“Three-ring circus” was the term used by many to describe the state of the HIV Planning Council (HPC) budget meetings this past week. The HPC entered its fourth week of meetings on Wednesday, Aug. 27, still having not come up with a budget. However, thanks to the dedication of HPC leadership, a budget was passed and the county can now begin the process of applying for Ryan White CARE Act funds from the federal government.

The troubles began for the planning council late last month when they were informed that, due to the state budget crisis, funds were being cut from viral load and resistance testing programs statewide. As a result, a total of $540,000 was cut from the programs locally, which meant that the money would have to be recaptured through federal funds if possible. However, since the word from Washington this year was not to expect any increase in funding, it was determined that the $540,000 needed to be cut from the existing HPC budget.

After making major cuts that included $150,00 from the food services category (which funds Mama’s Kitchen) and completely defunding the benefits counseling program, the HPC still needed to trim close to $157,000 from it’s 2004 budget as of two weeks ago.

As the Aug. 20 meeting kicked off at the San Diego County Health and Human Services building, around 3:00 p.m., an announcement was made that because of work being done on a nearby water main, the water supply to the building would be shut off at 5:00 p.m. At that time, the building would need to be cleared. With just two hours to cover 10 funding categories, the council quickly made cuts to “relief respite and emergency help,” as well as “home health/home hospice” to trim a total of $60,000 from the budget and put the process back on course to meet its goal of slashing $157,000.

The process moved along at a steady pace until the HPC reached the “outreach: tech. assistance” and “outreach: capacity building” categories. Both the county and the HPC Priority Setting Committee (PSC) recommended that these two areas be defunded. Ken Hooks, who represented members of the African American community argued that these categories were too valuable to be cut because they help agencies that service communities of color, which currently comprise the majority of new HIV/AIDS cases in San Diego County.

After a compromise was reached, the “outreach: tech. Assistance” category was left with $40,708 in its budget. Artie Edwards of the HIV Consumer Council (HCC) then motioned to defund the “capacity building category,” to cut another $50,000 from the budget and bring the HPC within $7,000 of their goal. Multiple friendly amendments were requested to keep the category from being completely defunded, but Edwards refused to accept the amendments, saying that his motion was in keeping with the wishes of the HCC.

“You’ve got to understand that you don’t alone speak for the consumer council,” Hooks protested.

“You’ve got some other consumers around this table that might disagree with that and agreed with you on other motions,” Hooks continued, alluding to an early vote he supported that maintained funding for the “complimentary therapies” program, a notable priority for the HCC. “I don’t even want to go all the way as to say how many people of color were sitting around the table when this was voted on by the consumer council.”

Despite protests and concerns voiced by members of the HPC that represent the African American community, the “capacity building” category was defunded — which became a major point of contention as the council reached the final two budget items only needing to cut a total of $7,000 more.

Debate over how much money to cut from the HPC “support services” category erupted as a motion was made to remove $20,000. The meeting was stalled when Clay Henderson asserted that the HPC could not properly address the support services budget for a number of reasons, including an inherent conflict of interest because the grantee (in this case, the county) oversaw and shared the support services budget. He also said that it would be necessary for the council to have an itemized budget for the support services category, set to be funded at $405,000.

As the meeting pushed on past 5:00 p.m., Henderson made a motion stating, “At this point we could not make a decision based on the fact that the building is no longer safe; we really need to table that motion and be adjourned. This is the health department. The water is off, they told us that. The fire sprinkler system is no longer operating, we need to leave.”

With that, the Aug. 20 meeting came to a close just two votes and $7,000 away from passing a balanced budget.

The HPC budget meeting resumed at County Health on Aug. 27 with Tim Pestotnik, chair of the HPC, stating, “I think we can do better for ourselves. I think we can do better to each other… We all come to this because we care deeply about the lives of people with HIV and I look around this room and I see people that I have worked with for a decade and I know that you are here because you care. It’s that care that brings out passion and it’s that passion that brings out differences of opinion. I just want to say that’s expected and that’s part of the process.”

Pestotnik, who was not in attendance at the Aug. 20 meeting, apologized for his absence and announced that, once the budget was passed and the grant application process complete, he would be stepping down as the HPC chairperson. He also made a motion to establish a task force that would explore issues addressed in the Aug. 20 meeting related to the separation between planning council support staff and the grantee “in order to achieve greater separation of lines of authority, lines of influence, lines of control.”

Debate on the establishment of the task force leaned in its favor and the motion was passed. Returning to the previous week’s discussion of the planning council support services category, there was still debate as to whether money should be cut. Both the PSC and the HCC had previously recommended to flat fund the category.

“The impression that I got in sitting in the priority setting committee meetings was that the planning council support budget was untouchable,” Henderson argued. “It was frequently referred to as ‘Terry [Cunningham’s] Budget’ (Cunningham is Chief of the Office of AIDS Coordination). “Whether that is correct information or not, the erroneous implications that were repeatedly made that this was an untouchable piece of information makes the recommendations of the Consumer Council and the Priority Setting Committee seriously questionable.”

With the tabled motion to cut $20,000 to support services still awaiting a vote, some members of the HPC were still not clear how the cuts would affect the category.

“I do not know whether or not it takes three, five or ten [people] to do this work,” Tim Smith of the HPC said, adding that he would not vote for the $20,000 cut. “I would sincerely like to hope that this task force … [would] come back and give us some recommendations. I do not want to cut this at this time because I do not know what it is that I am looking at.”

The motion eventually failed and a new one was put forth to cut the $7,000 remaining balance from the support services category. While some people cautioned against cutting support services, Hooks pointed out, “It’s money in this budget, whether it is $20,000 or $7,000, that can come out of this particular budget because we zeroed out some categories where people that have HIV and AIDS will not be able to get a service anymore…. We need to quit the sale of holding this particular budget like we can’t cut it…. Lets just do what we’ve got to do — nothing is harmless when we cut services to people with HIV and AIDS.”

The motion to cut the $7,000 from planning council support services eventually passed and the budget process successfully came to a close.

“I believe that all the contention this year and all the discussion was incredibly good for the planning council,” Edwards told the Gay and Lesbian Times following the meeting. “It brought up issues that have previously not been addressed. Now we have to address them….”

Pestotnik, said he was happy with the outcome, despite the lengthy process. “Nobody said cutting almost a half a million dollars would be easy and our community is no different than any others,” he said. “We and everyone at the table feels passionately about all of the services that are needed in the community, so I would be disappointed if it wasn’t a passionate and difficult discussion.”