Minutes - October 28, 1999
WIB AND GOVERNING BOARD
THURSDAY, OCTOBER 28, 1999
Updated November 9, 1999 @12:25 PM
- CALL TO ORDER
The meeting was called to order by the Governing Board Chair, J. Reese, and the WIB Chair, J. Madden, at 1:32 PM.
- ROLL CALL
There was a quorum of the WIB, but no quorum of the Governing Board. Roster
- WIB APPROVAL OF MINUTES, July 29, 1999
A motion by B. Maffett, seconded by T. Cochran, for the approval of the Minutes as mailed, passed the WIB unanimously.
- APPROVAL OF AGENDA
A motion by B. Hamby, seconded by T. Cochran, for the approval of the Agenda as mailed, passed the WIB unanimously.
- PUBLIC COMMENT
There was no public comment.
- WIB APPOINTMENTS
As there was not a quorum of Governing Board members, there were no appointments made to the NoRTEC WIB.
- PROGRAM COMMITTEE REPORT
Michele Piller, Program Committee Chair, presented the Program Committee Report.
- Program Monitoring
This item was discussed as presented in the agenda. B. Austin, NoRTEC Program Services Director, said that the summer youth programs were particularly well conducted in the area of crew-based technology sites.
- PY 1999/00 First Quarter Program Reports
A summary of the standard program reports were presented. T. Brown said that there were no areas of concern at this time. She also said that the data presented was somewhat insignificant, as the adult performance standards were only based upon thirteen participants, and the youth data was only based upon eight participants.
- Participant Summaries and Employment Report
These reports are provided to the PIC and Governing Board as informational items (number of participants served in each county and participant placements in jobs). No items of concern were noted.
- Fire 1999 Temporary Job Creation Project
This item was discussed as presented in the agenda with the members noting that NoRTEC had requested $5,000,000 to provide temporary job creation services in Butte, Plumas, Tehama, and Trinity Counties. T. Brown said that the State had not received any word from DOL on whether or not we would receive the funding. Brown said that the agencies requesting assistance (United States Forest Service, CalTrans, Bureau of Land Management) were concerned that approval had not already been granted. They want work to start right away as winter storms would exacerbate the soil erosion problem.
- Upcoming Monitoring
This item was discussed as presented in the agenda, noting that fact finding visits to Tehama and Siskiyou Counties for the Welfare to Work program had been positive. T. Brown said that a "real" review has been scheduled by EDD's Evaluation Division for early January 2000.
- Program Monitoring
- FINANCE COMMITTEE REPORT
Bill Hamby, Finance Committee Chair presented the Finance Committee report.
- Approval of Final PY 98/99 Financial Reports
Closeout reports for PY 98/99 were not available at July 29, 1999, meeting. Preliminary reports were presented at that time. Hamby noted that the financial reports attached to this agenda were closeouts, and that the figures varied very little from the preliminary reports given in July. Hamby said there were no areas of concern.
A motion by J. Madden, seconded by L. Bosetti, for the approval of the final PY 1998/99 financial reports, passed the WIB unanimously.
- PY 99/00 First Quarter Financial Reports
NoRTEC currently has $8,737,412 in available funds for the program year July 1, 1999, to June 30, 2000. The standard Finance Reports were reviewed.
- PY 99/00 Contracts Summary
- PY 99/00 Service Provider Contract Modifications
- PY 99/00 Program Expenditure Report
- PY 99/00 NoRTEC Administrative Entity Expenditure Report
- PY 99/00 NoRTEC WIB and Governing Board Expenditure Report
No items of concern were noted in any of the reports, which are detailed in the agenda.
A motion by T. Cochran, seconded by R. Belarde, for approval of the PY 99/00 first quarter financial reports, passed the WIB unanimously.
- Approval of Final PY 98/99 Financial Reports
- WIA TRANSITION COMMITTEE
This item was discussed as presented in the agenda. J. Madden read the summary of the decisions made at that meeting to assure full understanding by the members. There were no items of concern.
C. Brown said he had hoped to bring a completed Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) to this meeting for WIB and Governing Board approval, so the one stops could begin working out the details at their level. The MOU is the signed agreement between the Governing Board and the One Stops regarding the partners, service delivery and the sharing of costs for the One Stop partners. He said he and the programs, including Butte, had met with Will Jones, NoRTEC Counsel, to work out the format for a NoRTEC MOU with the One Stops. He said they reached consensus on the overall format, but he had not gotten beyond a rough draft. He said their big decision was to reduce all financial transactions between the one stop partners to the lease, and to keep the MOU itself focused on service delivery by each of the partners.
C. Brown said he would have the MOU for their next meeting, or for the WIA Transition Committee if they met first.
- FUNDING APPLICATION APPROVAL
The members discussed staff submitting an application for $80,000, in the name of NCEN, for an Individual Training Account/Eligible Training Provider project in partnership with the State. Proposal information is posted on the new NCEN site at /cb/vendor/vendorapp.html.
C. Brown said the main focus of the project is to test NCEN's "informed customer choice" process as it relates to individual training accounts (ITAs) and for the selection of eligible training providers (ETPs) by participants. He said he got involved because it seemed like a good opportunity to show off their on-line training vendor application form, and maybe help influence state policy. It was turning out to be more about the ITAs, and how much say the customers would have in determining their usage; i.e., from a fixed amount with complete freedom, like the GI Bill, to a variable amount based on the amount needed, as determined by the program staff. He said if they got the funding, it would be used to offset staff time from the three NCEN partner SDAs to see if they can pull together their respective case management systems into some kind of common case management system for the thirteen county area.
A motion by B. Maffett, seconded by T. Cochran, for staff submitting a proposal in the name of NCEN, in partnership with the State, for the purpose of testing the design and implementation of "informed customer choice" as it relates to Individual Training Accounts and Eligible Training Providers passed the WIB unanimously.
The members also discussed staff submitting an application for $5,000,000 of Temporary Job Creation funding to assist with clean-up of damage caused by forest fires in Butte, Plumas, Tehama, and Trinity Counties. C. Brown said it would be a first if they got funding for fire related damage.
A motion by T. Cochran, seconded by L. Bosetti, for staff submitting a Temporary Job Creation project proposal for approximately $5,000,000 to the State, for the funding of NoRTEC disaster areas, including funding the Butte County JTPA program passed the WIB unanimously.
- WORKFORCE INVESTMENT ACT PLANNING
The members discussed this item as presented in the agenda.
- More Money
C. Brown said that their regional coordination efforts with NCEN, and the NoRTEC merger with Butte County increased the NoRTEC costs of doing business. He said the increased costs for these kinds of efforts were recognized in the WIA legislation, which allows states to provide financial rewards and incentives, but appeared to be receiving little more than lip service at the State. He said Gary Freeman, Supervisor from Glenn County, offered to introduce legislation through CSAC, if we would provide the language. The consensus was for NoRTEC staff to work with Mr. Freeman on such a bill.
C. Brown said another financial challenge to NoRTEC was the reduction in administrative funds under WIA, from the current 15%-20%, to 10% of the allocated funding. He referred to a handout, NoRTEC - Estimated Administrative Allocations - PY 2000/2001, which showed the varying amount of administrative funds available per county for the operation of the one stops, from allocating the full 10%, to allocating no administrative funds to the local one stops. To maintain NoRTEC's current budget, only 2% of the funding would be available for local administrative costs. This obviously will not do.
C. Brown said the OIG had recently completed a study of a number of SDA's operating costs, and had discovered the obvious; the 10% limitation on administrative costs is insufficient to operate the program. The OIG expressed concern that a majority of the SDAs (WIAs under the new legislation) would apply for waivers, which would defeat the purpose of the rule (making compliance with the rule of 10% an exception). C. Brown said the 10% rule has the most negative impact on organizations like NoRTEC, that separate the operation of the WIB from the operation of the one stops. This separation, touted as a primary goal in the WIA legislation, increases the administrative costs of doing business over having a single organization that combines the WIB and the one stop. The DOL has announced that they will change the rules. The hoped for change will allow the WIB to operate on 10% of the funding, and the one stops to charge all of their costs to program.
- WIB/LEO Agreement
C. Brown said they currently had an agreement between the PIC and the Governing Board (PIC/LEO Agreement) that addressed a number of items pertaining to the working relationship between the PIC and the Governing Board - the "Local Elected Official" or "LEO." He said he didn't think one was required between the WIB and Governing Board, but it might be handy to have one. W. Jones, NoRTEC counsel, was asked for his opinion. He responded that it was not required in the WIA legislation, but NoRTEC might want to put together such an agreement to clarify some things up front and avoid problems later. For example, how to handle a disagreement between the WIB and the Governing Board on an issue they were to jointly decide. C. Brown said he would post their current agreement, and they could make this an agenda item at their next meeting, or the WIA Transition Committee could deal with it if they met first.
- WIB Representation
C. Brown was asked what impact the appointment of the nominations from Butte, Trinity and Siskiyou would have on the WIB makeup. "If one county changes their representation, doesn't another county have to change theirs to match?" C. Brown said yes, and referred to a handout, "NoRTEC WIB Representation." He said if the four appointments had been made today, NoRTEC would have four vacancies, all of which would need to be private sector. Butte has no assigned sector representation, but may volunteer to take on two private sector. If so, we would still need two more vacancies, one for a private sector seat, one for a labor seat. Our "overage" is in CBO, Economic Development, Education and Public Assistance. This means one or two of those counties with the "overage" would need to swap current representation for a private sector and/or a labor representative.
C. Brown said the current assignment of specific sector representation to each county had developed over time through informal swapping. E.g., if one county had an economic development person, they might swap with another that could come up with a labor representative, and so on. One problem now was that they were adding Butte to the fray, and had not included Butte in the discussion of what kind of sector representation they wanted. There was also the problem of the scrutiny of the new law, so they had to make sure whatever swaps they made were done in a timely manner, and that their final appointments were in conformance with the 51% private sector and the 15% CBO/Labor combination.
After some further discussion, it was agreed that a more structured process for WIB nominations was needed, so the Governing Board could consider the impact of all WIB appointments at one meeting. It will also help to conform to anticipated State direction on the formation of the WIB, and allow current members to consider whether or not they want to continue under the new structure.
C. Brown said he would send out WIB application forms to all current members (including the new nominations), and the Governing Board members, for distribution to individuals not currently on the WIB. The form would ask for basic information about the applicant, and which sectors they could represent. It was also agreed to return the application forms with a nomination letter from the entity the applicant wanted to represent. Staff would then prepare a slate of nominations, for presentation to the Governing Board for appointment at the January 28, 2000, meeting, or for the WIA Transition Committee if it meets first. This would allow ample time for the filling of remaining vacancies prior to July 1, 2000.
- Procurement of Youth Programs
C. Brown said he was concerned that he would not be able to complete a proper procurement in a timely manner. He asked the members to consider following the lead of some of the other SDAs (North Central included) that had decided to extend the contracts for current youth program providers for one year. This would allow ample time to incorporate state direction (still not developed) and implement a rational process. The general consensus was to grandfather in the current youth program providers for one year and to go out to bid for implementation the following year, PY 2001/2002. This will be an agenda item at the next regularly scheduled meeting, or for the WIA Transition Committee if it meets first. C. Brown said he would prefer to get it over with, and would try and put something together anyway.
The MOU was discussed above, under item IX. WIA Transition Committee.
- Individual Training Accounts
The ITAs (Individual Training Accounts) were discussed above under item X. Funding Applications.
- Negotiated Performance Standards
C. Brown said that NoRTEC was going to have to negotiate performance standards with the state. These include rates of employment, job retention, wages, competencies, education, etc. Under JTPA, these are prescribed for the SDA by the State using a complicated "regression" formula. Under WIA, the guidelines are sparse. C. Brown said he was feeling vulnerable, as the performance standards carried the same sanctions as before, and he had no plan yet other than to try and keep them as low as possible, based on prior levels for the same kinds of indicators.
- More Money
- OLD BUSINESS
No Old Business items were brought up for discussion.
- NEW BUSINESS
Upcoming Meeting Schedule
- WIB and Governing Board - January 27, 2000
- WIA Transition Committee - Early December
There being no further Old or New Business, the meeting was adjourned at 3:15 PM.