Skip to main content

Full text of "Meeting Minutes"

See other formats

Situted Community Corporation 
Executive Committee Meeting 
124 Branford Place 

Newark, New Jersey 
December 1, 1956 

Present: Dean C. Willard Heckel, president, presiding; Rabbi Jonathan 
J. Prinz; Kenneth A. Gibson; Mrs. Ceil Arons; Willie Wright; 
Timothy Still; Rev. B.F. Johnson; Miss Hilda Hildago; Mrs. 
Estelle Pierce; Edward A. Kirk; Aldo Giacchino; Fr. Thomas 
Petrillo; Sidney Reitman, legal counsel 

Staff; Donald M. Wendell; James H. Blair; Mrs. Beatrice V. 
Easley; Norman Steinlauf; Miss Andree V. MeKeithan 

Guests; Oliver Lofton; Dickinson R. Debevoise; Mrs. Annamay 
Sheppard; David Shepherd; Dr, Helen Strauss; Walter 
Dawkins; Gary Skoloff 

NEWARK LEGAL Dean Heckel brought to the attention of the Exeentive Committee 
SERVICES PROJECT an allegation of gross neglect on the part of staff toward the 

Newark Legal Services Project. At the request of Nr. Debevoise, 
NLSP President, this item was docketed for discussion today. 

Before going into the fics of the Mr. Di 
thet NLSP is in support of the entire budgetary program and coneept 

of the UCC. He spoke of the tremendous rapport developed between NLSP and the Area 
Boards including the free criticism between them and the discussion of any problems which 
develop. The basic problem, he feels, is with the UCC headquarters structure. He 
explained that as NLSP envisions it, the UCC staff's function is to serve and assist the 
Area Boards and the delegate agencies rather than blocking the passage between them and 
the UCC Board of Trustees. 

Wr. Debevoise said that working through the impenetrable 
mechanics of the UCC has given NLSP concern for such specific problem areas as: 

(1) lack of -- including 

and unacknowledged telephone calls; 

(2) failure to notify the NLSP of meetings which directly involve 
the project; 

(3) unnecessary red tape, i.e., duplicating over 100 copies of 
the project's proposal, attendance at committee meetings 
where not enough members are present to act and where NLSP 
representatives are asked to answer the same questions by 
two separate committees. 

Wr. Debevoise also told the committee that there probably wovid 

have been no objection from NLSP or its Board regarding the transferral of $50,000 of their 
unexpended funds but to not be informed of this action, particularly in light of the absolute 


United Community Corporation 
Executive Committee Meeting 
December 1, 1966 

confusion as to how much money will be left over and to not have a chance to determine 
What effect this will have on their budget, constituted a threat to the integrity of the whole 
NLSP project. 

Concerning the request for reallocation of funds to carry NLSP 
from January 1 to May l, 1967, Nr. Debevoi d that the initial dence 
dated from July 19, 1966 and that copies of that application had been forwarded to the NISP 
representative at Regional OEO. He said that as far as could be ascertained, UCC had 
taken no action to process that application, but since his meeting with Dean Heckel, he 
had been informed that the application has been submitted to Regional OEO. On behalf of 
NLSP, Nr. Debevoise asked: 

7 (1) that this committee instruct the staff of UCC thet if the 

reallocation request is not in New York that it be hand- 
ucitiiicearttetil¢herei tomarrowiatid.thét its progress be checked on a 
RETTENE" AE. SF. j dd Putk 
ai yhelt ip obtimedzdii te Comon 

(2) that if approval is not received by December 15, the staff 
be instructed to supply NLSP with instructions as to how the 
project will continue; 

(3) that the transferral of $50,900 of NLSP funds be reviewed to 
determine what implication this reallocation will have on the 
project; and 

(4) that there be a review of Task Force procedures. 

wow yidediig oyal 3 

A toa apard cbant bobra anu 

Dean Heckel informed the NLSP representatives that the 
corporation had, in the past, authorized reallocation of funds from one agency to another, 
3s can be done under the CAP Guide, without notifying the agency from whose accruals 
the monies were being taken. He extended an apology on behalf of the corporation for such 
past actions and stated that when, in the future, funds are to be reallocated from one 
component to another, we will insure. that the agency receives proper notification of such 

Wr. R.itman advised that no action could be taken by the 
Executive Committee in revising action already taken by the Board on the $50,900 reallocation 
but that a Board member could request reconsideration of the Board's decision to seek 
Regional OEO's approval to reallocate. 

Rabbi Prinz then suggested that perhaps Mr. Noore and his 

could address ves to this problem. Although he conceded the lack of 
adequate communication, he suggested that the shortage of executive staff might possibly 
explain this problem since most of them are carrying the responsibility of two or three slots 
instead of one. 

Dean Heckel advised the NLSP representatives thet at their 
current rate of expenditure, it is possible for the project to remain operative until June and 
even beyond. The committee instructed that staff explain the implications of the $50,000 
reallocation in direct correspondence to the project director. In accordance with UCC pro- 
ccdurcs, the request for reallocation will be docketed on the agenda of the next regular 
Board meeting. 

United Community Corporation 
Executive Committee M ecting 

December 1, 1966 -3 

MOTION Rabbi Prinz moved that the committee authorize staff to urgently 

ursue approval of the reallocation of NLSP accrued funds in the 
Regionél office of OEO on an informal basis subject to the final approval by our Board. 
Motion seconded. 

Wr. Reitman stated that this motion was unnecessary because 
staff can be directed to follow through with the Regional office but that the request for 
reallocation should be submitted to the Board and if Regional OEO approves, the Board's 
approval can be nunc pro temp. 

Wr. Debevoise stressed again the urgency of the UCC staff's 
pursuit of OEO approval and indicated that this action warranted any harrassment, ony 
humber of telephone calls, any amount of correspondence, etc., which might be required 
to reach a successful end, However, Nr. Giachinno suggested thet the staff not seek OEO 
approval until the Board acts because this might be interpreted as è usurping of the functions 
ot the Board. In consequence, the committee agreed that we should press for signing of 
the approval for a date after December 15 but try to eliminate the encumbrance of àll red 
tape except signature prior to that date. 

MOTION AMENDED It was moved, seconded, and passed that the motion be amended 
to read that this committee authorize staff to urgently pursue 

approval of the reallocation of NLSP accrued funds, other than the actual signing of the 

official document by the Regional Office of OEO subject to the final approval of our Board 

at its December 15th meeting. 

MOTION It was moved that the Executive Committee recommend to the 

Board of Trustees that it recommend to OEO that permission be 
granted to NLSP to use its own accruals for the extension of its program. Motion seconded 
and adopted. 

Several members of the committee commended the work of the 
NLSP, its excellent service, and its promotion of the maximum feasible participation concent 
in its identification with the people in the area board communities. 
When the representatives of NLSP were dismissed, Nr. Lofton 
and Wr. Reitman also departed to continue the discussion on the legality of UCC s obtain- 
ing OEO 2pproval prior to transferring 10% of funds. 

REPORT OF PRESIDENT Dean Heckel read from correspondence regarding Area Board 

representation on the Essex County Welfare Board. He advised 
the committee that this item will be docketed on the agenda of the next regular Board 
meeting as no discussion was necessary. 

REPORT OF COMMITTEE Mr. Gibson reported that because of the time element, the affair 

TO PLAN AFFAIR FOR for Mr. Tyson had again been postponed, He suggested, however 

NR. TYSON the possibility of having an anniversary celobration of the first 
actual funding of the corporation in conjunction with the affair 
honoring Nr. Tyson. 

United Community Corporation 
Executive Comittee N ceting 
December 1, 1965 

MOTION It was moved that Mr. Gibson set in motion the necessary 
processes for our first annual celebration of our initial funding 
of this corporation at which we will honor Cyril Tyson, former executive director. Motion 
seconded and passed, 
Mr. Gibson asked that anyone who has suggestions for the 
celebration or who wishes to serve on his committee please contact him. 

PROGRAMMATIC. Dean Heckel introduced David Shepherd, consultant to community 
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR action on the state level from Scientific Resources, Inc. (SRI). 
AREA BOARDS, Mr. Shepherd was invited to speak to the committee because he 

has ideas on devising ways in which area boards might be 
productive on low cost budgets. Dean Heckel reminded the committee that one of the most 
important activities of this corporation is to help our Area Boards move forward fruitfully 
within our guidelines. We will be faced with an cven greater chullenge in the coming year 
because of the enticipated cutback in funds so that we must offer even more programmatic 
assistance to the Area Boards. 

Mr. Shepherd indicated that he is interested in developing a 
program whereby the communities can assess their own resources through surveys and decide 
what they would like to experience. He feels that over a period of time and through proper 
manegement, the people will be able to actually change the statistics of the community, i.e., 
real estate value, number of children in the schools, etc. 

Mr. Shepherd also explained his theories on the interpersonal 
relations of poverty, He noted that the primary function of the SRI consultant was to raise 
the level of the trainee to the point where he himself could become the trainer; the 
consultant then would move out of the community before those trained could become deponden. 
upon him. H was confident that SRI could find or even create the necessary materials to 
train the people in how to deal with the professional, how to cope with city planners, and 
in other meaningful training programs. 

The committee was again made aware of the existence of 
consultant funds and instructed Mr. Wright to convene the Area Board presidents in order 
that they themsclves might hear and discuss the recommendations of Mr. Shepherd and 
Dr. Strauss, his assistant. 

BLAZER Wr. D.wkins, Bl-z-r project director, informed the con matt. 

that an impasse had been reached in obtaining the corporation's 
approval of the Blazer request for refunding, The project had been evaluated and approved 
by the central staff znd the Program Committee but could not be brought before the Board of 
‘Trustees because the Employment Tesk Force had not acted upon it. He explained further 
that becuse the proposal had been presented to the Task Force twice without recommendations 
to move it forward, Blazer was at a loss as to what action should now be taken on their part. 

MOTION It was moved and seconded that the Blazer proposal be docketed 
for action at the next regular Board niceting. Motion passed. 

United Community Corporation 
Executive Committee Meeting 
December 1, 1959 -5 

the committee instructed staff and the Program Committee to 
insure that their evaluations are forwarded to the Board members prior to that time. 

AGENDA OF BOARD The Program Committee was instructed to establish dollar 
MEETING OF priorities for presentation at the next regular Board meeting. 

REPORT OF ACTING Mr. Wendell reported that legal suit hod been initiated against 

EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR the corporation, the PAL, the City of Newark, and the 
Neighborhood Youth Corps for payment of the insurance premium 

Suit Against UCC for the 1965 Summer Block Recreation Program. He reminded 

the committce that there was initially no provision in the 
Summer Block project budget for this insurance and that no payment could be made without 
approval from OEO. No decision as yet has come from the Regional Office. 

Insurance Coverage Nr, Wendell reminded the committee that for some time now we 
have been trying desperately to get insurance coverage against 
burglary, etc, He read to the committee correspondence from a 
broker in which he was advised that insurance ‘Gould be obtained from Lloyds of London and 
added that staff would pursue further information regarding rates, etc. 

MOTION It was moved that we recruit people from the Aroa Boards to patrol 
UGG central headquarters instead of hiring 3 guard service and 

that monies be used from unfilled existing SSi Lines to pay them. Notion seconded and 

it was suggested by counsel that an inquiry De made to determine 
whether or not a burglar alarm system could Pe installed in central and to see if the landlord 
will absorb the costs. 

After considerable discussion it was agreed that implementation 
of this motion be held up until we get more information on the burglar alarm system- 

Job Corps It was moved and seconded that the corporation become involved 
in the screening of Job Corps candidates. Notion passed. 

OEO-CAP Fiscal This item docketed for the next meeting of this committee. 


Respectfully submitted, 

Andree V. Mckeithan