HomeMy WebLinkAbout06101974CITY
COUNCIL
MINUTES
June 10 and 11, 1974
CITY
O•
eliO
The City Council of the City of Palo Alto met'on June 10 at 7:30 p.m. in
a special meeting with Mayor Comstock presiding.
Present: Beahrs, Berwald, Comstock, Henderson, -Pearson,
Clay, Norton, Sher
Absent: Rosenbaum
�rie�r of Drug Abuse Control Program
�.ro.r+�aaw.mf� .n �r.��..�wew�nwi�arw..n.rm.ww�wso.w�w a ■
Mayor Comstock noted that due notice had been given that this was a special
neeting of the City Council 14.1.91 the sole ag nda item being review
of the drug abuse control program, and that the meeting of the following
evening was also set aside for this subject. Mayor Comstock stated
that staff had provided Council with an evaluation report and a synopsis,
many letters had been received from citizens and groups in the community,
a proposal from Combined Addicts and Professional Services, Inc. , a
staff report dated June 6, 1974 which is an evaluation manual, a copy
of the proposed goals and objectives for the oming year from PACDAB,
a Nay 30 letter from the City Manager's office transmitting the report
concerning indications for the need for drug abuse services in the community,
a copy of the auditor's report, plus some letters that had been placed
before Council members that evening.
Carleen Bedwell, Assistant to the City Manager, reported that the first
presentation would be by the John F. Kennedy University Institute for Drug
Abuse Education and Research. They have just completed a one-year drug
abuse evaluation project, funded by the Office of Criminal Justice Planning
to evaluate the Palo Alto Drug Abuse Program. This evaluation to serve as
a model for similar community programs in other cities. She stated that
Dr. Allan Y. Cohen was the Project Director of the evaluation team, and
he would introduce the members of the team who would proceed with their
presentation.
Dr. Cohen introduced Miss Susan Nowlis, primarily responsible for the process
analysis of The Collective part of the program; Miss Landes Putnam, primarily
responsible for the experimental study of client impact at The Collective;
Mr. Stephen Mooser, responsible for the experimental research in the community
impact section of the report; and Mr. Gary Cavazos, responsible for both
the process and the outcome evaluation of Unity House. Dr. Cohen reported
that Ma. Bedwell asked him to briefly summarize the first document, Drug
Use In Palo Alto - Estimates and Trends. Further, that he had been asked
to make a rather quick analysis of drug use in the community which would
help the city estimate what kinds of services and programs were needed.
He stated that statistical and observational information was extrapolated
from several surveys that were made in schools, from drug overdose figures,
arrest statistics, and data from interviews with such persons as school
counselors, police, school Administrators, members of other drug abuse
programs, etc, The finding was that illicit substance use and abuse -probably
still exists at a significant level in Palo Alto and close environs. Most
distressing was the finding that drug use among younger children was increasing
508
6/10/74
at a very rapid rate, for instapce at the junior high school level and
also into the elementary school. level. The other consistent finding was
the resurgence of alcohol as a drug of abuse among young people in particular.
Data in terms of :rug use and crime was a bit more mixed showing some decreases
in certain narcotic offenses in some areas. However, this was attributed
by narcotic agents and police as being due to the zones where drugs are
bougl.t, moving further away from Palo -Alto. Where is a less visible kind
of drug abuse going on among adults, featuring some of tie more popular
drugs such as marijuana, cocaine, and particularly drugs that had been
traditionally used such as barbituates, amphetamines, and tranquilizers.
Alcohol is a major problem, and the latest Gallup Poll showed that one
out of every twelve persons said liquor had caused a significant problem
in his family, At the request of:city staff, an effort was made to estimate
some numbers, and they tried to produce a general range of people in different
age groups who were considered to be "high -risk", that is, either seriously
in difficulty now or potentially in serious difficulty from abuse of chemicals.
The team estimated from a minimum of 940 to a maximum of 2,000 adults
in the community who would be projected zs being high -risk, including alcohol.
Excluding alcohol, the figures would be 590 to about 1,300. In terms of
young people, figures were projected for elementary schools, junior high
schools, and the high schools. Adding up all the figures for Palo Alto
public school children, it was projected that there would be 389 to 960
high -risk persons if you included alcohol. The corresponding figures for
just illicit drugs were about 320 at a minimum to 870. One conclusion
is that if the trend continues there will be greater experimentation in
the lower grades and therefore, a much higher risk. A significant problem
exists with some drugs becoming more popular, and the drug scene in general
has became less visible. There is no evidence that thews; of drugs by
young people in this area can be expected to go away, much as a fad would.
Dr. Cohen stated that the research team saw themselves as professional
evaluators, not as consultants, They saw their pririary job as that of
collecting and interpreting data that may be useful to Council, the city,
and the public in making relevant decisions. Thirty --four recommendations
were made on the basis of enhancing the reduction and prevention of drug
abuse in Palo Alto, but from no other standpoint.
Susan Howl's reported that The Collective staff was housed at the Ramona
Street facility, and is organized collectively. The staff has taken responsi-
bility for the directorship and fmpiementation of the program within the
policies established by PAGDAB. Staff members are dedicated, energetic,
self --motivated people. To effect a responsible group dire'torship, the
staff engages in certain bureaucracies. Criticism and self-criticism is
one of these. Decisions are made by consensus rather than by vote, and
this requires struggling through disagreements in developing a program.
Miss Needle said that various work interests and experiences of staff members
necessitate integration and decisions about practical work priorities.
The concept of leadership is an important one, and it means sharing knowledge
and experience, and advocating program directions. The goal of leadership
is for all persons to assimilate given content so that they may assume
leadership for themselves. This process exists between staff members, staff
and clients, staff and volunteers, and staff and participants in the program.
The goal of the program is gaining and exercising control over one's life
in order to be responsible and productive. The staff sees social, political,
and economic conditions as a major cause of drug abuse. In crisis situations
the staff tailors referrals and counseling co the individual client's needs.
Crisis intervention services provided are the detoxification program, hot-
line services, counseling, and referral services. Examples of prevention
and education are work within classes, addresses to groups, use of communication
media, work with other groups or participation in them, and organization
509►
6/10/74
of people around areas of common interests. To be an effective prevention
program, the Collective staff feel they must analyze and work toward understand-
ing the causal conditions of drug abuse. Because staff works with the
harsh and frustrating realities of drug abuse, they occasionally express
a style that is seen as alienating and threatening to some. Being aware
of this in addition to a more clearly defined role in prevention work,
they are now better able to articulate their framework so that their style
does not obstruct their message. Volunteers are similar to staff persons
in that they are energetic and self -motivated. They share the work of
the program and participate in various groups. Role ambiguity for board
members and between the board and staff have led to a recent disparity
in board/staff relations. The board shared with the staff much of the
early development of the program which led to the staff's credibility with
the board and a growing independence in internal decieior.s. The staff
looked to the board to serve primarily as liaison and advocates for the
program. As four original board members were replaced, new members were
not generally formally introduced or prepared for their membership by other
board members. Further, the board did not directly participate in the
development of Unity House as they had with The Collective. There were
few means devised to gain credible access to Unity House staff and program
information, nor did the board make clear directives. The combination
of these events led the board to question conclusion of The Collective
staff. The staff had strongly urged board r embers to increase their involve-
ment with the program while accepting the need for their presentations
at board meetings to be increasingly precise and disciplined. The staff
see themselves as responsible for, the directorAip of their program where
avenues of accountability exist and are exercised to the board. :they feel
that they fulfill the administrative aspects of this directorship, so they
recognize themselves the need for an improved client record keeping system.
Input into the program's internal operations is most effective when offered
informally where control was not the ,goal. The city has control over approving
hoard memberships, approving budgets, and through audit. Some system
of concise service delivery monitoring may well be appropriate now that
this independent evaluation is finished.
Linda Putnam reported that the outcome research which was conducted over
the last six months was largely a continuation of the kind of thing that
was done over the summer, when fifty clients were interviewed. In December
and January another twenty clients were interviewed, which is called the
winter sample. In this winter sample, most of the participants were white,
in their twenties, single, Palo Alto residents, and high school graduates.
Most had a drug problem in the medium severity category. Overall drug
experimentation was high with nineteen out of twenty reporting some misuse
of drugs at sometime in their lives. The majority had at least tried marijuana,
amphetamines, barbiteates and heroin. Most of these persons regularly
used marijuana and tobacco, and more than half of theca regularly used heroin
and amphetamines. Most experimentation occurred between the ages of fifteen
and eighteen, with regular use starting a year or so after first use.
Alcohol and tobacco had the lowest stage of first and regular use. The
majority of the participants learned about the program through a friend
or family member who already had a connection with the program. Nearly
all of the subjects came to The Collective on a completely voluntary basis,
with most of them coming because they wanted to be drug free or lees dependent
on drugs. Most of the interviewees had a positive first impression of
The Collective, and their impressions tended to improve after the initial
contact. The average number of contacts ranged from two to fifty, and
for almost half of the participants The Collective was their first treatment
program, and they were not repeaters. Most of the others who had been
involved in one or two other programs ranked The Collective better than
others or the best in their program experience. When they were asked to
5 1 0
6/10/14
rate a list of possible goals at The Collective, participants rated the
goal of taking control of one's lice extremely high, both from their own
perspective as clients and from their understanding of the staff's perspective.
Participants also rated this goal of taking control of one's life as a
way in which they w:hre helped considerably. The service used by the greatest
number of participants was individual counselling, and this is generally
perceived to be a lot of help. In the overall assessment, 85% of the partici-
pants felt they were helped a lotor some by The Collective. By far, the
staff, specifically and in general, was perceived to be the most helpful
factor at The Collective, and there was very little report of dissatisfaction.
Most of the subjects stopped contact with The Collective when they no longer
needed help in their own perception. The frequency and amount of the partici-
pants overall drug use significantly decreased from the time of just before
coming to The Collective and the time just before the first interview.
Frequency of alcohol and tobacco usage increased slightly. Participants
tended to have a high involvement with criminal justice systems, with 75%
of the subjects arrested one or more times. The majority were convicted
one or more times. A lower level of criminal activity seemed to be prevalent
for the samples since contact with The Collective. Drug abuse participants
felt that their own participation in The Collective had greatly reduced
their criminal activity. Overall income decreased after contact with The
Collective, and illegal income also decreased; on the other hand, public
assistance increased. Involvement In primarily nonproductive activity
all declined. Extensive involvement and treatment increased iu the time
before they core to The Collective to the tine before the first interxiew.
Seventy percent of these participants were reinterviewed about two months
after the first interview. Few of these participants felt the need to
continue service contacts at The Collective over a long period of time.
Looking at the whole sample after a two month interval, changes were evident.
Drug use decreased significantly, crimiaa1 action seemed to be at a low,
even diminished, level, income was gained entirely from legitimate sources,
and involvement in productive lifestyles and activities tended to increase.
Miss Putnam reported that the fifty who were interviewed over the summer
were also reinterviewed in lace winter. Thirty of the original sample
were reinterviewed at about a six tonth interval. As with the winter post -
study, only about half of the participants had some contact beyond that
first interview. It seemed that relatively few participants felt the need
of continued service contact with The Collective over a long period of
time. Those who did continue found the services to be at least of some
help. The finding of help received in The Collective is corroborated by
changes in important behaviors. For these people drug use had signficantly
decreased; criminal activity appeared to be at a low, possibly diminished, -
level, income gained and was from legitimate sources, and involvement in
productive lifestyles and activities generally tended to increase. Therefore,
the results from the two samples were in many ways very similar. A special
questionnaire was given to the nine winter samples who had gone through
the detox program. It was found they were generally satisfied with the
detox program; they felt the daily hospital visit to be very important
and helpful; however it was found that few of these people engaged in meaningful
follow-up activity past their stay in the hospital for detoxification.
Also, a small drop -in study was conducted. Drop -ins are people who had
only one contact with The Collective. Overall, these people had more positive
impressions of their visit than negative ones; and most often, they received
the help they needed in the one visit and considered further contact unnecessary.
Host also felt that if they needed help again, they would return to The
Collective.
Mr. Gary Cavazos stated that unlike the Collective report which was information
on a viable and ongoing program, the situation at Unity House was one which
called for the process evaluator to play two roles, initially as a process
5 1 1
6/10/74,'
evaluator and later on as a person who would conduct a post mortem. Of
course the most immediate and basic conclusion to be drawn on the case
of Unity House is that it was a failure; however, it was felt that an examination
of the program's shortcomings would be very useful for City Council and
PACDAB policy formation. The problem at Unity House was one of inadequate
staffing, which is to say staff members had limited expertise, and they
were also limited in numbers. That was the basic dysfunctional feature
of the internal and external processes. There was one other important
thing which contributed in part to the failure of Unity House, and that
was that the house operated for the majority of the duration without clear
direction or guidelines. These guidelines, in large part, should have
come from PACDAB as well as the staff. There is a :seed for role definition
on the part of PACDAB and Unity House and The Collective. It was also
noted that the house never came up to capacity; that is, there never were
fifteen residents as was the intention. It is not certain whether this
was due to a low level of demand in the community or because of the fact
it was known on the street that the house was not really functional. Since
the house did operate during a one week period under a different set of
assumptions, the team concluded that it was possible for a pavaprofessionai
staff with clear direction to operate a drug -free environment. If there
is to be another residential treatment center, it is recommended that the
staff have clinical experience and that they do implement a drug -free program.
Mr. Stephen Mooser reported there were six surveys that were part of determining
community impact. Two of these were face -to -faze community interviews
involving four hundred residents .in Palo Alto and one hundred residents
in East Palo Alto. Also included were two pencil and paper surveys administered
to high school students in Palo Alto, 229 in number, roughly 75 at each
of the three high schools. There also was a survey of 75 students at Ravenswood
High School, and a survey of community leaders which included representatives
of the city, other drug abuse agencies, medical personnel who worked in
the detoxification process, various criminal"justice representatives, and
representatives of the local media. A "high -risk" survey was included
which was a survey of thirty people who said they knew heroin addicts,
and the aim wz..5 to try to determine their feelings about The Collective.
Mr. Mooser stated it was important to keep two things in mind with regard
to the surveys, and the first was that there were definite time constraints.
The community surveys were started in early February and concluded in early
March before Unity house closed. The East Palo Alto community surveys
were completed in late April; then the high school surveys during the
first and third weeks of April, and the high risk surveys were finished
in late April. The other thing to be kept in mind is that the Palo Altt
community sample design was both statistically and operationally successful
so that the results obtained may be confidently viewed as a close approximation
of Palo Alto community opinion. Results of the other surveys, however,
while interesting are not necessarily representative or unrepresentative
of the constituency sample. In terms of some of the conclusions drawn
from the high school end community surveys regarding the perceived extent
of drug abuse, that was considered at least moderate by all the groups
surveyed. The East Palo Alto residents especially indicated an awareness
of serious drug abuse problems in the community. High school students
perceived a moderate local drug problem, and that is significant since
American students often underestimate perceived extended drug abuse. Regarding
perceived solutions to the drug abuse problems, both the community and high
school student surveys in Palo Alto identified a definite need for more
education and prevention programs as a necessary solution to the drug abuse
problem. East Palo Alto residents, however, viewed basic changes in society
as most important; while Ravenswood High School students tended to feel
that what was most essential was to help addicts and other drug abusers
take control of their awn lives. The community and school surveys revealed
5 1 2
6/10/74
that the PACDAB program had been able to convey little concrete information
about their services and objectives. Specifically the Palo Alto community
survey indicated that very few people had more than vague knowledge about
them. Despite the program emphasis on younger people, this group being
those eighteen to twenty-nine, those persons tended to be no more familiar
with the program. The majority of high school students surveyed in Palo
Alto were unfamiliar with the PACDAB program, and were especially unaware
of program therapy. Familiarity with the programs in East Palo Alto and
at Rai,enswood High School was even lower, although it must be kept in mind
that in the case of Ravenswood High School, many of the students do not
come from East Palo Alto. A aignifi6ant majority of the students and residents
in Palo Alto favored continued support of the PACDAB program. Palo Alto
residents who were unaware of the PACDAB program strongly favored taxpayer
support of drug abuse programs. These feelings no doubt were partially
the result of the perceived seriousness of the local drug abuse problems.
Although the degree cf familiarity was low, East Palo Alto residents and
high school students in Palo Alto who were familiar with the PACDAB program
geneeally viewed them favorably. Participants in each survey group who
were familiar with the PACDAB program consistently indicated that they
would refer someone with a dreg -related problem to the program. In terms
of the community leader survey, generally the leaders felt the Collective
staff was hard-working, dedicated, and concerned. Although they were perceived
to be successful with some clients, there was some concern expressed that
the present program clientele is too narrow. Most felt that the program
had a positive influence on the community by encouraging the expansion
of drug abuse programs. Many mentioned, however, that too much of t:e
Collective's efforts were spent on activities largely unrelated to the
drug problem. The need for greater tact and cooperation with the establishment
oriented groups and individuals was often expressed.
Dr. Cohen reported that various factors of the programs, were looked at which
related to money matters, and costs and benefits, and community needs.
In terms of cost analysis, the big roadblock was the condition of the records.
For a complete cost analysis, records and categorization have to be much
better than they were in this case. Using the data -.found, a rough estimate
of costs was given. For the fiscal year 1972-73, the average cost per
contact - which is a key figure in a drug abuse program - was about $24.50.
The same analysis projected on vaguely the same data for fiscal year 1973-
74 turned out to be about $41.00. The latest federal guidelines per client
week show $25.03 for an outpatient program. There were not enough records
to show where the money was going in terms of efficiency for what services.
it was concluded that the cost per contact figure probably was in range
of the federal guidelines. Perhaps a more important kind of statistic
would be a cost per success figure which is even harder to cote by in terms
of budgetary accountability, but the records were not in any kind of condition
eo that this could be determined. There was a section of the contract
asking for investigation of intangible costs and benefits, and they were
evaluated somewhat intangibly. Overall it is strongly suggested that more
adequate records and a better system for fiscal accountability be set up.
There was also a survey of other drug programs in the area with an analysis
of the question of duplication of effort. No evidence was found of duplication
of effort with regard to outpatient or client drop -in contact.
Dr. Cohen referred to the summary recommendation section of the report.
He stated that the tear: had taken a corm value orientation to recommend
behaviors and procedures that would increase the effectiveness of au anti-
drug program in the community. The recommendations are somewhat critical,
that is they are most relevant to weaknesses of a program or of a city
or board's point of view and they should be looked at in that way. This
particular program has been subject to very careful scrutiny. Although
high standards of accountability are a good thing, it should be recognized
5 1 3
6/10/74
that very few other drug programs in the country have been subjected to
this kind of review. Thirty-four recommendations were made, and Dr. Cohen
mentioned a few which he felt were highlights. He said that when the PACDAB
program was mentioned, the recommendations presume that the program will
be refunded. One recommendation was that the Palo Alto City Council and
other interested citizens recognize that drug abuse is extensive among
local youth and adults. Among the recommendations for the operation of
The Collective part of the program, there is one that states Collective
staff should continue to organize as a collective structure. Recommendation
six is that staff always be prepared to explain to lay people the relationship
of their activities to the reduction of drug abuse. Recommendation eleven
is that staff maintain the high quality �f crisis intervention and counselling
work as well as increased emphasis in the prevention and education areas.
There le a great need for early ieqervention in the community particularly
with the findings of increased drug abuse. Recommendations related to
the reeidential treatment center included number twelve which states that
any new residential treatment center not be opened without a careful analysis
of community need, projected cost effectiveness, and content of the program
operation. in terms of recommendations concerning the PACDAB board, recommenda-
tion twenty states that the PACDAB board along with program staff and
city representatives define carefully its function for the program. Among
the recommendations for record keeping and evaluation in the future, recommenda-
tion twenty-two suggests that a new and comprehensive record keeping and
internal evaluation system be created. Appropriate consultants could be
hired to help institute the system. Recommendation twenty-six is that
outreach efforts to the community be expanded through traditional as well
as innovative channels. This includes most particularly the schools where
there is a critical need. Recommendation twenty-nine states that the city
should encourage community elements to judge drug abuse and intervention
programs by their results and not merely by their appearance. Number thirty-
one suggests that the city present to PACDAB clear guidelines on expected
performance, and recommendation thirty-two states that in order to facilitate
long range planning the city should consider whether substance abuse services
will be a semi -permanent responsibility and proceed accordingly.
Mayor Comstock suggested that at this point Council members have an opportunity
to ask questions of the Institute members case there was a need fr
clarification.
Councilman Clay requested that Dr. Cohen redefine the team's role as evaluator
as distinguished from consultant, especially with respect to recommendations.
Dr. Cohen responded that traditionally a consultant is one who is hired
for his expertise in implementing a service, and usually a consultant is
paid to give good advice as to what should be done from his perspective
as an expert. Evaluators do not project their value systems and proceed
to tell the Council what it should do about the key issues of the program.
The Institute members' role is to analyze the situation, gather data which
would assist relevant decisions being made, and analyze the data in an
objective and unbiased way. The group could have been very conservative
and lade no recommedations at all, but they felt that on the basis of the
work they had done, recommendations would be helpful. They decided not
to make any recommendations where they would have to presume to know what
the value system or priority system of the Council would be. On the basis
of the data, recommendations had to do with increasing the effectiveness
of the program in the context of the community with regard to reducing
drug abuse.
Councilman Clay asked for comments regarding the recommendation that if
The Collective were refunded that it be operated as a collective,
514
6/10/74
c
Susan Nowlis explained that the recommendation was that if The Collective
were to be refunded, the staff should continue its organization as in a
collective structure.
Councilman Clay asked why it was felt this organization should be operated
as a collective. Miss Nowlis responded that the findings were that this
worked as an efficient system. The staff feels it is highly important
for them to be a collective, to be in a sense appropriate representatives
of their various constituencies, where they operate together rather than
in a hierarchical system.
Councilman Clay noted there was no.such recommendation made for Unity House
if it were to be reopened. Gary Cavazos, responded that the situation at
Unity House was one where when the staff was hired, there was a compromise
made betKeen PACDAB and The Collective who were the two parties to the
hiring of the Unity House staff. Unfortunately, there was no clear agreement
ss to what kind of staff should be hired at Unity House, whether the staff
should be paraprofessionals with a lot of interest and experience in collective
decision making or professionals with no experience or hostilities to collective
decision making. The Collective favored the collective idea for Unity House
since it would he compatible with its own structure- A compromise staff
was .recruited so that some people did have clinical and professional experience
but were hostile or disinterested in making collective decisions. The
other half of the staff, who were paraprofessionals in drug abuse work,
were interested in collective decision making. The result was finally
one where the staff became dysfunctional in decision making because of
the factions which could not agree, and it was exasperated by one further
factor, which was some of the paraprofessionals interested in collective
decision making did not have a clear grasp at all of how to conduct collective
decisions. Eventually the system was dysfunctional and made no binding
decisions and made no goals and objectives. The problem at Unity House
was a misconception of how to establish a collective.
Councilman Clay asked that if the personnel were changed at The Collective,
would that mean that it ought to be organized differently. Mr. Cavazos
replied that 11 meant in this particular case, given that kind of a staff,
the system could not work. Were you to recruit a staff of significant
clinical experience who could provide therapy and who were interested in
the collective system, it might work.
Councilman Clay stated he thought the reason for the collective structure
had to do with a determination of the cause of the problem as due to social,
political and economic conditions. He assumed that collective structure
waa consistent with the description of the problem in that a collective
structure gave everybody an opportunity to participate.
Susan Nowlin explained that The Collective serves as a model of persons
working together without the usual barriers of authority and exhibiting
horizontal directions.
Councilman Clay expressed concern that clients being treated in an environment
that was collective in nature would have some difficulty with re-entering
the real world where the environment was hierarchical. He Maid it would
appear that either society would have to be changed so that the released
clients could function, or the clients would have to be kept in a protected
atmosphere.
Ron Luyet, PttCDA.B, stated that none of the clients are confined in a collective
structure. It touches their lives but predominantly they carry on in the
culture as everyone else does. The second point he made was that the contact
5 1 5._
6/10/74
wade seemed to be working. He pointed out that all staffs function in
some way, and it is helpful for the clients to be involved in that environment.
Joel Davidson stated that. when a person goes through the collective program,
he learns better how to control his own life, and that is taken with him
into any job structure ar,d into any family situation. In -this way he may
even help fellow employees or family members how to caake decisions for
themselves. He felt there was a change going on in the country very slowly,
and it vas happening through people working together.
Councilman Sher commented on the role of evaluators as opposed to that
of consultants. He asked if he understood that the team of evaluators would
not recommend whether or not the city should have a residential treatment
center, but that if there is such a center it should be staffed with people
of clinical experience. Me waked Darr. Cohen if Council should be asking
PACDA.g whether or not there should be a residential treatment center, how
the preventive part of the program should be organized, etc.
Dr. Cohen replied that this depended ul:on how Council developed the contractual
relationship. He stated that Council was at the decision making point,
and this would be one of the decisions that needed to be made.
Councilman Sher asked if Dr. Cohen felt the city needed an ongoing consultant,
or is it enough to have a consultant from time to time as the program is
reviewed.
Dr. Cohen replied there ftight be a -viable consultation function, but on
the basis of the research the city should be very careful to get a consultant
who would be at least sensitive to the different constituencies around
Palo Alto that Light be involved; with the contract so that they could best
guide the practical realities vefsus the ideal realities.
Councilman Sher referred to page 23 of the report regarding work of the
staff through media to communicate the existence of the program and tc
disseminate its content and philosophy. He asked .:hat the word "content"
would mean.
Susan Nowlts responded that it would mean counseling people who needed
help, and introduce the fact that there is a program of services which
they provide. With regard to philosophy, the staff has conducted regular
programs on the politics of drugs, and do speak to what they see are some
of the conditions that contribute to drug abuse.
Councilman Sher asked if this would include presentations of the staff's
view of the social, economic and political causes of drug abuse. Miss
Nowlis responded affirmatively.
Councilman Sher asked what kind of programs were presented in the schools.
Miss Nowlis replied that ambers of the staff would talk with the students
about what drugs are, which might be good or bad, leading the students
to understand that a drug might be good or bad depending upon how it is
used. This gets into decision waking processes of how one decides what
to use. She said that personally she did not see that the staff got heavily
into philosophical discuseiona with the students.
Councilman Sher referred to the statement that The Collective staff carte
to perceive the major function of its board as advocates and a public relations
liaison of its program to the City Council and the city at large. He
asked if that were still the perception.
Miss Nowlin pointed out that she terminated observations as of May 1, but
that she had heard tbat since that time a lot of things had started moving
and shaping up.
5 1 6
6/10/74
Councilman Sher referred to the statement that the staff has encouraged
greater participation by the board in the collective process and so forth,
and asked how that fit in with the team's view of the board's relationship
to the City Council. The suggestion seemed to be that the board become
more like the staff.
Dr. Cohen replied that there are two different issues. One is the legal
accountability cf the board, as a nonprofit corporation, to the city for
providing services, and he understood Miss Nowlis' report to describe the
staff trying to include the board members in getting a feel for their program
in order to understand it.
Miss Nowlis added that the lines of accountability for The Collective staff
to the board were fairly clear and had been followed. The question is
more one of input and one of wanting the board to have a better flavor
of the program which is difficult in bimonthly meetings with their full
agendas. Board members had originally worked quite closely with the staff,
and there was a great sense of understanding each other. They want to
have a better understanding so that they can in turn communicate the perspective
of the program.
Councilman Sher asked if Miss Nowlis referred to that function of being
the liaison to the community and serving the public relations role. Miss
Nowlis responded affirmatively.
Councilnaa Sher stated that as of a cont and one-half ago that was a limited
role in which the staff saw the board. Miss Nowlin replied this understanding
was correct.
Councilman Sher noted that many of the report's recommendations related
to the board and staff clarifying their relationship, articu1ting it,
and having a co=mmoa view of that relationship. He said the message that
came across to him was that was something that would be worked out between
the board and the staff, and in his opinion that was something for the
City Council to work out.
Miss Nowlis responded that given the contractual constraints of the last
two years where the board is an indepe{ident nonprofit corporation, the
board would define with the staff its operational role. She noted that
it is quite common for boards to have a director to take care of all the
administrative things. The Collective staff itself has developed a group
directorship and has been accountable to their board in that sense. The
relationship between the board and the City Council has been such things
as approving board memberships, approving budgets, having audits, etc.,
so that those lines have been clearly defined.
Councilman Sher asked if the relationship between the city and the board
appeared unclear. Miss Nowlis replied negatively, but she felt there was
often a different perspective or enphasis.
Councilman Sher referred to the recommendation which said the city should
develop with PACDAB and the staff a system for monitoring service delivery
in a coherent systematic manner, and asked if that referred to developing
the concept or was it a suggestion that the city have an ongoing process
for monitoring the delivery of the services.
Mies Nowlis explained that in the last contract there was a provision for
a monthly and a quarterly report. She felt that the way it was organized
was overwhelming and not particularly clear at times about exactly what
the services are and how many have taken advantage of the services. She
5 1 7
6/10/74
said that if the new set of goals and objectives were accepted, they could
provide a format for a report that could define more clearly what the services
delivered are, how well they are being met, plus allow for changes in goal
directions as they occur along the way.
Councilman Sher asked if there were any suggestion that there might be
some advantage in having a member of the city staff actually do some of
the monitoring and reporting on its -own.
Miss Nowlis responded that if this were an independent corporation she
would say no, and that the staff and the board should be responsible for
that. If there were any question, then perhaps there should be another
evaluation,
Councilman Sher said there was one statement in the report on Unity House
that he wanted clarification on, and that was the reference to pressure
from PACDAB and the city to continue the program.
Mr. Cavazos replied that it was felt by PACDAB, and it came to the people
at Unity House through the grapevine, that the city felt that if the house
did close, it would not be reopened. Therefore they felt they could not
close the house with any reassurance that they would be able to reopen
it, The other point is that it might have been possible, had certain people
been expelled from the house, without fully closing the house to be able
to _lean it up and get it working in a viable and vibrant fashion again.
Because of the fact that the program and the staff did receive criticise:
for having a low census, and they interpreted that as interest in quantity
rather than quality, they tended not to do what their better judgement told
them which was to close the house at the immediate onset of drug use.
Councilman Sher said the report indicated there would be no danger of duplica-
tion of services such as preventive programs and drop -in programs, but
that the situation was more ambiguous with regard to a residential treatment
cents. Ou page 230 of the report there is a reference to other residential
treatment centers in the area which would have open slots available for
Palo Alto residents, which does suggest the possibility of duplication.
Dr. Cohen replied that it is necessary to realize that drug abuse control
is a very changing kind of a scene. In a matter of a couple of months
it is possible to find no vacancies in available programs and some where
programs are shutting down completely or just opening up. Another question
is what kinds of criteria you would have for admission, such as whether
a potential new residential treatment center would include only heroin
addicts, or whether it might include divertees from the criminal iustice
system, or whether the center eight be restricted to voluntary self referral,
etc. The criteria that is set up will determine in great measure whether
or not the need exists for this particular outlet.
Councilman Berwaid said he understood the team to be saying that the lines
of communication between The Collective and PACDAB were clear and generally
followed, yet starting on page 144 of the report, statements ate made such
as, "failure of the residential treatment center was due to the serious
organizational deficiencies in the internal process, and external pressures
largely outside the control of the Unity House staff." The report also
said that board members made few policies and yet the staff saw their role
as implementing the policies of the board; and the board relied on information
from The Collective staff which was sometimes accurate, secondhand, or
hearsay. Further, the board and staff could not agree on criteria for
selecting Unity House staff; and The Collective staff communicated only
with their peers on the Unity House staff, and the Board members with their
peers. PACDAB appeared to want a drug -free disciplined environment, but
5 1 8
-6/10/74
1
The Collective was not quite sure. Finally, FACD..B asserted itself and
Unity House seemed to shape up; unfortunately, within a few days, it was
closed. Evidently, one-half of the Unity House staff looked to the board
for counsel and one-half to The Collective. Councilman Berwald said that
all of these statements picked out of numerous pages of the report seemed
to directly contradict the statements that the lines of communication and
authority were clear between the board and the staff, and that failure
of communication as indicated in Mr. Cavazos' report was the cause of the
closure of Unity House. Forinstance there is a statement that because
Unity House staff could not accept direction of The Collective, that The
Collective ceased referring clients to the Unity House staff. Because
of these problems the staff was demoralized and some of them left; then
other problems developed, and the place was closed. He asked for some
counts on these apparent inconsistencies.
Miss Nowlis explained that the statements she made were in direct relationship
of The Collective staff to the board as it relates to The Collective program.
Mr. Cavazos reported he found that interaction between Unity House and
the board was dysfunctional; and this was not really the case between The
Collective and the board. The Collective was the first component to be
organized, and in fact, many of the original task force members participated
in the organization of The Collective staff persons. Through that recruitment
and through their early work together, the board developed a certain respect
for the staff people at The Collective and tended to look to them for opinions.
The hoard, of course, net only included people with professional backgrounds
in drug abuse but includedmanylay persons from the Palo Alto community
not all of whom were specifically knowledgeable in drug abuse. When the
staff at Unity House was originally being recruited, the persons on FACDA3
with clinical experience drew upon that experience when they began to think
about what types of persons should be recruited for the program at Unity
House. However, other persons on the board and some people on The Collective
drew on their particular backgrounds for what they saw as being necessary
people at Unity House. The first dysfunction is that these two different
groups did not really cone to any sort of consensus, and the staff which
was hired at Unity House was a compromise staff which really satisfied
neither of the two groups. Mr. Cavazos said that when he referred to a
certain peer grous, he meant that these groups with their backgrounds communi-
cated best with that group at Unity House which came from the same type
of background. People with therapeutic experience at Unity House best
interacted with people with therapeutic experience who were on the board
or at The Collective; also, those persons who had the greatest collective
type of experience tended to interact with those persons at The Collective
who shared that sort of orientation. Conversely, those persons who had
disagreements tended to have them with the cross -group. After the initial
hiring, communications began to deteriorate. The thing that helped facilitate
The Collective and PACDAB interaction but did not facilitate Unity House
interaction was that the meetings of PACDAB by and large were held at the
Ramona Street facility. Once Unity House began to get going, there was
very little additional contact; for instance, only one board member consistently
interacted with the staff at Unity House to gain firsthand knowledge of
what the situation was, or to find out where the board could provide guidance,
assistance, or whatever else. Eventually, this deteriorated to the point
that given the fact that the Unity House staff had limited clinccal expertise
after the departure of certain of the original staff members, they drastically
and desperately needed the board to give them clear direction. However,
this did not happen, and they continued to muddle along as best they could.
When finally this paraprofessional group did get clear guidelines from
PACDAB, they were able to respond, However, because of the fact that one
key staff r;ember was forced to take a leave of absence for health reasons,
PACDAB having no confidence and not being able to look at any history of
consistent, effective work, had to close the house down. Mr. Cavazos
5 1 9
6/10/74
pointed out that this was in part due to the fact that there was constant,
if limited, drug use at the house. In one of the few documents which PACDAB
and the staff jointly developed, it said the purpose of Unity House was
to assist clients in becoming drug free and gain control of their lives.
At Unity House, the staff did not understand if this meant that a client
came in using drugs and they be helped from that point, or if it meant
clients used drugs at the house and help was given from that point.
Councilman Berwald said he understood the team members to be saying that
the reason Unity House closed was because there were dysfunctions in the
organizations, and that the problem was with the staff of Unity House,
and the board, not necessarily between the board and The Collective. Yet,
the statements directly contradict that because you say there was disagreement
about the type of therapy, what is meant by a drug -free environment, and
the selection of the staff itself was a compromise. The compromise came
because The Collective and the board could not integrate their viewpoints,
which was at least better than domination of one over the other. -There
was a breakdown in lines of authority and in lines of communication, and
this seems to be evident in other parts of the report when comments are
made such as The Collective refusing to take directions from the board,
seeing the board as a public relations entity, etc. Speaking hypothetically,
Councilman Berwald said it was as though he would have two functions as
a staff member - one to run Unity House and one to run The Collective -
and he dic' very well at The Collective but failed at the Unity House.
It would seer, to him that then you could not say there was really good
communication between the board and The Collective, or the board and the
staff, in a sense.
Councilman Berwald referred to an item in the report concerning the .uckus
in the Council Chamber in 1973 as a result of someone in the residential
treatment center being arrested. The conclusion in the report was that
this was due to a lack of communication between the police and the staff.
It was Councilman Berwald's understanding that the staff felt the city
should haae contacted them on this situation, He asked Dr. Cohen if he
felt that incident was possibly an indication of lack of communication
between the staff and the board.
Dr. Cohen responde_ that the impression he had was that the functional
organization of the program has a definite need for clarification of account-
ability, of role, and of function. He continued that Council had in essence
a hierarchi al organization by law in the PACDAB board as reporting in
a contractual way, and on the other hand it is responsible for a program
element that essentially operates in collective leadership. You also have
a very active program that is accustomed to taking initiative, and in a
vacuum of power, will certainly make their presence felt. One thing that
the evaluation team agreed on was that whatever the role is, it ought to
be made very clear to everybody. Apparently the legal accountability at
The Collective was clear. At what point and how substantially the board
versus the staff was the policy maker is the question. There was a very
serious disruption and lack of communication between the board and Unity
House.
Councilman Be:wrald noted that the team speaking of Unity House said a sensible
blend would have been a staff with substantial skills organized on a collective
basis; therefore, he assumed the team wasrecommending a collective organization
at Unity House. He asked whether this collective should report to the
city, PACDAB, or The Collective.
It. Cavazos responded that the team opinion was that a sensible blend of
the two viewpoints could have been one of a therapeutic staff organized
on a collective basis.
5 2 0
6/10/74
1
Councilman Bev-wald explained that when the team referred to a sensible
blend being a staff with substantial skills organized on a collective basis,
he assumed they were talking about the staff at Unity House. Mr. Cavazos
responded this was correct.
Councilman Beahrs stated he found it significant and discouraging to note
drug education accounted for only -164 cases out of a total of 1,335 contacts.
He said he had always maintained that the group seemed to be doing good
referrals, but he wondered if this could not be done better by other agencies.
It was his feeling that the community had phenomenally good counselling
services, and he was concerned that the money spent was allegedly for the
drug problem, in the community whereas the summary indicates only ten percent
of the problems handled fall into that category. Further, he was discouraged
because a ouch meligned newspaper is supposed to be the source of most
information in the community on this misjudged, misunderstood, little-known
outfit - The Collective. Councilman Beahrs wanted to know why the schools
were not assuming some responsibility for drug education since there was
a captive audience in every classroom in the public school system.
Miss Putnam responded that it was necessary to recognize that their tables
were made up of only those contacts that had been recorded, and that not
all the drug education contacts'managed to get recorded. She felt sure
that The Collective understood itself to be doing more drug educaticn than
shows up in reports. Most of the counselling that occurs is directly related
to drug ptobleWs, and she believed there were not many agencies in the
area which did {tug related counseling, although there are a lot of mental
health organizations. She felt it was fair to say that all of their services
relate in some way to drug related problems. In general the statistics
cannot reflect as much as is actually done, and they certainly do not reflect
the school contacts.
Mr. 'looser responded that about 50% of the students who had heard about
The Collective had heard about it by word-of-mouth, and 16% of them had
heard about it through the Palo Alto Tines. At Ravenswood High School,
two of the students knew clients; two had heard about it through radio
or television, end two by word-of-mouth,
Ron r.uyet stared the School District had begun to make an effort to educate
students in the area of drug abuse problems. The staff who is charged
with waking recommendations about drug abuse submitted a twenty page list
of recommendations for dealing with drug abuse on a prevention level for
grades kindergarten through twelve. This report was done last year and
has never been implemented. The report is constantly referred back to
by the staff and memos are sent to supervisors, but there is no response.
The School District is in a financial bind, and this area does not seem
to be one of their priorities.
Agnes i.obioson, PACDAB, reported that she was very disappointed that the
School Board had not put more money into the drug program or given more
encouragement to the drug counsellors. As Councilman Beahrs pointed out,
it would be possible to bring up in every class in the district some aspect
of drug use in society; but board members would say they wanted math taught
in the math class, and English in the Englis'i classes. There was a great
deal of resistance, and so it was understood teachers were not to go beyond
certain points in controversial matters. The only classes where there
possibly could be some drug education would be sociology classes, the eighth
grade classes in family .life education, in other words - elective courses.
The school district has not had enough staffing for it, and one of The
Collective members has aasisted the achool diatrict by teaching ene of
the classes. With the school district in a financial bind, they will no
doubt put their money into such things as math and English, where she felt
-5 2 1
6/10/74
Councilman Beahrs would want them to put their money. She pleaded with
Council to support the efforts of The Collective in working in the schools.
Councilman Henderson said there was no doubt that alcohol was a drug that
needed to be covered by the program. Since there was no specific recommendation
along that line, he was wondering if the team agreed and if so, could they
indicate what impact this might have on the program, and whether the staff
would be qualified to handle this addition.
Dr. Cohen responded that the team had suggested that the staff consider
alcohol use as relevant in drug intervention and prevention services.
He pointed out that those treating drug abuse people and those treating
alcoholics do not usually get along in terms of service delivery. Even
nationally the two areas have been divided, resulting in the National Institute
for Drug Abuse and the National Institute for Alcoholism. The main reason
for this is that for the most alcoholics do not see themselves as having
a drug abuse problem. However, the promise for integration is at the younger
level. The team felt it was especially important to expand substance abuse
education to include alcohol. They found in their analysis that poly -drug
use was going way up, and that particularly young people were using any
kind of substance to get high. You can now find a mixture of alcohol use
with illicit drug use, which was not the case five or six years ago. Dr.
Cohen said it would be appropriate that the city or PACDAB make a special
point that they wish this to be investigated, or perhaps that they wish
the PACDAS program expanded so they could work especially with alcohol
abuse education among students.
Councilman Henderson said one of the disappoinments he felt was the failure
of the diversion programs:, and he wondered if the team saw irreconcilable
differences between the county probation officers and The Collective, or
did they feel something could be worked out.
Mr. Mooser stated that he spoke with a representative of the Probation
Department, and he recalled the history of the relationship between his
department and The Collective and felt it had not been satisfactory as
far as the criteria of the Probation Department was concerned. He indicated
his department would welcome a future relationship with The Collective
in terms of a drug education program if certain criteria were met, such
as that participation be monitored, attendance be taken, and that the program
be structured.
Miss Nowlin reported that there were many problems, one of which was that
the diversion clients simply appeared at the doorstep of The Collective
without having any idea about the aims of the program. Often diversion
clients see their diversion as punishment so it is difficult to maintain
long-term contact with people who have those feelings. The staff eventually
made one month contracts with the diversion clients and submitted an evaluation
of their participation to the clients themselves, who were then responsible
for turning it over to the probation office. So the responsibility for
the final contact with the probation office was on the client and not on
the staff, and this is the point where the relationship began to break
down. The probation office wanted a lot of direct reporting and had a
lot of questions which the staff felt they did not want to answer.
Jane Hyatt, Collective staff member, reported there were many reasons why
the diversion program did not work. The clients showed up on the doorstep
with staff having had ao idea that they should have been prepared for diversion
persons. The probation officer had not contacted anyone at The Collective
and so there was no way of knowing what the expectations were or why they
were even there. She explained that one of the major conflicts was that
staff was made to feel that they were to keep track of the probation officer's
5 2 2
6/10/74
clients for them. The probation officers expected the staff to do all
the follow-up and all of the contacts. The staff did not feel at all that
they should have to report continuously to probation officers on their
clients; but that in fact, probation officers should be in contact with
their clients. It was also difficult for staff to make the program a good
one because it was hard to counsel and educate people who had been busted
for one-half joint of marijuana. Further, almost all of these clients
were from south county, and they were expected to drive up to Palo Alto
once a week, every week, which really made the program more of a punishment
than anything else.
Ron Manuel explained that normally the staff met with clients before deciding
to accept them, but that the probation officers were sending clients to
them for treatment before this kind of decision could be made, including
what the individual's involvement would be.
Vice Mayor Pearson pointed out that representatives of CAPS were in the
audience, and since a number of them would not be able to return the following
evening, she would like to be sure that they would be heard from before
the evening was over.
Councilman Berwald noted that the evaluators recommended an extensive needs
assessment prior to a decision regardiog the reopening of Unity Douse;
but that it was now his understanding that recomnendation might Le modified
somewhat, and he shared Vice Mayor Pearsoc's thought that it would be well
to get on and talk with CAPS.
Dr. Cohen said it would be easier to respond if it were clearly defined
what kind of facility the city night want to have opened. Part of the
decision is really one of priority, but that no one seriously questioned
that an effective residential treatment renter could be helpful to a lot
of people. the Council_ has to decide whether it considers that a high
priority, whether the budget allows expenditures in that area, etc. The
team members all support the idea that a lot of investigation go into the
ne.ture and quality and organization and ccc•unt?bility of another such
program.
Ron Luyet stated that he and other members of PACDAB had questions to ask
of the evaluation team, and it was :felt that since this was a major input
by an objective group in tetras of the evaluation of their proiect, they
would very much like an opportunity tt ask questions and explore some of
the things the tears had lead. Mr. Luyet requested that CAPS consideration
not be inserted in the middle of the evaluation of the existing program
since that would be somewhat distracting.
(The Council recessed from 10:10 p.m. to 10:30 p.m.)
Councilman Clay noted that page 28 of the report stated that the Outreach
Program vas abandoned, and he wanted to know why. Miss Nowlis responded
that the program was abandoned because of staff time, staff resources,
and a feeling that the preference of the programmers was to work with existing
groups and help organize a system rather than cons in and lay on a community
a system that works is a different kind of community.
Councilman Clay referred to the community iaapaet part of the report. He
wanted to know to what it was attributed that 90% of the people interviewed
fell into the bracket of "never heard of the program" to "heard something
about it".
Mr. Mooser replied that it was attributed to the fact that people either
have not heard of it in the case of The Collective and the Unity House
5 2 3
6/10/74
which was 60%, and the second group had heard of it but did not know many
details, or simply that they heard about it through the newspaper or by
word -of --mouth but they did not know much specifically about the services,
other than that the program did exist.
Councilman Clay said he would assume these people would not be able to
talk intelligently about the program. Mr. :Moser responded this would
not be so of all the, people; Some felt they would not be able to speak
in depth about the program, but they did have a certain amount of knowledge.
Councilman Clay said that there was the question of support for funding
the program, and such support was indicated as being pretty high. He asked
if the respondents were saying they were willing to support this program
or a program.. Mr, Mooser replied that they were saying both: People who
had not heard of the program were asked if they felt in general that taxpayers
should support a drug abuse program, and over 70% said that would be a
priority use for tax dollars •- to support a program. People who indicated
they had some familiarity with The Collective or Unity Mouse were asked
if those programs should be refunded, and a substantial majority felt that
way. This comes from the fact that the majority of the citizens are concerned
about the drug abuse problem in Palo Alto, and they were quite supportive
of allocating tax dollars for this purpose.
Councilman Clay stated that the relationship between the city and PACDAB
was a hierarchical one, and he wanted to know what the relationship was
between PA DAB and staff.
Miss Putnam said it depended in a sense which function they would be serving.
in terms of accountability, ultimately the board holds responsibility.
In terms of program directions, the staff and board hive worked together
in a collective fashion to devise directions and implementation of the
program.
Councilman Clay said that in considering the board aa a policy making body,
that policies are established on a collective basis. Miss Nowlis replied
that the board has ultimate responsibility for establishing policies,
meaning voting, but they take into account quite seriously the input of
the staff.
Ron Luyet stated that PACDAB operated basically the same as the Council does
in terms of its staff, They try to set general policy and try to hire
the best staff to carry out those policies. It is not possible to be familiar
with everything that goes on, so you have to trust and depend upon your
staff. On the other hand, the board does get involved as much as possible,
and they were working more and more towards that. The board sets policy,
hires, and fires. The one thing that might be different is that everyone
is listened to until he is a ompletely finished before a decision is made.
Not everybody is always satisfied, and the board has gone against staff
in a number of cases. He said there was no confuaion in his mind, at least
at that level, what the relationship is. He wondered if the evaluators
could offer any comparison in terms of familiarity with other social service
agencies who have been in existence perhaps eighteen months to two years,
and what the general knowledge of their services are in the community.
Councilman Beahrs commended Hrs. Bedwell on her staff analysis and referred
to page three where she subtly treats the credibility of the statistical
findings of the major report, speaking in this regard to the question of
a unique terra, "nonlocateability of the client". He pointed out that The
Collective has been very wary of recordkeeping which is to be improved
as recon sided. Councilman Beahrs wanted to know where the people came
from and where they went.
1
5 2 4
6/10/74
Mrs. Bedwell replied that most of that page was a direct quote from the
evaluation report. She felt it was appropriate for the evaluation team
to speak directly to this because they had the task of trying to locate
these people. The point she was trying to make was that staff could not,
as the evaluators say, say that these samples are representative of the
total client population; but you cannot say they are unrepresentative.
What you can say is the clients are representative of those clients mailable
and interviewed, and those that have remained in the area. This means
you cannot necessarily generalize to the total client population of The
Collective.
Miss Putnam agreed this was a very complex issue. There are a lot of reasons
why people could not be located. For one thing, The Collective tries to
protect their clients' confidentiality, so that people who do not want
to leave addresses are not pressed to do so. Sometimes a client is willing
to give only a first name, or a temporary address. Most of the people
seemed to move around the area of Palo Alto. Most of these people were
Palo Alto residents at the time of the interviewing, and they continue
to be; but their addresses change. The evaluation team was contractually
obligated to conduct the study in a confidential manner.
Councilman Beahrs felt programs of this sort should be based on a broader
tax base than just Palo Alto. He went oa to refer to page nine of the
staff report where :it states that The Collective is oriented toward prevention
and treatment and is activist in nature. Fe asked for Mrs. B_dwell's definition
of activist.
Mr3. Bedwell replied that her use of the word activist referred to the
operating style of the program to confront an issue directly. If, in example
of the Medi-Cal payments, members of the staff were able to identify the
fact that there had been some administrative procedures that had cut off
payments for detoxifications procedures which are indicated by law, members
of the staff would confront agency representatives in Sacramento to get
the !natter straightened out. They have exhibited this see kind of action
in attempting to work out the problems of the diversion program, Activist
therefore, means that they are likely to take some action rather than put
up with something that is unsatisfactory to them.
Dr. Cohen, in response to Councilman Eerwa.ld's earlier questions, stated
that in the evaluation report a recommendation was made for a comprehensive
needs analysis before the opening of another residential treatment center.
After that was written, the city asked the tease to do a needs analysis
concentrating on the drug abuse and trends in Palo Alto. The conclusion
in terms of the number of people probably seriously dysfunctional, or close
to it, in this area certainly would support the conclusion that there is
a population which appropriately might be treated in a residential context.
Dr. Allan Seid introduced Willa Dawson, Executive Director of Combined
Addicts and Professional Services, who was asking Council to consider a
proposal for operating a residential treatment center in Palo Alto.
Mrs. Dawson introduced those persons involved in CAPS stating that she
was impressed with their commitment to doing something about the drug abuse
problem, the time and energy they put into it, the progress they had made
in upgrading their own ukills, and tine fact that they all had a following
of persons who gave credit to there for their recovery. She reported that
the philosophy of the group wasp to provide some kind of program to strengthen
individuals who have experienced the ravages of drug abuse.
Councilman Beahrs raised the point that there were three residential treatment
centers in San Jose and one: in Gilroy, and he asked how those centers were
financed.
Mrs. Dawson said she was not sure of all of the sources of funding, but
part of it came from welfare assistance to the clients; another portion
comes from the SB 714 fnnds,,and another portion comes from the National
Institute for Mental Health.
Councilman Beahrs asked'if some of these sources might be available to
Palo Alto. Mrs. Dawson noted that the program in Gilroy had a continual
battle with funding because it came from such a broad base,
Councilman Sher asked Mrs. Dawson if her staff had worked together as a
team at some other residential treatment center. She replied that some
of them had worked together in various drug abuse programs, and they had
begun to work together in a planning consultant capacity because there
was a need for paraprofessionals to put forth ideas in a meaningful way.
Mrs. Dawson felt their unique feature of their proposal was the community
based concept, and the idea of interacting extensively with community programs.
Essentially, they would want to get away from the idea of a cloyed environment,
and would want clients to feel they cnu1d get out into their own community
and feel comfortable.
Councilman Sher noted that Dr. Seid had indicated that the population of
the treatment center would be coming from parole and probation situations,
and there would also be some diverted from the criminal .justice system.
He asked if that would be the primary source of clients for the program,
and would the community prevention part of the city's program also be referring
people.
I'rs. Dawson replied affirmatively to the second part of the question, and
she said they would hope to gat referrals from a number of sources. The
probation and parole agents have indicated a need for a residential treatment
center in this area. As far as divertees are concerned, there has been
a trend in recent years to rely on community based resources.
Councilman Sher noted that it had been heard earlier in the evening that
most of the divertees at The Collective had come from south county, and
he wondered if that would be the case in this situation also. He was particu-
larly interested in what Mrs. Dawson's prediction would be as to the number
of Palo Alto residents the proposed center would service, and whether she
felt there would be a priority for Palo Alto residents.
Mrs. Dawson said that a parole agent had already approached them and said
they would need at least three beds for Palo Alto residents if the center
were established, and probation officers have made similar comments.
Councilman Sher asked how many beds there would be. Mrs. Dawson replied
there would be fifteen.
Councilman: Sher asked Mrs. Dawson if she would be comfortable with a policy
that gave priority to Palo Alto residents. Mrs. Dawson responded affirmatively.
Vice Mayor Pearaon asked if she understood iirs. Dawson to say there is
a need for beds in the county, and this particular center would be predominately
for Palo Alto residents, and that the city does have those kinds of people
who need our assistance. Mrs. Dawson reeporded affirmatively.
Vice Mayor Pearson asked if CAPS would be a nonprofit organization with
a board such as PACDAB. Mrs. Dawson replied affirmatively.
526
6/10/74
Vice Mayor Pearson asked if CAPS would be absolutely willing to work with
PACDAB. Mrs. Dawson replied affirmatively.
Councilman Henderson noted that the presented budget did not include rent,_
and when he added that in he came up c,Lth a figure roughly thirty to thirty-
five percent higher than had been budgeted for Unity House for one year.
He also noted the listing of twelve employees, six of whom would be working
directly with clients and six others who might be described as overhead.
He asked if Mrs. Dawson was committed to all twelve employees or if she
were in a position to work with Council or the Finance Committee to effect
savings.
Mrs. Dawson replied that they had put together what they felt was a quality
program, and that it was important to have adequate staffing, Programs -
that are understaffed tend to warehouse clients, and their intention was
to develop a proposal under which the success rate might go up. She felt
it was critical to have coutsellors available at all times.
Councilman Henderson asked specifically about the need for a bookkeeper.
Mrs. Dawson said that was written in because they felt they wanted to maintain
themselves as a creditable program in the handling of finances. If that
service were available in some other way, then that item could be stricken
from the budget.
Councilman Per4ald asked staff if they had an opportunity to do any sort
of comparing of the proposed CAPS budget with Unity House over a period
of time in consideration of nun hers of residents in the house.
Mr. Sipel :paid the staff had not as yet been able to do that. Staff had
net with representatives of CAPS on one occasion, but the proposal had
just been received so there had been no opportunity to do any comparing.
Mr. Garner reporLed that the other residential treatment centers received
funds from the state and federal governments, and the only county funds
were general assistance ones which were available to all clients who qualify.
Councilman Beahrs asked if this meant the individual was subsidized rather
than the entire operation. Mr. Garner replied that in terms of county
funds, that was a correct statement.
Councilman Beahrs asked how much the individuals received. Mr, Garner
said the county would pay up to $215 per client per month.
Councilman Beahrs asked if such funds would be guaranteed to Palo Alto
if the city serviced people in those categories. Mr. Garner explained
that in terms of the guarantee it is to the client if he qualifies to the
criteria of the Welfare Department. He said the eligibility has to be
established by the Welfare Department, and the referral is really a client
going into a house, and the house will find out if that client is qualified
for welfare payments.
Councils Beahrs asked if Mr. Garner had any impression as to the percentage
of the budget that might be covered by such a source. Mr. Garner estimated
that .about half of the cost would be covered- This was hard to estimate
h.:asver, becauae a case load during one part of the year could be very
different from another part of the year.
Councilman Beahrs aaked where the other half of the funds came from. Mr.
Garner said some houses had no other funds and the result was no treatment
was offered, but there was simply a board and care facility, The others
who do get funds get them from the state and federal government.
5 2 7
6/14/74
Councilman Beahrs asked if Palo Alto could have any hopes of qualifying
for such funds. Mr. Garner said his opinion was negative, but that Palo
Alto could apply. He felt there were other areas in the county with a
higher need and therefore, they would receive a higher priority.
Councilman Sher asked if the clients turned the full amount of the money
they qualified for over to the residential treatment center. Mr. Garner
said the county was about to develop a voucher system and under that a
payment would be made to a house on behalf of a specific client.
Mr. Harold Lesser, 440 Ramona Street, spoke strongly in favor of refunding
The Collective.
Mr. Simon Hassitt, 435 Tennyson, read t•. story which he had written, which
summed up the problems of drugs in today's society.
Julia C. Fuller, 2432 South Court, Chairman of the Santa Clara County Drug
Abuse Coordination Commission, said the Commission had been aware of the
Palo Alto drug problem since it began. The ideal situation would be for
each community to take care of its own drug problems insofar as possible.
Mrs. Fuller stated that it was necessary to have a prevention program as
well as a residential treatment cnter. Specifically, the Commission supports
The Collective as a prevention program. She attested to the capability
of the staff of CAPS.
Ron luyet expressed frustration about the departure from the agenda since
he and others on the PACDAB board had questions they wished to ask of the
evaluation team, and all of the nerbers of that team would not be able
to be present at the next meeting.
Mayor Comstock noted that Council would meet again Tuesday, June 11, a
7:30 p.m. to continue this discussion.
Ad9ournm t
The special meeting of June 10 adjourned at 11:50 p.m.
ATTEST: APPROVE:
City Clerk Mayer
528
6/10/74