January 13, 2010
Mental Health Board
Tuesday, January 13, 2010
City Hall, Room 278
San Francisco, CA
BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT: James L. McGhee, Chair; James Shaye Keys, Secretary; Officer Kelly Dunn; M. Lara Siazon Arguelles; Mary Ann Jones, PhD; Tom Purvis; Errol Wishom; Iviana Williams; Lisa Williams and Virginia Wright.
BOARD MEMBERS ON LEAVE: Susan McIntyre.
BOARD MEMBERS ABSENT: Njoroge Tho-Biaz, M.A.
OTHERS PRESENT: Helynna Brooke (MHB Executive Director); Loy M. Proffitt (MHB Administrator); Sarah Accomazzo (MHB Special Projects Manager); Ruth Armstrong, Psychiatric Nurse Practitioner, San Francisco General Hospital; Maxine Gilkerson, African American Community Health Equity Council (AACHEC); Mukullo Godwin, AACHEC; Heather Hall, AACHEC; LaVaughn Kellum King, NAMI; Noah King; Dafina Kuficha, AACHEC; Perry L. Lang, Director of Wellness and Health Advocacy, AACHEC; Daniel Lee; Katherine Moore, AACHEC; Joileen Richards, AACHEC; Thomas Simpson; Pamela Washington, AACHEC; Michael Wise, Mental Health Service Act (MHSA).
CALL TO ORDER
The meeting was called to order at 6:36 PM.
Ms. Brooke called the roll.
ITEM 1.0 DIRECTORS REPORT
1.1 Discussion regarding Community Behavioral Health Services Department Report, a report on the activities and operations of Community Behavioral Health Services, including budget, planning, policy, and programs and services.
Mr. McGhee: “Dr. Robert Cabaj, Director of Community Behavioral Health Services (CBHS) will give the Director’s report.”
Dr. Cabaj: “I missed the Mental Health Board’s annual retreat which was held in December 2009 because I was in Washington DC for a healthcare reform conference.
The City-wide deficit for 2010 – 2011 is $500 millions, and a $102 million shortfall in the General Fund for the Department of Public Health (DPH). We are hoping to off set any further cuts with about $80 millions in new revenue. Hospital tax, additional Medi-Cal match and other behavioral health services should generate the new revenue. We will have a clearer picture by April 2010.
California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger would like to raid the Mental Health Service Act (MHSA) coffer to make up the short fall in the State’s General Fund. Although the 2009 voter initiative defeated his MHSA raid, another voter initiative may be on the June 2010 ballot. I am strongly against the governor’s action as are all of the California mental health directors.
The integration of primary care and behavioral health care is the new health model which is in alignment with the Healthy San Francisco initiative which is a number one priority. Specialty care in mental health and substance abuse are important, and we have prepared for a possibility of no new money. Along with some other consultants, Deputy Director of Health Barbara Garcia, Dr. Michael Drennan and I are planning to visit all City-wide clinics. We have visited about half of them so far.
In regard to the MHSA, May 2010 is the fifth anniversary of the Proposition 63 passage. Celebrating in Sacramento is tentatively being considered. The Information Technology component of MHSA is posted for the period of January 8, 2010 to February 7, 2010. This initiative was very client driven!
The final pot of money for MHSA is the Innovation Plan, which is almost complete. February 17, 2010 is the next MHSA Advisory committee meeting.
There are lots of upcoming trainings listed in the Director’s Report.”
MONTHLY DIRECTOR’S REPORT
January 13, 2010
The Department of Public Health will be facing a possible reduction in the General Fund for Fiscal Year 20010-2011 of $102 Million--at the request of the Mayor to help with the projected City-wide deficit of close to $500 Million. The combination of lower property tax revenue, lower payroll tax revenue, and lower hotel and restaurant revenues contribute to the budget gap facing the City. In addition, the State budget problems will undoubtedly pass along further deficits to the City.
As this point, DPH believes it can generate new revenue--up to $80 Million--from a new hospital tax, additional Medi-Cal match, and other sources. If this projection is true, then the Department would not need to offer any immediate cuts. However, the financial picture should be clearer within the next two months--and at that time, CBHS may need to offer cuts that could be a combination of community based organizations via the Mega-RFP and civil service restructuring and cuts.
There have already been mid-years cuts that will take effect soon. The biggest impact to CBHS is the closure of two substance abuse residential programs--still to be determined. There were other reductions based on lower contract usage and some savings from the Mental Health Services Act funds. All together, DPH had over $7 Million in mid-year cuts as discussed at the Health Commission in December, 2009.
The State budget is still unclear but the Governor has proposed yet again redirecting some MHSA funds to replace State General Fund. Since this action would violate the law, it does require a voter initiative similar to the one last year that lost. Further analysis of the possible impact of the State budget will be done and available sometime within the month.
THE FIVE YEAR ANNIVERSARY OF PROPOSITION 63 PASSAGE SET FOR MAY 2010
To mark the five year anniversary of the passage of Proposition 63, which later became the Mental Health Services Act, counties throughout the State have been invited to participate in an event celebrating positive outcomes, personal accomplishments, and successful collaborations that have been achieved thanks to the implementation of programs and services credited to the MHSA. The celebration is tentatively scheduled to be held in Sacramento in May, 2010. Planning for San Francisco’s contribution to this event has begun with monthly meetings coordinated by Epidemiologist/Evaluator Diane Prentiss. Our participation will feature various projects and, possibly, personal testimonies demonstrating positive outcomes as a result of MHSA funding. As plans and details are finalized, we will keep you informed.
IT PROJECT PROPOSALS SET FOR STAKEHOLDERS REVIEW AND COMMENTS
Community Behavioral Health Services is inviting all stakeholders to review and comment on the MHSA Information Technology Component and Technological Needs Project Proposals for a period of 30 days, from January 8, 2010 to February 7, 2010. The Proposals will be available in Spanish, Russian, Vietnamese, and Chinese upon request. These language versions may be requested in hard copies, large print format, or CD-ROM format by calling (415) 252-3084. Please note: Translated documents will be available within two weeks of request. Please e-mail your comments to: email@example.com or send to: Community Behavioral Health Services, Mental Health Services Act – IT Proposal, 1380 Howard Street, 3rd Floor, San Francisco, CA 94103. Attention: Nan Dame.
MHSA ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETINGS:
The Mental Health Services Act Advisory Committee meets bi-monthly from 3-5 pm, alternating between advisory meetings and community forums. The next scheduled meetings are as follows:
Wednesday, February 17, 2010 Wednesday, April 14, 2010
Community Forum Advisory Meeting
TBD 1380 Howard Street
San Francisco, CA 94103
Friday, January 15, 2010
Methamphetamine Treatment Strategies in Integrated Mental Health and Primary Care Services, with Dr. Rick Rawson
9:00am - 4:30pm, Ft. Mason Golden Gate Room
The day-long session will provide an update of current knowledge about methamphetamine and how it affects the brain and body.
Psychiatric co-morbidity with methamphetamine use is common and current research on the nature and impact of co-occurring disorders will be reviewed. Treatments that have evidence of efficacy will be reviewed and a new DVD clearly articulating the goals and methods of treatment will be presented. Treatment strategies that can enhance treatment engagement and retention will be discussed with a specific emphasis on techniques useful in the treatment of meth-using individuals who have co-occurring psychiatric illness.
Tuesday, January 19, 2010
SDMC Mental Health Services HIPAA Phase 2 Training
9am - 12:30pm & 1pm - 4:30pm (sessions are identical)
St. Mary's Cathedral Conference Center
This training will be targeted to Adult/Older Adult and Children’s Mental Health Providers. Provider Staff attend one training session. There are two sessions available on this day. Each session will focus on issues related to HIPAA Phase 2 changes being implemented by the CA Dept of Health Care Services and Dept of Mental Health. Training will allow sufficient time for questions and answers by CBHS Quality Management, DPH Fiscal – Billing, and IT - BIS Staff. This training will focus on new Mental Health Services billing and documentation requirements, Short-Doyle MediCal and INSYST billing information system changes.
Thursday, January 21, 2010
Alcohol & Drug Programs – SDMC HIPAA Phase 2 Training
9am - 12:30pm & 1pm - 4:30pm (sessions are identical)
St. Mary's Cathedral Conference Center
This training is targeted to Substance Abuse Treatment Providers. Provider Staff attend one training session. There are two sessions available on this day. Each session will focus on issues related to Phase 2 HIPAA changes being implemented by the CA Dept of Health Care Services and by ADP. Training will allow sufficient time for questions and answers by CBHS Quality Management, DPH Fiscal - Billing, and IT-BIS Staff. This training will focus on new AOD billing and documentation requirements, Drug Medi-Cal and INSYST billing information system changes.
Friday, January 22, 2010
The Therapeutic Value of Work, with Dr. Marty Nemko
9:00am - 4:30pm Ft. Mason Golden Gate Room
This conference will serve as a tool for clinicians to help successfully facilitate the integration of employment, training and education into the lives of consumers they serve. It is undeniable that working and earning money sometimes bring new challenges and obstacles for consumers to overcome. However, in this conference we will examine ways in which vocational activity can change a consumer's perception of daily life, from one focused largely around the role of being a social services recipient to one encompassing greater purpose and enhanced meaning. We will look at the rewards that working can bring, including increases in self-esteem, pride in accomplishment and reintegration into the community, all of which contribute to the overall process of recovery.
We will hear directly from consumers who are employed, in training or in school about the struggles and rewards they have each experienced, and examine how clinicians can support them around specific situations which present challenges. We will look at a landmark study showing that consumers’ utilization rate of acute inpatient psychiatric services correspondingly decreased as work activity increased. We will educate attendees about existing vocational services practice models. And lastly we will demonstrate ways in which clinicians can assist their clients with referral to vocational services as part of an overall shift in CBHS service philosophy to the model of wellness and recovery.
For more information regarding these trainings, please contact Norman Aleman, CBHS
Training Coordinator at 415-255-3553 or email firstname.lastname@example.org
Past issues of the CBHS Monthly Director’s Report are available at: http://www.sfdph.org/dph/comupg/oservices/mentalHlth/CBHS/CBHSdirRpts.asp
To receive this Monthly Report via e-mail, please e-mail email@example.com
1.2 Public Comment
Ms. Armstrong: She is a Psychiatric Nurse Practitioner at San Francisco General Hospital who is also involved in the Trauma Recovery Center (TRC). She mentioned that TRC, which is a safe environment for people who have been traumatized, is being considered by the City for closure on March 1, 2010, and she wanted the Board to help in preserving the program.
Dr. Cabaj: “Here is the history behind program recovery like TRC. TRC was part of the mid-year-cuts agreement proposed by Mayor Newsom’s budget in June 2009. The Board of Supervisors, however, restored some items back in July and August 2009.
In spite of being slated for the cut two years ago in the State funding, TRC received extended funding through the City’s General Fund. California Senator Mark Leno has strongly advocated for State funding for trauma recovery programs. He, however, was unsuccessful. The Mayor’s budget cuts will go before the Board of Supervisors again.”
Mr. Lang: As a Director of Wellness and Health Advocacy and a member of AACHEC, he believes that mental health, physical health and environmental health are tightly integrated. He asked the Board to consider the 4.2c resolution in support of social capital to deal with traumatic stress in communities of African descent. He said social capital speaks to correctedness in the community to marshal what they need to deal with issues. Furthermore, he suggests mental health proposals should include elements of social capital.
Ms. Hall: Working as a psychiatrist at San Francisco General Hospital, she mentioned that low social capital and social cohesion have an inverse relationship to mental health. She offered a couple of examples: that inner city impoverished blacks have increased levels of mental illness and that low social capital neighborhoods have higher rates of mental illness. Social capital germinates from communities that want to spread from the bottom up.
Dr. Cabaj: “We a have a whole department that focuses on health disparity.”
Item 2.0 BEHAVIORAL HEALTH COURT, JENNIFER JOHNSON, ESQ., PUBLIC DEFENDER
2.1 Presentation: Behavioral Health Court, Jennifer Johnson, Esq., Public Defender
Mr. McGhee: “I would like to introduce Jennifer Johnson, a public defender with the San Francisco Public Defender’s office. Ms. Johnson has been working with the Behavioral Health Court since it began in San Francisco. She is known for her total commitment to, and passion for helping people with mental illness who come into contact with the criminal justice system, get help instead of jail time.”
Ms. Johnson: “First I like to mention how proud I am to see Mr. Errol Wishom sitting on the Board because he was one of my clients with felony charges who had a first hand experience in Behavior Health Court (BHC) of San Francisco. My focus is going to be on three sections: the genesis of the Behavior Health Court, the current status of BHC and the future of where the system will be going.
Being part of the public defender unit, I have seen many offenders with mental illness in county jail primarily due to behaviors that resulted from an active psychosis. Having a mental illness is not a crime per se. But our social system fails to help these people by allowing the criminal justice system to serve as the de facto system for people with mental illnesses and co-occurring substance disorders.
The genesis of the BHC of San Francisco started in 2003. At that time in San Francisco, public defenders, district attorneys, judges and legal experts were questioning the treatment of offenders with mental illness and were trying to answer questions such as ‘How can these people be connected to mental health and substance abuse services?’ and ‘Can BHC reduce criminal recidivism and violence?’ BHC has become a jail diversion program that focuses on recovery-oriented mental health and substance abuse services!
Despite little funding, there was lots of passion from people like Officer Kelly Dunn who is on the Mental Health Board! Starting out with 10-20 offenders with mental illness as BHC clients, they looked at the mental health system to see how people could be referred. The BHC is a conduit with dual objectives: helping offenders with mental illness get into therapeutic services while respecting public safety.
‘Has the BHC reduced criminal recidivism and violence in San Francisco?’ The outcomes of the first two years from January 14, 2003 to November 19, 2004 were evaluated by a University of California San Francisco professor who published the research in the American Journal of Psychiatry in September 2007. The article is called Effectiveness of a Mental Health Court in Reducing Criminal Recidivism and Violence. The professor sampled 175 clients with mental illness who would have similar profiles as people with mental illness in county jail where most were feloniously charged with assaults. Because felons were allowed to participate in the BHC, the San Francisco study was very unusual. The study showed a 40% reduction in re-arrests and a remarkable success of 56% reduction in violence for those re-arrested. The effectiveness of BHC corroborates with the MacArthur Violence Risk Assessment Study which is a larger on-going study from the MacArthur Foundation.
The study is completed yet, but so far, BHC shows statistical significance in improved public safety. Of those offenders with mental illness who were re-arrested, the time period was much longer between arrests. The San Francisco BHC is a low sanctioning court that does not use jail as a threat on non-medication adherent clients. Clients are aware of the possibility of jail time and we are aware that strict medication schedules are not always possible due to individual client circumstances. Thus, low sanctioning BHC courts like ours tend to perform better in terms of reducing recidivism and violence and increasing public safety.
From San Francisco client’s perspective, many are grateful that we care about them and are overwhelmingly satisfied by the program, even though they sometimes stay in custody longer. Waiting for resources and going through programs sometimes take longer than if clients first went into jail.
‘Where are we on the national scale?’ I am part of The National Leadership Forum on Behavioral Health/Criminal Justice Services, and we put out our first paper in September 2009 which is called A Call to Action. Our solution is appropriate for SF but not necessarily for rural communities. We made four recommendations at the Federal, State, municipalities and localities.
Phase 1 includes Forensic Intensive Case Management (FICM), Supportive Housing, Peer Support and Accessible and Appropriate Medication. These four things are really tourniquets. FICM acts like a broker because clients can be helped by case managers who are savvy with the criminal system.
Recommendations in Phase 2, which I personally believe are more important then the tourniquets in Phase 1, include Integrated Dual Diagnosis Treatment, Supported Employment, Assertive Community Treatment (ACT)/Forensic Assertive Community Treatment (FACT), and Cognitive Behavioral Interventions Targeted to Risk Factors.
We use a Harm Reduction Model. We find that 70% of the clients in BHC want to work, and about 60% are capable of working. I think it would be great if these eight philosophies were part of the entire mental health system.
‘Where are we in the future?’ I hope we are moving toward a better future for people with mental illness as they face dual stigmas – being marginalized and discriminated against. We are going forward to help them get their lives back together and to have a better life. Supported employment includes setting a higher bar to encourage people to develop higher job skills.
Supported employment was part of Mayor Gavin Newsom’s San Francisco Streets and Neighborhood program addressing the problem of people on the streets. The San Francisco Public Defender’s Office is the first in the country to receive a grant for an Employment Specialist. Jobs are key to self esteem, purpose and recovery.
Cognitive Behavior Therapy (CBT) and Dialectic Behavior Therapy (DBT) are targeted to criminal risk factors. Early results from jails show much promise.
In summary, BHC would like to have more community involvement and work with different cultures.”
Public member: The member asked if participation in mental health programs through BHC is coercive or voluntary.
Ms. Johnson: “Yes, being handcuffed is coercive! Upon entering the criminal justice system, people with mental illness have a choice. Coerciveness is the impetus to actively participate in mental health services voluntarily or risk going to jail. Our low sanctioning court helps mentally ill people succeed in restoring dignity to people’s lives and from being recycled back into the criminal system. BHC results in more public safety and saves incarceration costs. The program works, and it is the right things to do.”
Mr. Purvis: “How many people are eligible for BHC and are using services?”
Ms. Johnson: “We are very selective. We do not take sex offenders or people who have committed a homicide. We are a small program, which may not get to the most critical people, and can only afford to take diagnostically qualified clients who have been through the criminal system several times. High functioning clients often benefit lots more from BHC.”
Dr. Jones: “I applaud you for your enthusiasm and hard work. Is there any integration down the road with other programs, especially for the African Americans who experienced trauma early in life, according to Dr. Nadine Burke’s research, and who would benefit from the social capital programs?”
Ms. Johnson: “We want to work with any programs that want to work with us. We would love to expand to interacting more with other cultures to make treatment more specific to different populations.”
Ms. Hall: She is a psychiatrist at SF General Hospital who often sees patients being misdiagnosed for schizophrenia when they are traumatized by layers of stress disorders. She mentioned that these people often are given inappropriate poly-medications.
Ms. Johnson: “I think we need to work more on PTSD especially for veterans who experienced traumas in combat situations because PTSD can be misdiagnosed for schizophrenia.”
Ms. Hall: She stated that mental illness is underestimated and the trauma is undertreated.
Ms. Johnson: “I had ex-clients who had had layers of traumas as toddlers.”
Mr. Keys: “Where is the BHC held?”
Ms. Johnson: “At 850 Bryant, Department 15. Tuesday at 2:30 PM is custody cases, and Thursday at 2:00 PM is Out-of Custody cases.”
Mr. Wishom: “Thank you for helping me get back my dignity. How is prospecting for jobs in the current budget crisis?”
Ms. Johnson: “The job market is very tough for our clients. But we have volunteer programs and some stipend programs. This is a stepping stone to participating in the main job market.”
Mr. Keys: “Volunteer work is important because it might help people get into a work regiment.”
Ms. Johnson: “Volunteering helps as a resume builder.”
Item 2.2 Public Comment
Ms. Moore: She is a member of the African American Community Health Equity Council (AACHEC). She inquired about behavior health court for adolescents?
Ms. Johnson: “We do have the juvenile system but not behavioral health court for them. Sometimes psychosis has not come up yet, but the focus on transitional age youth is very important. I’m only dealing with the adults.”
Mr. Simpson: He wondered about the break down by ethnic groups in BHC.
Ms. Johnson: “The demographics is mostly African Americans and a few Latin Americans. There are more Asian Americans in BHC then in the criminal justice system.”
Mr. Simpson: He asked about the case load.
Ms. Johnson: “We have about 120 clients but there have been times as high as 150 clients. I wish to help more clients with mental illness. Every year in October, 80% of the clients graduate out of BHC.”
Mr. Lang: He inquired which programs participate in BHC.
Ms. Johnson: “My clients are diagnosed as Axis I mental health disorders. My clients go to Acute Diversion Units, Progress Foundation, Baker Place and Conard House, Mission, South of Market, Citywide Case Management and Westside clinic.
Mr. McGhee: “What can the Board do?”
Ms. Johnson: “I am very appreciative that the Board has tackled difficult issues. Your support gives BHC much credibility.”
Mr. McGhee: “How may behavioral health courts are there?”
Ms. Johnson: “California has about 30 behavioral health courts out of 150 in the United States.”
Mr. McGhee: “I hope you can come to present to the California Mental Health Board (CALMHB).”
Item 3.0 MENTAL HEALTH SERVICE ACT UPDATES AND PUBLIC HEARINGS
Mr. McGhee “I want to let the board know ahead of time that time will be devoted to a Public Hearing of the MHSA IT Project Proposals at the February meeting. There is a flyer in your packet that shows how you can access the posted proposal on the internet. Staff will also mail copies to each of the board members before the meeting.”
3.2 Public comment
No public comments.
ITEM 4.0 ACTION ITEMS
4.1. Public comment
No public comments.
4.2 a PROPOSED RESOLUTION: Be it resolved that the minutes of the Mental Health Board meeting of November 10, 2009 be approved as submitted.
Resolution unanimously approved.
4.2 b PROPOSED RESOLUTION: Be it resolved that the notes of the Mental Health Board Retreat of December 5, 2009 be approved as submitted
Resolution unanimously approved.
4.2 c PROPOSED RESOLUTION: Be it Resolved that the Mental Health Board supports the work of the African American Community Health Equity Council (AACHEC) in its mission to promote and endorse policies and program guidelines aimed at increasing social capital in communities of African descent.
WHEREAS, traumatic stress disproportionately affects low-income Blacks in San Francisco.
WHEREAS, health care providers in San Francisco indicate that as many as 30% of adult Black patients and 50% of children in the Bayview/Hunters Point (BV/HP), Western Addition, Oceanside/Merced/Ingleside (OMI), Excelsior, Sunnydale and Visitacion Valley neighborhoods have experienced or witnessed a traumatic event and present symptoms of traumatic stress during visits to city clinics and San Francisco General Hospital.
WHEREAS, traumatic stress results in a significant disruption of one’s well being and quality of life and has profound long-term consequences both to the person who experiences the condition, his or her family, and the community as a whole.
WHEREAS, AAHEC engagement of a representative sample of residents in the Bayview Hunters Point, OMI, Sunnydale, and Western Addition neighborhoods in a discussion of traumatic stress and perceived health issues pointed to a lack of social capital as a contributing factor to health disparities among San Francisco’s Black population, and;
WHEREAS, social capital refers to the degree of connectedness among individuals and available resources in a community, and;
WHEREAS, research has shown that elements of social capital including trust, reciprocity, and civic membership positively impact morbidity, mortality, and lessen the impact of traumatic stress, and;
WHEREAS, social capital increases tangible and emotional support, reduces risky behaviors, and reduces the impact of psychosocial stressors that contribute to one’s mental health, and;
WHEREAS, communities rich in social capital have lower incidences of mental illness and traumatic stress, and;
WHEREAS, when communities realize their common values and share resources, the end result is longevity and greater sense of wellbeing, and THEREFORE,
BE IT RESOLVED, that the Mental Health Board supports the work of the African American Community Health Equity Council (AACHEC) in its mission to promote and endorse policies and program guidelines aimed at increasing social capital in African American communities, as a means of reducing the impact and burden of traumatic stress, and;
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that policies aimed at increasing social capital will strengthen the community from within and thus represent a holistic approach to improving the community’s health.
Resolution unanimously approved.
4.2 d PROPOSED RESOLUTION: Be it resolved that the Mental Health Board priorities for the year 2010 be approved as submitted (Attachment B)
GOAL #1: Identify resources and funding sources for Southeast Sector and Western Addition and develop collaborations between the two communities, utilizing public hearings, volunteer support and developing key resolutions, with continued focus on women and girls issues.
GOAL #2: Outreach to the community to educate about mental health issues and needs and resources, and increase awareness of the advocacy and policy development roles of the Mental Health Board, utilizing media, newspapers, blogs, attending community meetings, developing key resolutions, and planning a mental health awards reception and a PCIT ten year celebration.
GOAL #3: Investigate impact of city-wide budget cuts on vulnerable populations impacted by mental illness.
GOAL #4: Investigate mental health issues for veterans, including women veterans by researching and collaborating with current stakeholders.
Resolution unanimously approved.
ITEM 5.0 REPORTS
5.1 Report from the Executive Director of the Mental Health Board.
5.2 Report of the Chair of the Board and the Executive Committee:
Mr. McGhee: “This is the next to the last meeting that I will serve as your chair. We will be electing the new officers at our February meeting. I want to say thank you to everybody for your support.”
5.3 Report of the Chair of the Nominating Committee: Lisa Williams
Ms. Lisa Williams: “I met with the members of the Nominating Committee, which included myself, Mr. McGhee, Mr. Wishom, and Ms. Arguelles. The committee nominated Mary Ann Jones, PhD and James Shaye Keys for Chair; Lara Arguelles and Susan McIntyre for Vice Chair; and Mary Ann Jones, PhD for Secretary. Additional nominations can be taken at the February meeting. Board members are welcome to nominate themselves for a seat or another board member. The election will be held at the February Board meeting.”
5.4 Report by members of the Board on their activities on behalf of the Board.
Mr. Keys: “I penned a letter in the December 29, 2009 San Francisco Chronicle in letters to the editor section.”
Mr. Purvis: “We are continuing with joint meetings with NAMI and MHB to plan a hearing on cuts in mental health services. We are meeting again on January 14, 2010 and January 21, 2010.
5.5 New business - Suggestions for future agenda items to be referred to the Executive Committee.
Mr. Purvis: “In preparing for this year’s NAMI Walk, NAMI people would like to form the San Francisco MHB-NAMI team to attract more sponsors.”
5.6 Public comment
ITEM 6.0 PUBLIC COMMENT
No public comments
Meeting adjourned at 8:29 PM.