITORIUM
THE AGENDA IS AS FOLLOWS:
1.
Minutes of the Meeting of November 30, 1966
2.
Finance Report for the Month ending November 30, 1966
3.
Administrative Report
4.
Report of the Executive Committee
5.
Other Business
■{
EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MEETING
ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY SOARD OF CLARK COUNTY
Decamber 27, 1966 3:30 P.M.
EOB Offices
Las Vegas, Nevada
PRESENT: Charles Spann, (Chairman), Emory Lockette, Ted Lawson, Joseph Gankins, Harvey Dondero, Tnomas Wilson, Lee Walker, Father Charles Shallow
Guests: Robert Trimble, Leola Armstrong, Lubertha Johnson
Staff: W.F. Cottroll, Dorothy Johnson
The Chairman called the meeting to order declaring a quorum present.
REPORT ON OPERATION INDEPENDENCE AUDIT- Hr. Cottrell reported that Operation Independence Is reqiilrod to be audited every 12 months. Mr. Stanley McNair audited the books for the period ending December 31, 1965. His major findings were that property records weren't properly maintained; Inadequate purchasing system: personnel responsible for expenditures or handling of money were not bonded, and the personnel records were either not available or Inadequate.
:<r. Cottrull rooorted that he had Informed Mrs. Johnson, Executive Director, and the Executive Committee of Operation Independence that the E.O.B. would not be In a position to release additional funds for the Day Cara program If thasa shortcomings were not corrected by December 31. He also said that the E.O.B. Finance Officer would conduct the audit of Operation Independence for the period ending December 31,1966.
1967 FISCAL POLICY AND FUNDING OF PROJECTS: Mr. Cottrell advised that 0E0 will be unable to process the refunding application prior to expiration of the current period on December 31. He stated that there ar® sufficient funds remaining to fund our operations for several weeks, If necessary, anu reported that EOB has requested to commit and expend funds from our current grant to sunport these projects, pending funding of the 1967 programs.
REPORT ON GOLDEN WEST SHOPPING CENTER LEASE: The Committee discussed the proposed lease for space In the West Owens (formerly Golden West) Shopping Center on Owens Boulevard to house the EOB, NYC and Manpower Projects. Hr. Walker reported that the space Includec approximate Iv 3,000 sq. ft., valued at 51,200 per month, but that only $300 of this amount will ba cash — the remaining $700 per month will be granted by the owners as an In-klnd contribution.
Mr. Cottrell advised that one reason the owners are willing to rent for such a low cash price Is that they want to have the space occupied, and wore prepared to convert the store rooms Into offices. In discussion of the relative value of the space, It was noted that similar space Is regularly rented at 33< per sq. ft., and the value of the space presently occupied by th® EOB offices (Including cash and ln~k|nd contribution) Is something like 40C per sq. ft. per month.
Mr. Lockette asked If there was any provision for extending the lease beyond the original period of one year, and suggested there should be some stipulation as to what would happen after the first year. Mr. Cottrell noted that the EOB could.not make a.commItment to the owners beyond the first year Inasmuch as 0E0 will fund projects for only one year at * tlAe. 3oth he ond Wa(ker agreed
-2-
that the lease should bo amended to make some provision for an option to renew or for first refusal on the space at the end of the one year period.
Hr. Walker advised that a resolution passed by the full Board was required.
It was moved and seconded that the Executive Committee approved th© proposed lease, subject to the modifications suggested and subject to approval of the final language by Mr. Walker, and that the Committee so recommend to the Board. Motion carried.
Hrs. Johnson asked why It was that the EOB could obtain 0E0 approval for remodeling store space for Manpower but could not do so for modification and rehabilitation of the throe Day Care Centers. Mr. Cottrell pointed out that the remodeling of the West Owens Shopping Canter space was being undertaken by the owners at no direct cost to the EOB.
Mrs. Armstrong stated that she had tried In ©very way possible to get th® building repeltad by donation of materials and labor, but that this was unsuccessful.
After further discussion, Hr. Lockette suggested that Mrs. Johnson and
Mr. Cottrell talk to our field representative, r. Harold 'corn to see what could be dona about the matter and report back to the Committee and the Board on their findings.
FINANCE COMMITTEE REPORT ON EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR’S SALARY: Mr. Walker, Treasurer and Cha I man of the Finance Copaml+tee reported that the Finance Committee had studied the matter upon referral from the Executive Committee and recommended as fol lows:
1.
That the Executive Director’s salary be raised from $10,500 to $12,500.
2.
Thdt the salary of the Project Director of the Neighborhood Youth Corps, also referred to the Finance Committee be reduced from $10,200 to $9,000 per year.
\ \
Mr. Walker stated that the Committee’s recommendations were based on a study of comparable salaries in the State and in Clark County which showed th«t each of the other Community Action Agencies In the State (Washoe County, Statewide, and Inter-tribal Council) paid Its Executive Director 512,000 per y»?ar, and none of these agencies had programs as large as those administered by the EOB.
He also reported that the recommendations were based on a study of the duties and responsibilities of the two positions In relation to other EQB staff positions, noting that the reduction of the NYC Director’s salary would provide a spread of $600 between the salary for that position and the $9,600 salary of the Program Coordinator.
After considerable discussion, Mr. Lockatte read from CAP Memo No. 23, Periodic Increases", which provides that the personnel plan for a grantee or dolegate agency shall not nrovlde for periodic step Increases that oxcaod three percent of currant annual salary or that are given more frequently than annually.
-3-
lt was pointed out that "&no 23 had been superseded by CAP Memo 23-A, and that the three percent limitation had been removed. Mr. Walker read CAP Memo 23-A and stated that he could see no prohibition against the recommendation of the Finance Committee.
Motion: After further discussion, a motion was made by Mr. Lawson and seconded by Father Shallow that the Committee recommend that the Board Increase the Executive Director’s salary to $12,500. Motion carried by a roll call vote of five ayes and two nays.
Mr. Lockette questioned taking this kind of action on salaries when action has not been taken on certain projects. H® recommended that a committee be appointed to study salaries under the by-laws.
■Motion: After further discussion, Father Shallow moved that the recommendation of the Finance Committee concerning the salary of the NYC Project Director be approved, and that the Executive Committee rocommond to the Soard that ths salary be reduced from 110,200 to 39,000 annually. Motion seconded by Mr. Walker and carried by a roll call vote of four ayes and three nays.
OF DISCRIMINATION FILED SY MR. DUDLEY EVANS: Mr. Cottrell reported that Mr. Dudley Evans had filed a complaint with the Nevada Commission on Equal Rights of Citizens, alleging that he had boon discriminated against because he Is not a Nogro.
p
Mr. Cottroll noted that 'r. Evans had been appointed a temporary Community Service Aldo In Henderson, working under the Jurisdiction of th© delegate Agency, Nevada Catholic Wal fare. He also reported that th© Henderson Neighborhood Council upon reaching the maturity called for In the project, had proceeded to elect Its paid Neighborhood Service Worker, and that Hr. Evans had not been elected. Mr, Evans wns not dismissed as an employee of the E.O.B., and was not, In fact, an employee of E.O.B.
The Executive Director stated that th® complaint was to bo answarod within ton (10) days of receipt (Docembor 19), and asked for committee Instructions as to what action should be taken. s
Motion: Mr. Walker moved that tho Executive Director look Into th® allegations and file the Board's answer with the Equal Rights Commission. Motion seconded and passed.
STATEMENT BY Mr. Lockette: Mr. Emory Lockette stated that he had heard a statement made by Mr. Robert Fahey at the meeting of the Executive Committee on November 28, 1966, to the affect that he (Mr. Fahey) was aware of an arrangement or agreement to ’divide up the money at tho top." Mr. Lockette stated that he did not think a statement of this kind should go unchallenged by the Committee.
Mr. Lockette askad If other members had heard this statement. There was conslderabla discussion on the matter, with other Committee members Indicating that they had not heard such a statement. The discussion brought out the point that Mr. Fahey
was at the moating only as an Invited guest, ana that his statements did not necessarily reflect the position of th© Catholic Welfare, Inc. or of Father Sha I low.
Mr. Lockstt® also questioned th© Committee’s failure to provide for approval of minutes of Committee meetings. It was agreed that this was a desirable oractlca, and should be followed In the future.
DISCUSSION OF MANPOWER DIRECTOR POSITION ANO OPERATION INDEPENDENCE ACTIONS: Mr. Spann asked for comments from Mrs. Johnson, Executive Director of Operation Independence, concerning the actions taken by Operation Independence In regard to appointment of a Manpower Director and particularly the action of the Operation Independence Soard in rejecting the recommendations of ths screening committee concerning Mr. Maurice Morgan.
Mrs. Johnson replied that there were good reasons for not accepting the recommendations as made, and that these reasons did not Include prejudice, as has since been alleged. She said that nobody bothered to ask her for the facts, and that she hoped that any party Interested In the matter would taka the time to get ail the facts.
Mrs. Johnson further stated that Operation Independence has hired Caucaslons as well as Negroes, and that feet was not a factor In employment. She said her personal opinion was that because Negroes had been discriminated against for so long, and because unemployment was so high a.monq Negroes, that qualified Negroes should hav® an opportunity to be considered for the Manpower program.
Mr. Robert Trimble, Chairman of tho Opcra+lon Independence Soard, was asked for his views. He stated that he was ashemed of tho action taken by the 8oard, and that h« fait Caucaslon ■ambers f the Board had folt that they 'had to vote black at the Operation Independence Board meeting at which the Screening Commlttgg’s recommendations were rejected.
w n
Mr. Spann asked tho Executive Director to explain tho position of the E.0.8.
In this matter. Mr. Cottrell outlined tho relationship between the grantee and delegate agencies, and noted that the grantee (E.0.0.) Is responsible- for seeing that programs are administered In accordance with th© approved work procrams, 0E0 guidelines, and applicable regulations. He stated that E.0.8. did not attempt to dictate” to or Interfere with the internal operations of Operation Independence, but that It :dld hav© the responsibility to so© that programs delegated to Operation Independence war® operated properly, and that Operation Independence followed Its own by-laws as well as other guidelines and rulas.
Mr. Lockette expressed tho opinion that the E.0.8. should not become Involved In the Internal affairs of a delegate agency.
Mr. Trimble said that h© felt Operation Independence could not make a fair decision, and that some members were guilty of reverse racial prejudice.
After further discussion, Mr. Trimble asked that he be given permission to speak to the E.0.8. at th© Board meeting scheduled for December 28. Mrs. Johnson
said sh© fait Oporation Independence should be given time to explain the facts in tho case.
Action: Mr. Walker moved that Mr. Trimble and Mrs. Johnson, or some representative of Operation Independence, each be granted 10 minutes to speak at the E08 mooting. Motion adopted. Mrs. Johnson pointed out that sh© had only asked for tlm©, and did not have the authority to speak for th© Operation Independence Board, since sh® had not had a chance to discuss the matter with them.
There being no further business, th© meeting was adjourned.
Respectfully submitted.
Executive Director
MEETING OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY BOARD OF CLARK COUNTY
December 28, 1966 7:30 P.M.
Clark County District Health Dept. Las Vegas, Nevada
MEMBERS PRESENT: Charles Spann (Chairman), William R. Merz, J. R. McPherson, Daisy L. Miller, Marvie Lee Smith, Ethel G. Lucas, Douglass Pushard, Harvey N. Dondero, N. W. Tigner, A. G. Montemayor, Thanas W. Wilson, Sr. Pat Fahey, George 0. Keyes, Emory W. Lockette, Lee Walker, J. H. Mankins Ted Lawson, Father Charles Shal low..
GUESTS PRESENT: Willie Metcalf, Clifford Greene, Sarah Ray, Obera Turmon, Hazel Geran, Ethel R. Pearson, Tony M. Doram, H. L. Ortega, Frederick French, D. P. Curtis, W. R. Carlos, Robert Fahey, Robert Trimble, Rosie L. Smith, Leola Armstrong Addie Reid Blake, Joyce Greene, Rita Lucas, Cleveland Woods, William E. Wynn, Lucille Gee, Art Grant, Gloria Roma
STAFF PRESENT: W. F. Cottrell, Evelyn W. Mauldin, L. L. McDaniel, Doyle Longhurst
CALL TO ORDER: The Chairman, Charles .Spann, cal led the meeting to order; and following a count by the Acting Secretary, declared a quorum present.
The Chairman announced that in the absence of Mrs. Staples, Leola Armstrong, Assistant Director of the State Department of Economic Opportunity, would act as Secretary, with the approval of the Board.
MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF NOVEMBER 30, 1966: There being no objections, the Chairman declared that the minutes of the meeting of November 30, 1966, would stand approved.
ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT: Mr. Cottrell explained to the members of the Board that authorization was received to supplement the Conduct and Administration Grant by transfer of unencumbered funds from certain projects and indicated that this was explained in detail in Exhibit B entitled "Statement of Budgeted and Actual Expenditures."
Hot Lunch Project: Mr. CottrelI discussed the recent publicity concerning the newspaper statements that the money al located to Clark County for the poverty programs had been reduced. He discussed the West Las Vegas School Hot Lunch Program in detai I.
Mr. Merz was requested to explain the position of the Clark County School Board of Trustees insofar as their contribution of funds for the Hot Lunch Program was concerned. It was stated that the School Trustees required some guarantee that this project would be funded for more than one year, and in the absence of this guarantee, they could not undertake the project.
Mr. Cottrell indicated that all possible sources had been checked to determine if money from other sources could be granted for the Hot Lunch Program.
Mr. Lockette discussed the proposition of board members appealing to the School District Trustees to reconsider their position on the Hot Lunch Programs.
There was further discussion of the Finance Report for the month ending November 30, 1966.
Motion: Father Shallow moved that the report be accepted. Seconded by Mrs. Fahey, motion carried.
Mr. Keyes questioned the fact that newspapers had received information prior to the time it was presented to the Board. Mr. Cottrell explained that all material is sent to the press prior to a meeting of the Board and further explained that this information was a matter of public record.
Mr. Chairman asked if certain items should be given to the press before they were accepted by the Board. Mr. Dondero pointed out that if minutes of previous meetings were given to the press before they were approved by the Board, the press might be receiving information that was not correct. Discussion fol lowed concerning the type of material that might be released to the press prior to a meeting.
Mr. Walker stated that he felt the Board was being too restrictive and stated his belief that the only matter that should be restricted was information that had to be approved by the Board.
The Chairman stated that if there were no objections, that items requiring Board approval would not be released to the press until after such approval.
Mr. Spann declared that there being no objections, the administrative report was accepted.
REPORT OF THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE: Mr. Cottrell was asked to discuss the following items:
Space for Manpower Program: Mr. Cottrell indicated that this program would need space to acccmodate at least 15 employees. He further indicated that space had been located which would acccmodate the Manpower Program, the NYC Program and the EOB staff at the Golden West Shopping Center — located at ”H" and Owens.
Mr. Spann stated that the Executive Committee recommends that acquisition of this space to house the three aforementioned projects be made.
-2-
Mr. Keyes asked how much space was being utilized by NYC and EOB now, and Mr. Cottrell advised that EOB used 1200 feet and NYC had 800 feet. He also noted that the proposed space would rent for approximately 10<£ per square foot per month, compared with 20C at present.
Motion: Mr. Lawson moved that the Board approve the acquisition of space at Golden West Shopping Center as set forth in the proposed lease, subject to approval of Mr. Lee Walker as to final language. Seconded by Reverend Tigner, motion carried.
Executive Director’s Salary: Mr. Spann noted that this question had been referred to the Finance Committee, which had studied the matter and made a report to the Executive Committee. He informed the Board that the salaries of professional staff members were considered by the Committee, to wit: the salary of the Executive Director of the Economic Opportunity Board and the Neighborhood Youth Corps Project Director. After a careful review of the salaries and duties of the two positions, the Finance Committee recommended to the Executive Committee that the salary of the Executive Director be increased and the salary of the NYC Project Director be decreased.
Mr. Spann reported that the recommendations had been approved by the Executive Committee, and it was now necessary that they be approved by the Board of Trustees. He explained that the salary of the Executive Director had been set at $10,500 while the NYC Project Director was being paid $10,200. The recommendation of the Executive Committee, based on the report from the Finance Committee, was that the Executive Director's salary be increased to $12,500 annually. This increase, he said, was also based on a comparison of comparable salaries in the city, the county, and other statewide poverty programs. The Executive Committee further recommended that the NYC Project Director's salary be reduced from $10,200 to $9,000 annually.
Mr. Keyes moved that this recommendation be tabled. Motion died for lack of second.
Motion: .Father. Shal low moved that the portion of the report of the Executive Committee concerning the salary changes be approved. Mr. Merz seconded the motion.
A discussion continued on whether or not the By-Laws and personnel regulations would prohibit this.
Motion Amended: Father Shallow moved that his original motion be amended that the Board consider the increase of the salary of the Executive Director at this time.
Seconded by Mr. Merz, ballots were distributed and a verified count showed that the motion carried by the following vote: 10 Ayes; 3 Nayes, 4 Not Voting.
-3-
The discussion turned to the salary of the Project Director of the NYC Program.
Motion: Father Shallow moved that the recommendation of the Executive Committee be approved. Seconded by Mrs. Fahey.
A discussion followed, and Mr. Lockette moved that the salary of the Executive Director of Operation Independence be increased in an amount equal to that of the Executive Director of EOB. Mr. Chairman declared Mr. Lockette's motion out of order.
The question was then called. Ballots were distributed and a verified count showed that Father Shallow's motion lost by the following vote: 8 Nays, 4 Ayes, 5 Not Voting.
Mr. Lockette moved that the Board of Operation Independence be made aware of the feeling of the Economic Opportunity Board concerning the matter of the salary of Mrs. Johnson. Motion died for lack of a second.
Mr. Trimble indicated that he had tried to raise the salary of Mrs. Johnson and the salary of the Manpower Project Director, and the Operation Independence Board disapproved it.
STATEMENT BY CHAIRMAN OF THE OPERATION INDEPENDENCE BOARD: Mr. Spann informed the Board that Mr. Trimble had requested that he be allowed to make a statement to the EOB concerning the selection of a Manpower Project Director. He also indicated that Mrs. Johnson would be given equal time to discuss this if she so desired.
Mr. Trimble discussed the qualifications for the Manpower Director's job insofar as Federal requirements were concerned and stated that these requirements would eliminate 99-99/IOOths of the applicants in the Negro community. He said that if a person was placed on a job because of the color of his skin "we're defeating the whole purpose of the program." He asked that the EOB appoint a committee to see if "we're capable of doing this job or not..."
Father Shallow stated that it was his belief this did not require any action by the EOB, but that Operation Independence was a delegate agency in charge of the Manpower Project. He stated that this appeared to be a case of rank discrimination in violation of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
Motion: Father Shallow moved that Operation Independence be removed as a delegate agency if it is found that they are guilty of a violation of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and that another delegate agency be appointed. Motion seconded by Mrs. Fahey.
There was discussion concerning the feasibility of Father Shallow's motion.
It was pointed out by Mr. Harold Moore, Field Representative of 0E0 from San Francisco, that if Operation Independence, Inc. was guilty of a violation that the Regional Office would probably not fund them as a delegate agency.
Father Shallow was asked what steps were being taken by Mr. Morgan, the candidate for Manpower Center Di rector, whose appointment was rejected by Operation Independence.
Mr. Chairman recognized Mr. Robert Fahey who stated that "we are going to the Federal Government. We cannot go through the Equal Rights Commission because one of the persons who made the most prejudicial remarks is the Commission Secretary. We have already approached the Federal attorney."
Mr. Merz moved that Father Shallow's motion be tabled. Seconded by Mr. Lawson, motion carried.
Mr. Mankins moved that the meeting be adjourned. Seconded by Mrs. Smith, motion carried.
Meeting adjourned at 9:40 P.M.
Respectfully submitted,
Execut i ve Di rector
WFC:sms
ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY BOARD MEMBERSHIP
December, 1966
Mr. Charles Spann
Youth Opportunity Center 629 Las Vegas Blvd. North Las Vegas, Nevada (Business 382-8942; Home 735-3410)
Mr. Emory Lockette
Representing Mayor John Batchelor
City of Boulder City
P.O. Box 546
Boulder City, Nevada
(Business 293-2161; Home 293-1980)
Reverend Charles Shallow
Catholic Community Welfare
P.O. Box 1926
Las Vegas, Nevada (Business 385-2662)
Mr. James Snowden 1200 Lawry Street Las Vegas, Nevada (Home 642-6791)
Mr. Lee Walker
Attorney 310 South Third Street Las Vegas, Nevada (Business 384-6620; Home 878-6981
Mr. Ted Lawson
Central Labor Council 1526 N. Main Las Vegas, Nevada (Business 382-2112; Home 878-1072)
Mr. Harvey Dondero
Clark County School District
P.O. Box 551
Las Vegas, Nevada (Business 736-5011; Home 735-8203)
Mr. Joseph Mankins
U.S. Department of Labor
2301 E. Sahara Las Vegas, Nevada (Business 737-1122; Home 382-2064)
Mr. Isaac White, Teacher 616 GiIday Court North Las Vegas, Nevada (Business 737-1866; Home 385-1837)
Mrs. Pat Fahey PAL Organization 1805 Manhattan Drive Las Vegas, Nevada (Home 870-2361)
Mr. Douglass Pushard
Clark County Health Department 625 Shadow Lane Las Vegas, Nevada
(Business 385-1291; Home 382-7095)
Mr. Ferren Bunker
Clark County Extension
P.O. Box 590
Las Vegas, Nevada
(Business 382-0259; Home 878-1532)
Mr. Don Hampton
Clark County Probation Department 645 Shadow Lane Las Vegas, Nevada
(Business 384-0211; Home 385-3522)
Reverend Newton Tigner
500 Kasper
Las Vegas, Nevada (Home 642-9627)
Mr. Karl Harris
Clark County Health Department 625 Shadow Lane Las Vegas, Nevada
(Business 385-1291; Home 643-3783)
Mr. Vernon Bunker
Nevada State Assemblyman 913 E. Charleston Las Vegas, Nevada
(Business 384-1292; Home 735-3060)
Mr. Robert McPherson
Representing Mayor Oran Gragson City of Las Vegas Las Vegas City Hall Las Vegas, Nevada (Business 385-1221; Home 384-1057)
Mrs. Stella Fleming
Clark County Relief Administration 651 Shadow Lane Las Vegas, Nevada
(Business 385-1466; Home 382-0321)
Mrs. Ida Bel Ie Riggins
Representing Mayor William Hampton City of Henderson 15 Oregon Way Henderson, Nevada (Home 564-3164)
Mrs. Charlotte Hi 11
Representative of United Fund
27 Country Club Lane Las Vegas, Nevada (Home 735-0558)
Mr. Thomas Wilson
Representing Westside Neighborhood Council 516 Adams
Las Vegas, Nevada (Home 382-6618)
Mrs. Dorothy King
Representing Kit Carson Neighborhood Council 520 Perkins Circle Las Vegas, Nevada (Home 642-5492)
Mrs. Marvie Smith
Representing Jo Mackey Neighborhood Council 2637 Royal
North Las Vegas, Nevada
(Home 649-3213)
Mrs. Ethel Lucas
Representing Henderson Neighborhood Council 28 Lincoln Carver Park Henderson, Nevada
Mr. George Kline
Representing Madison Neighborhood Council 1105 Cunningham Drive Las Vegas, Nevada (Home 385-1646)
Mrs. Daisy Miller
Representing Highland Neighborhood Council
2108 Constance Avenue
North Las Vegas, Nevada (Home 649-1863)
Mr. George Keyes
Representing Matt Kelly Neighborhood Council 1201 Leonard Avenue
Las Vegas, Nevada
(Home 642-4151)
Mr. Bi I I Merz
Clark County School District
P.O. Box 551
Las Vegas, Nevada
(Business 736-5011; Home 870-6874)
Mr. Antonio Montemayor
Representing North Las Vegas Neighborhood Council 2821 Caney
North Las Vegas, Nevada
(Home 649-2288)