Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2023-08-30 ad Hoc - Reading Center for Active Living Committee Minutes� Fq Meeting Minutes c Town of Reading s 5''''�xconvoe r° Board - Committee - Commission - Council: Date: 2023-08-30 Building: Reading Town Hall Address: Purpose: Monthly meeting Attendees: Members - Present: TOWN CLERK HN OCT -4 AM 9: 01 Reading Center for Active Living Committee Time: 6:30 PM Location: Conference Room Session: Version: Final John O'Neil, Ron Assini, Nora Bucko, Michael Coltman, Mark Dockser, John Sasso, John Sasso, John Parsons Members - Not Present: Others Present: Genevieve Fiorente, Community Services Director Nancy Ziemlak, Council on Aging Board Member and Chair Marilyn Shapleigh, Council on Aging Board Member Minutes Respectfully Submitted By: Genevieve Fiorente, Community Services Director Topics of Discussion: 1. Attendance 2. Acceptance of July Meeting Minutes 3. Update on RFQ/feasibility study for new Senior Center/Community Center 4. Updates from each working group 5. Next Steps on gathering information from other towns 6. Scheduling of next meeting J. O'Neill calls the meeting to order at 6:30pm. He facilities attendance roll call. J. O'Neill entertains a motion to accept meeting minutes from July meeting. J. Parsons moved the motion. M. Dockser seconds. All are in favor of approval of meeting minutes 7-0. RFQ Update/ Feasibility Study Work Group: M. Dockser gives update on the status of the RFQ. He states that some feedback has been received from the COA an others and it is important to get it out as soon as possible. J. O'Neill asks about the timeline of November. M. Dockers says early September they are hoping to get it out then it goes through selection committee and the company will be chosen. M. Shapleigh enters the meeting at 6:35pm. Page i I J. O'Neill asks how this relates to Symonds Way. A brief discussion is held about Symonds Way. J. Sasso asks about all 3 phases of the contract being included in the RFQ. He states that in reading Phase I that it is already aligned with the work of RECALC. M. Dockser responds that J. Sasso is right and the RFQ includes the company looking at all prior work already done. M. Coltman asks about the phrasing of "high level" in the RFQ M. Dockser answers that means there is a lot of detail. M. Coltman suggests rephrasing. M. Coltman asks is there are sites we me asking specifically to look at. M. Dockser answers that Page I outlines the expectations. J. Parsons says that he heard Symonds Way Baseball field is not utilized. G. Fiorente states that is untrue. M. Dockser adds that Symonds Way Committee is exploring all options and reconfigurations and waiting on the RFI. J. O'Neill states he would have liked to have more input on RFQ. Programming Work Group: M. Coltman states there is still some confusion on what is to be accomplished and that the list of questions the group came up with sounds redundant. J. O'Neill suggests following questions: • What do other centers have that we don't have? • How do other centers get younger seniors there? • Do other centers offer evening programs? J. O'Neill asks Marilyn and Nancy for their feedback on programming as COA members. M. Shapleigh answers that COA does not implement programming and is an advisory board. M. Dockser states that we have to justify what is going on and what is needed for our 60+ community. J. Sasso states that we should not just be looking at current programming but what other spaces are available in town. He says we need to flush programs out fully. R. Assini states that after hours are important to reach younger seniors or seniors who still work. N. Ziemlak adds that she went to the Select Board and read letter from the COA highlighting some shortcomings of the RFQ in regard to the length of time of the contract will take to complete and the redundancy of what the company will compile vs what has already been done. Brief Discussion ensues about programming and length of Phase I in the RFQ. Page 1 2 M. Dockser states that he can mention to Fidel the suggestion to shorten Phase I to ensure there is not wasted time or duplicate efforts in program finding. Transportation Work Group: Questions from the Transportation Group are shared on the screen. 1. How many seniors do you transport to your center on an average day? 2. How many participants drive to the center on their own on a typical day? 3. Do you use, or have done so in the past, volunteer drivers? If so, any problems encountered? Liability issues? 4. Do you provide transportation for medical appointments? Any limitations on how far will travel? Hours/days of operation? 5. Any other destinations for which you provide transportation? 6. If you charge for rides, do you have a set fee, or is there a sliding fee based on need? 7. Are there other transportation options provided by your community that are not age restricted? 8. Does your center own its own vehicles, or do you contract out for transportation services? 9. Have you developed any innovative approaches, such as taxi vouchers or Uber/Lyft subsidies? 10. What is your budget for transportation, including any drivers that are employed directly? 11. Do any public regional transportation provider service your area? Suggestions by the Committee: • Specifying/highlighting existing places the drivers go and is there anywhere seniors or staff would like to go in addition • Added spot for number of parking spots needed • What percentage of seniors drive in the community and asking UMASS if they have any data on this as well Finance Work Group: M. Dockser reads through some of the questions for financing including following related topics State Funds Federal Funds Private foundations Fundraising Non -Profit Sr. Organization (thrift shops) Trust Funds J. Sasso adds description of programming costs for classes, transportations and trips. He also states that community input and data is important. G. Fiorente mentions asking if other communities have scholarships for seniors who are unable to afford programs. R. Assini asks how money is currently collect and asks how Rec does it Page 1 3 G. Fiorente describes the myrec online management system and depositing process. She states that there are some Elder Services like ATS and lifeline copays that are going through online management as well. N. Zien lak asks that if there are a list of questions to be answered on community needs or by RECALC to move forward with more data, COA can help. J. O'Neill moves into the next agenda item and states that more work should be done on consolidating questions before strategizing how to go to other towns. J. Sasso mentions that whatever the questions are, we as a town should answer them first to see where we are at. Committee agrees to consolidate and compile questions and give to G. Fiorente within the week Discussion on next meeting with a decided date of Wednesday, September 2T° at 7:OOpm. J. O'Neill entertains a motion to adjourn at 830pm. J. Parsons moves the motion. M. Coltman seconds. Roll call vote to end the meeting passes. Page 14