Washtenaw County

The session involved public participation where one community member spoke in support of the older person's millage, highlighting the collaboration involved in its development. The County Administrator presented a proposal regarding the potential establishment of a County Department of Aging Services, contingent upon voter approval of the millage. The proposal outlined the structure for this new department, including a funding mechanism, administrative functions, and directly operated programs such as the Senior Nutrition Program (proposed to move from OCD), legal aid contract establishment, and funding for innovative strategic projects. The department would also support the Commission on Aging and directly operate programs like a senior minor home repair program, a Senior Resource Hub, and the Foster Grandparents Program. The presentation emphasized clarity and accountability in the use of millage funds.

The meeting commenced with roll call and introductions for a new commissioner, Allison Foreman. Key discussions included the election of officers, resulting in Marie Grass as the new Chair and Brenda McKenna as Vice Chair, with Jennifer Heckendorn nominated as Secretary. A significant portion of the meeting addressed public participation, where concerns were raised regarding outdated meeting information on the website and the coordination of Zoom meeting links. A public commenter noted the positive impact of ARPA funding on hiring new personnel and stressed the importance of securing sustainable, long-term funding sources. The commission also reviewed its purpose statement and began setting goals for 2024, focusing on advocacy on behalf of seniors aged 60 and older, emphasizing recommendations for prudent spending of public funds related to Senior Services.

The session included a roll call of commissioners and a period for public participation, during which no in-person or online comments were offered. The County Administrator and BOC Liaison provided no reports. The core discussion involved the Deputy Finance Director presenting the Quarter 2 budget update and a resource management discussion. The Q2 update covered general fund projections, noting an initial budgeted surplus that was adjusted due to technical changes, resulting in a lower projected net surplus. Major changes since Q1 included reductions related to non-structural lump-sum payments and contract policing revenue billing model adjustments, offset by improved interest earnings. Expenditure discussions highlighted increased contract policing costs, largely due to overtime, leaves, and staffing requirements for guard posts. The presentation also detailed projected surpluses in several areas, such as planned contribution to fund balance and general fund personnel services, counterbalanced by significant shortfalls, most notably in Sheriff personnel costs driven by overtime. Additional fiscal topics covered jail food and medical costs (which are currently above budget), rising banking fees for online payments, and ongoing shortfalls in animal control and water resources.

The meeting, identified as a Working Session and Board of Commissioners Meeting, focused primarily on a presentation regarding the new Human Services Partnership, which is replacing the previous coordinated funding model. Key discussion points included the framework, timeline, and objectives of the new partnership, emphasizing incorporating equity throughout all components, such as accessibility and the review process, with an outside partner conducting an equity review. The goals involve addressing racism, poverty, and trauma as root causes of institutional inequity while maintaining safety net services. The presentation detailed three proposed funding types: Human Services Safety Net Contracts/Grants (intended for multi-year support for those at or below the poverty line in areas like healthcare access and housing), Human Services Mini Grants (one-year competitive grants for minority-led institutions for innovative projects), and High Impact Human Services Five-Year Grants (for new additive or complementary programming aimed at changing conditions for those served). The discussion also compared the new framework with the previous coordinated funding structure, noting differences in the number of funders, focus areas, and funding duration (moving from two-year cycles to five-year commitments for two of the new grant types).

The meeting began with a roll call and introduction of participating members. Key agenda items included addressing the swearing-in process for new commissioners, which was handled electronically, and public participation, which yielded no comments. The primary discussion revolved around a potential senior millage. Members discussed receiving an update indicating the millage was not as urgent as initially perceived, due to clarification on the frequency of future millage votes. The commission debated passing a resolution recommending the county create an Office on Aging or Longevity to distribute funds, convene stakeholders, and provide referral services. The resolution also recommended supporting a senior millage to fund this office and critical services in broad areas like housing, transportation, complex care management, and health and wellness initiatives. Concerns were raised regarding the timeline for putting any millage on the ballot, the lack of detailed accountability and data on current county service provisions for older adults, and the specific designation of millage funds solely for senior benefits rather than broader human services.