Workforce Development Committee Minutes
March 24, 2000

Members Present:

Vice-Chair, David MacKenzie, Don Gerdesmeier

Committee Staff:
Kathy Sweeney, Minnesota Department of Economic Security

Other Agency Staff:
Mary Ellen Novotny, Larry Eisenstadt, John Harvanko, Jim Korkki, and Tom Romens of the Minnesota Department of Economic Security

The Meeting was called to order by Vice - Chairman David MacKenzie at 9:53 am.

David MacKenzie made a motion to approve the 1/28/00 Committee Minutes. Don Gerdesmeier seconded and motion was approved.

Motion by Don Gerdesmeier to approve the agenda. Seconded by David MacKenzie. Approved.

Don Gerdesmeier requested that the record reflect his frustrations with the current timeframes allowed to review materials for Committee meetings. Kathy Sweeney explained that many of these frustrations are due to the extreme timeframes implemented by other agencies and suggested that a document, which outlines these timeframes, could prove useful.

In addition, Don Gerdesmeier requested that in future meeting quorums should be discussed. He expressed his uncomfortableness with conducting a decision-making committee meeting with only two committee members present.

Tom Romens explained to the committee the issues regarding the Customer Satisfaction area under Title I. The general guidelines for the standards were provided by DOL in December of 1999. These guidelines discuss issues such as the minimum requirements for customer services, levels of performance, surveys, methodologies and so forth.

During the presentation discussions were held regarding the complexities within the current guidelines and various problems with the proposed measurement methodologies which cause errors within the data results. For instance, within the proposed methodology groups individuals are counted which realistically shouldn’t and vice versa.

Despite the stated problems the guidelines provide a base framework to begin implementation guidelines for negations with local partners. Tom Romens asked that the committee briefly review the outline of the Title I Performance Standards/Customer Satisfaction documents then move to approve the process in order to move forward with the negotiation process.

Don Gerdesmeier moved to support the implementation of the Title I Performance Standards/Customer Satisfaction. David MacKenzie seconded the motion. Approved.

It was also noted that the Committee wishes to review the results to the above within the next year to observe its progress.

Within the February 25, 2000 Committee meeting the Committee approved all points and language within the proposed Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) except for the language found within the fourth area of the MOU entitled ‘Period of Performance.’ This language read: "These amendments must be submitted to the partners prior to state submittal and cannot be submitted if the change is objected to by one of the affected partners." The Committee suggested that this sentence within the MOU be re-worked to reflect less confining language.

Mary Ellen Novotny presented the committee with the revised version of this area within the MOU. The language now reads: "A partner may terminate their participation in this MOU upon 30 day written notice to the local WorkForce Council. The amendment must be submitted to the partners prior to state submittal." This revised version provides more of a flexibility mechanism for the partners.

After a brief review, the Committee expressed their satisfaction with the revised language within the proposed MOU. Therefore, David MacKenzie moved to support the revised language. Don Gerdesmeier seconded the motion. Approved.

Mary Ellen Novotny and John Harvanko presented the committee with highlights of the recently completed WIA Unified Plan. The entire WIA Unified Plan, consisting of approximately 250 pages, may be found on the MDES Internet site. Upon the request of Don Gerdesmeier, Mary Ellen Novotny will provide the entire GWDC with a complete copy of the plan.

John Harvanko outlined the planning process of both the WIA Transitional and Unified Plans, providing explanations of each. April 6, 2000 will be the official submittal of the plan to DOL, they will have 90 days to review and comment on the plan. John asked the committee to move to approve the process in which the WIA Unified Plan has been operating in order to obtain acceptance with DOL. Don Gerdesmeier again wished the record show his frustrations with the short timeframes in which to review and comment on massive amounts of material. Mary Ellen Novotny explained that the WIA Plan is constructed to be a ‘living document’ so to speak. That even though deadlines for comments to the plan are present that comments to the plan will be reviewed and incorporated on a regular basis.

Motion by Don Gerdesmeier to approve the WIA Unified Plan process. Seconded by David MacEnzie. Approved.

NOTE: A change for the next meeting above is that it will be a conference call. Return to the Meeting Home Page for the agenda and instructions to call in for the meeting.