[00:00:01]
ARE YOU? OH, GOOD.I'VE GOT 10 0 1 ON MY CLOCK, BUT I APPRECIATE IT.
WHAT DO YOU THINK YOUR POSITION IS ON SHE? GOOD MORNING EVERYONE.
WELCOME TO OUR CITY COUNCIL GOVERNANCE MEETING.
WE'LL CALL OUR SESSION TO ORDER.
THE TIME IS 10:01 AM ON FEBRUARY 15TH, 2023.
MADAM CLERK, COULD YOU READ THE ROLE COUNCIL MEMBER ROCHA GARCIA? HERE.
[Briefing and Possible Action on ]
WE HAVE ONE ITEM ON THE AGENDA AND IT IS OUR BRIEFING AND UPDATE ON THE ARPA, UH, RECOVERY FUND.WE HAVE THE APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES FIRST.
SO WE JANUARY 25TH, 2023 MIN GOVERNANCE COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES.
THERE'S A MOTION, A SECOND FOR APPROVAL OF THOSE MINUTES.
WE'LL GO NOW TO ITEM NUMBER TWO.
UH, GOOD MORNING, MAYOR AND COUNCIL.
SO, UH, THE, THE ITEM ON TODAY'S AGENDA IS REALLY A CULMINATION OF, UM, THE LAST TWO WEEKS.
UM, COUNCIL'S HAD CONVERSATIONS ON, UH, BOTH ELEMENTS OF THIS.
UH, THE FIRST IS, UM, TWO WEEKS AGO WHEN THE COUNCIL AWARDED THE, UH, THROUGH THE COMPETITIVE PROCESS, UH, ARPA DOLLARS FOR MENTAL HEALTH YOUTH AND SENIOR AND NONPROFITS.
THERE WAS A, UH, UNALLOCATED BALANCE OF $3.7 MILLION THAT WE MOVED, THAT THE COUNCIL MOVED TO BRING FORWARD THE GOVERNANCE FOR MORE CONVERSATION.
AND THEN IN LAST WEEK'S PRESENTATION, UM, QUARTERLY UPDATE ON OUR ARPA, WE HAD, UM, SOME AVAILABLE FUNDS, PRIMARILY FROM INTEREST ON THE ARPA ACCOUNTS, UH, FOR A TOTAL OF $3.9 MILLION.
AND AGAIN, THE CONVERSATION WAS TO BRING BOTH THOSE ITEMS TOGETHER.
FORWARD TO YOU THIS MORNING, MARIE IS GONNA WALK YOU THROUGH BOTH COMPONENTS AND, UM, A, UH, PROPOSED RECOMMENDATION.
UH, GOOD MORNING, MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS.
UM, SO TODAY THE DISCUSSION THAT WE WOULD LIKE TO HAVE WITH YOU ALL IS TO ABOUT SOME, UH, FUNDS THAT ARE AVAILABLE FROM THE AMERICAN RESCUE PLAN ACT, SPECIFICALLY OUR LOCAL STATE AND FISCAL RECOVERY FUNDS.
SO THERE'S $3.7 MILLION IN AVAILABLE BALANCES FROM THE COMPETITIVE PROCESS THAT WE, UM, HAD FOR MENTAL HEALTH YOUTH AND SENIORS.
AND AS YOU MAY RECALL, THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVED, UH, CONTRACT AWARDS TO AGENCIES ON FEBRUARY THE SECOND.
AND AT THAT POINT, UM, THE BALANCE OF $3.7 MILLION OF WAS ALLOCATED.
THE CITY COUNCIL HAD A DISCUSSION TO SEND THAT TO THIS BODY, TO THE GOVERNANCE COMMITTEE FOR A DISCUSSION.
SO WE HAVE SOME RECOMMENDATIONS FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION TODAY ON THAT 3.7.
THE SECOND ITEM IS $3.9 MILLION THAT IS AVAILABLE FROM THE FINANCIAL UPDATE THAT WE PROVIDED TO THE CITY COUNCIL AT A B SESSION LAST, UH, WEDNESDAY.
SPECIFICALLY, THERE ARE SOME AVAILABLE DOLLARS FROM INTEREST INCOME AND PROGRAM BALANCES FROM PROGRAMS THAT HAVE BEEN COMPLETED.
SO THOSE ARE THE TWO ITEMS THAT WE WILL BE MAKING SOME RECOMMENDATIONS TODAY FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION.
SO STARTING WITH THE FIRST ITEM, THIS IS A COMPETITIVE PROCESS THAT THE COUNCIL APPROVE ON THE SECOND.
AND JUST TO PROVIDE YOU WITH SOME BACKGROUND, UM, WE HAD, UH, FOUR DIFFERENT CATEGORIES, NON-PROFIT, SOCIAL SERVICES, SENIOR SERVICES, YOUTH AND MENTAL HEALTH.
SO WE PUT OUT A SOLICITATION, THE TOTAL $40.1 MILLION, AND WE RECEIVED PROPOSALS THAT EXCEEDED $145 MILLION.
WE MADE A RECOMMENDATION TO THE COUNCIL AND COUNCIL APPROVED CONTRACTS IN THE AMOUNT OF 36.4 MILLION.
THIS IS THE ACTION THAT YOU ALL APPROVED ON FEBRUARY THE SECOND.
AND THAT LEFT US WITH AN ALLOCATED BALANCE OF $3.7 MILLION.
[00:05:01]
AND AS YOU CAN SEE, THOSE BALANCES WITH THE HIGHEST AMOUNT BEING IN MENTAL HEALTH AT 3.4 MILLION YOUTH SERVICES AT 240,000 IN SENIOR SERVICE SERVICES, CLOSE TO $73,000.SO WHAT WE ARE RECOMMENDING TO THE GOVERNANCE COMMITTEE TODAY IS THAT THE 3.7 BALANCE FROM THIS COMPETITIVE PROCESS THAT I JUST DESCRIBED, BE SENT BACK TO THE RESPECTIVE COMMITTEES THAT DEVELOP THE IMPLEMENTATION PLANS THAT THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVED IN AUGUST AND SEPTEMBER OF, UH, OF 2022.
SO THIS PARTICULAR CHART SUMMARIZES WHERE THOSE, UH, BALANCES WILL BE GOING BACK TO.
SO THE COMMUNITY HEALTH, UH, ENVIRONMENT AND CULTURE COMMITTEE WILL GET THE, THE UNALLOCATED BALANCE OF CLOSE TO $73,000 FOR SENIOR SERVICES.
UM, WHEN THAT IS SENT TO THAT COMMITTEE FOR THE C COMMITTED CONSIDERATION, FOR INSTANCE, THEY COULD DISCUSS HAVING THAT AMOUNT BE ADDED TO THE CONSOLIDATED FUNDING PROCESS THAT WE DO EVERY COUPLE OF YEARS THROUGH THE DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES.
THAT COMPETITIVE PROCESS BEGINS NEXT MONTH.
AND AS YOU MAY RECALL, THOSE AWARDS ARE CONSIDERED BY THE COUNCIL AS PART OF THE BUDGET PROCESS IN, UH, IN AUGUST OR SEPTEMBER OF, OF THAT FISCAL YEAR.
THE SECOND CATEGORY IS YOUTH SERVICES AND, AND THOSE FUNDS ARE RECOMMENDED TO GO BACK TO THE ECONOMIC AND WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE FOR DISCUSSION.
AND THEN FINALLY, UM, THE FUNDS UNALLOCATED, UH, IN THE AREA OF MENTAL HEALTH TO GO TO THE PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE.
THAT'S $3.4 MILLION, UH, FOR DISCUSSION BY THAT COMMITTEE.
AND THAT COMMITTEE COULD, UH, POTENTIALLY ISSUE A NEW R F P OR PERHAPS, UM, ALSO COMBINE IT WITH A CONSOLIDATED FUNDING PROCESS.
THAT, AGAIN, STARTS NEXT MONTH.
NOW, UM, THE SECOND ITEM THAT, UH, WE WOULD BE, UH, RECOMMENDING FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION IS THE BALANCE OF $3.9 MILLION.
AND THIS PARTICULAR CHART IS THE SAME CHART THAT WE PRESENTED LAST WEEK WITH THE ENTIRE ARPA UH, PROGRAM.
THERE'S A LOT OF ACTIVITIES THAT WE ARE STILL, UH, WORKING ON.
HOWEVER, WE HAVE A BALANCE OF 3.9 MILLION CONSISTING OF INTEREST INCOME AND SOME PROGRAM BALANCES IN A COUPLE OF CATEGORIES.
AND THAT IS WHERE THAT $3.9 MILLION IS COMING FROM.
SO WHAT STAFF IS RECOMMENDING FOR THAT 3.9 MILLION FOR A DISCUSSION WITH THE GOVERNANCE COMMITTEE IS THAT OF THE 3.9, WE ALLOCATE $2.4 MILLION TO NONPROFIT SOCIAL AGENCIES THAT HAD A STRONG APPLICATION.
HOWEVER, THEY WERE NOT AWARDED FUNDS AT THE COMPETITIVE PROCESS THAT YOU APPROVE ON FEBRUARY THE SECOND BECAUSE THERE WAS NO SUFFICIENT DOLLARS.
IF THE GOVERNANCE COMMITTEE FEELS COMFORTABLE WITH THAT, UM, RECOMMENDATION, YOU CAN MOVE THAT FORWARD TO THE FULL CITY COUNCIL FOR CONSIDERATION FOR CONTRACT AWARDS AT AN A SESSION IN NEXT MONTH IN MARCH.
NOW, THE, THE OTHER PORTION, UH, CLOSE TO ONE AND A HALF MILLION DOLLARS, WE ARE RECOMMENDING THAT THAT IS ADDED, UH, FOR THE ONGOING, UH, PROGRAM, WHICH IS A C OVID 19 CONSTRUCTION GRANTS FOR SMALL BUSINESSES.
THAT APPLICATION PROCESS OPEN, UH, MONDAY OF THIS WEEK, AND WE COULD ADD THAT $1.5 MILLION TO THAT EXISTING PROCESS AND NOTIFY THE FULL CITY COUNCIL THROUGH A MEMORANDUM.
SO, UM, THIS PARTICULAR CHART SHOWS THE NINE AGENCIES THAT WE ARE RECOMMENDING TO BE FUNDED WITH A $2.4 MILLION THAT I DESCRIBED IN THE PREVIOUS SLIDE.
AND THIS PARTICULAR AGENCIES THAT ARE BEING RECOMMENDED ARE THOSE AGENCIES THAT HAD A STRONG APPLICATION.
THEIR SCORES ARE 70 OR ABOVE, AND WE ARE RECOMMENDING THAT 50% OF THEIR APPLICATION BE FUNDED THROUGH THIS PROCESS.
NOW, THE, THE 50%, UM, THAT WE, THAT WE ARRIVE TO THIS IS, UH, LESS THAN ON AVERAGE WHAT THE NONPROFIT AGENCIES RECEIVE ON THE CONTRACTS THAT YOU AWARDED ON FEBRUARY THE SECOND.
SO IS, IS, UM, UM, CONSISTENT WITH THOSE, WITH THOSE APPLICATIONS? A LITTLE LOWER, BUT IT ALLOWS TO PROVIDE, UH, THOSE NECESSARY SERVICES THAT WE HEARD, UM, COUNCIL DISCUSSION ABOUT AT THE, AT THE MEETING ON FEBRUARY THE SECOND.
SO, UH, MAYOR, THAT CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION, AND WE HAVE, UH, SEVERAL DEPARTMENT DIRECTORS HERE WITH US TO ADDRESS ANY QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMITTEE.
APPRECIATE THE, UM, THE UPDATE.
UH, LET ME NOTE FOR THE RECORD HERE THAT, UH,
[00:10:01]
I BELIEVE ALL OF YOU HAVE SEEN OR, OR, UH, WE'VE GOT A, A LETTER HERE FROM COUNCIL MEMBER CASTILLO TO THE GOVERNANCE COMMITTEE MEMBERS, UH, IN SUPPORT OF STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION ON THE $3.7 MILLION, UH, TO GO BACK TO THE RESPECTIVE COMMITTEES AND THE COMPETITIVE PROCESS.SO I WANTED TO NOTE THAT SHE ALSO HAS SOME LANGUAGE IN HERE, UH, RELEVANT TO THE SOARING COMMITTEES AND EMPHASIS ON PARTICULAR ASPECTS OF OUR INTERVENTIONS, GANG PREVENTION, GANG VIOLENCE, UH, AS WELL AS, UM, SERVICES OFFERED BY, UH, THOSE IN MENTAL HEALTH AND ADDICTION, UM, SPECTRUM, INCLUDING CORTISONE MINISTRIES, ET CETERA.
SO THIS IS FOR, FOR ALL OF US, I THINK.
LET ME ASK A COUPLE QUESTIONS AND THEN I'M ANXIOUS TO HEAR FROM MY COLLEAGUES.
UM, SO MARIA, ON THE $3.9 MILLION, YOU ARE RECOMMENDING A SPLIT OF ROUGHLY 2.4 FOR THE NONPROFIT SOCIAL AGENCIES.
UH, AND THOSE GO IN A NUMBER OF DIFFERENT CATEGORIES.
UM, THAT WOULD GO SPECIFICALLY FOR NONPROFITS IN THE NONPROFIT CATEGORIES FOR SOCIAL SERVICES.
UM, BUT NOT BACK TO A COMMITTEE.
UM, IF THE GOVERNANCE COMMITTEE, UM, APPROVES THIS ACTION, WE WILL TAKE IT TO THE FULL CITY COUNCIL FOR CONSIDERATION AT AN A SESSION IN MARCH.
AND THEN 1.49 FOR THE COVID CONSTRUCTION GRANTS FOR SMALL BUSINESSES.
UM, COULD YOU TELL ME HOW WE ARRIVED AT THAT SPLIT? YES.
SO WHAT WE LOOKED AT, UM, MAYOR, THE FIRST THING WAS THE, THE COMMENTS THAT WE HEARD AT THE, UH, FEBRUARY THE SECOND A SESSION IN TERMS OF THE PRIORITIES OF THE COUNCIL FOR CERTAIN, UH, SERVICES PROVIDED BY THESE AGENCIES.
UM, SO WHAT WE LOOKED AT IS THOSE STRONG APPLICATIONS.
YOU MAY RECALL THAT WE HAD MENTIONED THERE WAS ROUGHLY ABOUT $8.1 MILLION IN TOTAL OF STRONG APPLICATIONS.
AND THOSE WERE, UM, ENTITIES THAT HAD A SCORE OF 60 OR ABOVE.
SO IN ORDER TO MAXIMIZE, UH, THE RESOURCES WE HAD, WE LOOKED AT THOSE WITH SCORES OF 70, UH, AND HIGHER AT A 50% SPLIT.
LOOKING AT WHAT THE OTHER, UM, AWARDS WERE APPROVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL IN TERMS OF PERCENTAGES.
AND THAT CAME OUT TO BE THE, THE TWO AND A HALF, THE $2.4 MILLION.
AND THEN THE BALANCE, UH, WAS THE AMOUNT THAT IS BEING RECOMMENDED FOR SMALL BUSINESSES.
AND IN OUR RECOMMENDATION, WE, WE WANTED TO ASSIST, UM, BOTH THE AGENCIES THAT THE COUNCIL MENTIONED, AND WE ALSO HEARD FROM SEVERAL COUNCIL MEMBERS SUPPORT FOR SMALL BUSINESSES IN TERMS OF CONSTRUCTION GRANTS RELATED TO C OVID 19 MAYOR.
THE OTHER THING IS WHEN WE LOOKED AT THE, UM, AT THE R F P PROCESS, WE HAD A, A HIGHER NUMBER OF AGENCIES THAT SCORED 70 OR ABOVE IN THE NONPROFIT CATEGORY.
THAT WASN'T THE CASE IN EACH OF THE, IN EACH OF THE AREAS.
SO, UM, THE, THE ONES THAT, THAT, THAT, UM, WE ONLY HAD TWO AND A HALF MILLION DOLLARS FOR THAT NONPROFIT BUCKET, AND WE HAD A LOT OF HIGH SCORING PROPOSALS.
UM, AND THAT SEEMED TO BE WHERE WE, FROM, FROM OUR STANDPOINT, THAT WE SHOULD FOCUS IN THERE BECAUSE, BECAUSE OF THOSE HIGH SCORED, UH, PROPOSALS.
SO I MEAN, ESSENTIALLY IN TERMS OF THE, THE CONSTRUCTION GRANT GRANTS NUMBER, YOU, YOU SORT OF BACKED INTO THAT NUMBER BASED ON THE 70 PLUS YEAH.
SCORES ON NONPROFITS, I GUESS WHEN WE ORIGINALLY ALLOCATED OR CREATED THE CONSTRUCTION GRANT PROGRAM.
UH, I MAY NOT BE REMEMBERING THIS CORRECTLY, BUT I, I THOUGHT WE TOOK A LOOK AT, UH, WHAT THE UNIVERSE OF NEED MIGHT BE.
UM, THAT'S NOT HOW WE GOT THIS NUMBER.
THE, THE, THE $2.25 MILLION THAT WE REALLOCATED FOR THE SMALL BUSINESS CONSTRUCTION GRANTS WAS A FACTOR OF ONE OF THE SOLICITATIONS WE RECEIVED THROUGH ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT OUTTA SMALL BUSINESSES.
AND WE DID NOT GET THE NUMBER OF PROPOSALS WE WERE EXPECTING FOR THAT ECOSYSTEM CATEGORY.
WE TOOK, WE TOOK, WE TOOK THE, THE DOLLARS WE FELT WERE GONNA BE REMAINING ON THE TABLE AND MADE THAT RECOMMENDATION FROM THE 2.25.
WE DON'T HAVE AN IDEA OF THE UNIVERSE.
UM, AND SOME OF THE CONVERSATION THAT THE COUNCIL HAD THAT FIRST WEEK IN JANUARY WAS IF WE HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY FOR ADDITIONAL DOLLARS, UM, THERE WAS A DESI STRONG DESIRE FROM THE COUNCIL TO ADD DOLLARS.
NOW, ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, UM, STAFF HAVE BEEN DOING ALL THE OUTREACH.
AND AS MARIA MENTIONED, THAT APPLICATION PROCESS OPENED UP ON MONDAY.
UM, AND, AND THAT OUTREACH SCHEDULE, I THINK YOU SAW IN THE MEMO THAT WE SENT OUT TO YOU ON MONDAY, THAT OUTREACH IS GONNA CONTINUE, UM, OVER THE COURSE OF THE APPLICATION PERIOD.
WELL, UM, SO BACK ON THE NONPROFITS.
[00:15:01]
SO THE RECOMMENDATION IS TO ESSENTIALLY USE THE, THE, THE CURRENT APPLICATIONS AND LOOK AT THE 70 PLUS SCORES AND JUST TAKE THAT STRAIGHT TO A SESSION.WAS THERE ANY THOUGHT IN, IN TAKING THOSE AND FILTERING THE DO EXTRA DOLLARS BACK INTO THE COMMITTEE ITSELF IN THE SAME PROCESS? UH, WE DID NOT, UM, DISCUSS THAT AS AN OPTION.
HOWEVER, THAT IS, UM, A DISCUSSION THAT THE COMMITTEE COULD HAVE IF THERE WAS A DESIRE TO SEND THAT BACK.
WE BASED OUR RECOMMENDATION BASED ON THE CONVERSATIONS WE HEARD AT THE FEBRUARY 2ND, A SESSION FROM COUNCIL MEMBERS.
AND I'M NOT, I MEAN, I OBVIOUSLY NOT QUARRELING WITH ANY OF THESE APPLICATIONS.
UH, ALL ALL WERE THE ORGANIZATIONS, BUT I'M JUST WONDERING IF WE HAVE ONE SEAMLESS PROCESS AS OPPOSED TO DOING IT SOME IN A SESSION, THEN SOME THROUGH, REMEMBER.
SO, UH, SO ONE OF THE ORGANIZATIONS ACTUALLY, UH, SAVED THEIR APPLICATION BUT DID NOT SUBMIT, AND THEY HAVE BEEN NOTIFIED OF THAT ISSUE.
UM, WE ALSO HAD, UH, FOR HER ORGANIZATION, WHICH, UM, THERE WAS NO FUNDING RECOMMENDED IN ONE OF THE CATEGORIES UNDER WHICH THEY APPLIED.
AND SO THAT, UH, WE'LL GO THROUGH A, A SEPARATE PROCESS TO ALLOCATE THAT FUNDING.
AND THEN, SO THE FIRST ORGANIZATION, THE ONE THAT I'M TALKING ABOUT SPECIFICALLY, IS CLARITY.
AND SO I'M, I'M VERY FAMILIAR WITH THEIR WORK, AND SO I, I WOULD'VE THOUGHT THAT FUNDING EIGHT INPATIENT BEDS WOULD BE GOOD.
UM, BUT SO HOW DOES, SO WHERE DO THEY GET CONSIDERED? THEY DON'T GET CONSIDERED IN HERE, THEY'LL GET CONSIDERED SOMEWHERE ELSE, OR, SO CLARITY IS THE, THE AGENCY THAT ACTUALLY THOUGHT THAT THEY HAD SUBMITTED THEIR APPLICATION.
UM, UNFORTUNATELY THEY HAD SAVED IT TO THE SYSTEM, BUT NOT ACTUALLY SUBMITTED.
AND SO AS A RESULT, WE COULD NOT ACCEPT THE PROPOSAL SINCE IT WASN'T SUBMITTED BY THE DEADLINE.
UM, AND SO THAT WAS NOT EVALUATED OR SCORED BY THE COMMITTEES BECAUSE IT WAS NOT ACTUALLY SUBMITTED BY THE AGENCY, BUT WE COULD STILL DO IT RIGHT NOW.
ACCORDING TO OUR PROCESS ON SOLICITATIONS, YOU GOTTA SUBMIT 'EM BY THE DEADLINE.
SO WHETHER IT'S, YOU KNOW, TOILET PAPER OR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES, YOU GOTTA, YOU GOTTA SUBMIT.
SO WE WOULD NOT CONSIDER THAT AS, AS A POTENTIAL CATEGORY.
THE COUNCIL COULD, THAT'S ULTIMATELY YOUR DECISION.
SO THEN LET ME ASK, WERE THERE ANY ORGANIZATION, ANY OTHER ORGANIZATIONS THAT MAYBE WE WENT BACK THROUGH THE SYSTEM AND LOOKED AND CHECKED THAT THEY JUST SAVED AND NOT SUBMIT IT? CAN YOU TRACK THAT? UH, WE WOULD HAVE TO GET WITH PURCHASING.
THEY ARE THE ONLY ORGANI ORGANIZATION THAT REACHED OUT INDICATING THAT THEY HAD NOT RECEIVED A NOTIFICATION LETTER THEY THOUGHT THEY HAD SUBMITTED.
AND SO WE WERE ABLE TO THEN GO VERIFY IN THE SYSTEM.
BUT IF AGENCIES REACH OUT, UH, WE'RE ABLE TO GO THROUGH THAT VERIFICATION PROCESS AND WE'LL CERTAINLY CHECK WITH PURCHASING TO SEE IF THERE'S A WAY TO, UH, PROACTIVELY IDENTIFY THAT.
UM, AND SO ESPECIALLY IF IT WAS SOMETHING AS AS SIMPLE AS IF I, I, I THINK THAT I PROBABLY WOULD'VE HIT SAVE AND ASSUMED RIGHT.
THAT, THAT IT WAS GONNA BE UPLOADED.
JUST KINDA LIKE IF I SAVE ON A GOOGLE DRIVE OR SOMETHING, IT AUTOMATICALLY SAVES.
SO I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THAT THERE'S NO OTHER ORGANIZATIONS AND I, I WAS WORRIED ABOUT THAT.
SO, UM, I KNOW THAT WE PROBABLY HAVEN'T HEARD FROM SOME ORGANIZATIONS, BUT I DO THINK THAT SOME ORGANIZATIONS ARE A LITTLE BIT MORE SOPHISTICATED THAN OTHERS AND THEY HAVE FUNDING, SO THEY'RE ABLE TO HIRE PEOPLE THAT ARE TENDING TO JUST SPECIFICALLY TO LOOK AT THIS AND OTHERS DON'T HAVE, YOU KNOW, THAT TYPE OF STAFFING.
SO I JUST WOULD BE SENSITIVE TO THAT.
AND THEN CAN YOU HELP ME UNDERSTAND THE SAN ANTONIO SPORTS FOUNDATION FIT FAMILY CHALLENGE A HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS? DO WE ALREADY FUND SAN ANTONIO SPORTS AND, AND HOW MUCH DO WE FUND THEM FOR? UM, AND THEN SPECIFICALLY, UH, DO YOU HAVE MORE INFORMATION ON THAT? SO, UM, JESSICA TELLS ME THAT WE'RE NOT FUNDING SAN ANTONIO SPORTS FOUNDATION RIGHT NOW.
UM, THIS, UM, PARTICULAR, ARE YOU ASKING FOR INFORMATION ABOUT THIS FIT FAMILY CHALLENGE? YEAH.
UM, BECAUSE I UNDERSTAND THAT THERE'S OTHER SPORTS ORGANIZATIONS THAT ALSO
[00:20:01]
SUBMITTED.SO I'M TRYING TO SEE LIKE, MAYBE, LIKE, I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND LIKE, WHY DID THIS ONE MOVE FORWARD AND NOT SOME OF THE OTHER ONES? SO TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, WHY THIS IS BEING RECOMMENDED IS BASED ON THEIR SCORE MM-HMM.
SO IF THEY GOT, AGAIN, ALL THE AGENCIES LISTED HERE ON THEIR APPLICATION AS A PANEL SCORE, THEIR APPLICATIONS, THEY RECEIVE A SCORE OF 70 OR ABOVE.
UM, SO THAT'S WHY YOU SEE 'EM ON THE LIST.
SO THERE WERE OTHER ORGANIZATIONS, IF THEY SCORE LOWER THAN THAT, THAT'S THE REASON WHY YOU DON'T SEE 'EM HERE.
ADDITIONALLY, THIS AGENCIES, UH, WERE NOT FUNDED AT ALL IN, IN THE PREVIOUS PROCESS.
UH, THAT YOU APPROVE ON FEBRUARY THE SECOND.
SO IF THERE WAS AN AGENCY AND WE HAD SEVERAL AGENCIES THAT SUBMITTED MORE THAN ONE APPLICATION, UM, IF, IF THEY, I, I DON'T KNOW IF THE ORGANIZATION YOU'RE REFERRING TO DID NOT GET FUNDING AT ALL.
UM, BUT IF THEY SCORE HIGHER THAN THIS ORGANIZATIONS BUT HAD ALREADY BEEN FUNDED, UH, THEY'RE NOT BEING RECOMMENDED.
WE WANTED TO GET TO THOSE AGENCIES THAT WERE NOT FUNDED FOR ANY OF THEIR PROGRAMS, UM, ON FEBRUARY THE SECOND WHEN YOU TOOK THAT.
AND SO THESE NINE, THEY WERE THE ONLY ONES THAT WERE ABOVE A 70? CORRECT.
ABOVE THE 70 THAT WERE NOT FUNDED.
THERE WERE OTHER ORGANIZATIONS THAT HAD, UM, UH, SCORES OF 70 OR ABOVE, BUT THEY HAD ALREADY, THEY HAD ALREADY HAD PROGRAMS FUNDED IN THE ACTION THAT YOU TOOK ON FEBRUARY THE SECOND.
AND IT WAS A STRAIGHT CUT DOWN THE MIDDLE.
SO LIKE I COULD ASSUME THAT, UM, UH, FAMILY VIOLENCE PREVENTION SERVICES REQUESTED HALF A MILLION.
COUNCIL MEMBER, UH, ROCHE GARCIA, COUNCIL MEMBER COURAGE.
UH, I THINK THAT, UM, THE ONE SITUATION THAT I'M, I'M CONCERNED ABOUT TOO IS CLARITY CHILD GUIDANCE.
I UNDERSTAND THE WORK THEY DO AS A TEACHER.
I REMEMBER YEARS AND YEARS OF REFERRING CHILDREN OR SEEING THEM, UH, GET THEIR SERVICES.
AND, UH, I'VE RECEIVED A COPY OF, UH, AN EMAIL THAT SHOWED I SAW THAT THEY SAVED WHAT THEY DID.
I DIDN'T SEE ANYTHING THAT SAID, SUBMITTED OR NOT SUBMITTED.
UH, SO WAS THERE ANY WAY OF INFORMING ANY ORGANIZATION IF THEY WERE WORKING THROUGH THE SYSTEM AND SAVED IT, OF LETTING THEM KNOW, HEY, YOU HAVEN'T FILED THIS OR SENT IT TO US OR ANYTHING.
SO THE, THE SYSTEM WON'T SAY THAT.
AND, AND I'LL EXPLAIN IT THIS WAY, THE, AS THEY SUBMIT THEIR APPLICATION, THEY HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO SAVE IT, RIGHT.
TAKE A BREAK FROM IT, AND THEN COME BACK AND FINALIZE IT.
SO SAVING IT DOESN'T MEAN THAT IT'S SUBMITTED.
THEY HAVE TO ACTUALLY GO THAT EXTRA STEP, UH, TO SUBMIT IT.
SO, SO THE ANSWER TO YOUR QUESTION IS NO, THE SYSTEM WON'T TELL 'EM IT'S ONLY SAVED, NOT SUBMITTED, BECAUSE IT ALLOWS 'EM TO GO BACK AND CONTINUE TO WORK ON THAT APPLICATION AT A LATER DATE.
IS THERE A WAY IN THE FUTURE OF PUTTING SOMETHING INTO THE PROGRAM THAT WOULD REMIND PEOPLE BEFORE THE DEADLINE THAT YOUR SAVED APPLICATION HAS NOT BEEN FILED SO THAT SOMEBODY INADVERTENTLY WON'T MISS OUT ON AN OPPORTUNITY THAT THEY MAY VERY WELL DESERVE? WE, WE CAN LOOK AT THAT COUNCILMAN.
AND, AND, AND BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE THAT KIND OF MECHANISM, I'M JUST WONDERING, WERE THERE OTHERS IN A SIMILAR SITUATION WHERE THEY HAD SAVED AND HADN'T PRESENTED, UH, OR FILED, WE'RE NOT AWARE OF ANY.
SO THIS BEING A VERY UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCE, I'M JUST WONDERING IF THERE ISN'T A WAY FOR US TO, UH, GIVE SOME OTHER CONSIDERATION.
IN OTHER WORDS, I, I'D LIKE TO SEE THE STAFF EVALUATE WHAT THEY HAD, UH, UNDERSTANDING THAT IT WAS A VERY UNIQUE SITUATION.
UH, AND, YOU KNOW, LET US KNOW IF THEY WOULD'VE QUALIFIED.
WE CAN, UH, PULL TOGETHER THE, UM, THE EVALUATION COMMITTEE TO LOOK AT IT.
BUT I, I, UM, I'M GONNA BE VERY CAREFUL THAT WE ARE NOT GONNA SET A PRECEDENT IN TERMS OF SOLICITATIONS BECAUSE, UM, UNFORTUNATELY THIS HAPPENS.
THE, THE SYSTEM IS KIND OF LIKE TURBOTAX.
YOU CAN DO YOUR, YOUR TAXES, BUT IF YOU DON'T HIT SUBMIT, THEY DON'T GET DELIVERED.
UM, AND SO WE, WELL, WE CAN GO BACK AND LOOK AT THE CLARITY PROPOSAL, UM, AND, UM, AND, AND SCORE.
BUT, BUT, UM, UM, I WANNA BE CLEAR THAT I, I DON'T WANNA SET A PRECEDENT IN TERMS OF OUR PROCESS.
ALSO, IS IT POSSIBLE THAT THERE MAY BE ANY ADDITIONAL ARPA FUNDS THAT, UH, DON'T GO SPENT THAT COULD BE RECONSIDERED FOR ANOTHER PROJECT OR TWO DOWN THE LINE? THAT'S WHY WE DO QUARTERLY UPDATES, BECAUSE THE IDEA IS TO CONTINUE TO SHAKE IT.
UM, AND, AND IF WE HAVE UNSPENT DOLLARS IN ANY OF THE CATEGORIES, THEN, THEN YOU GUYS HAVE A CHANCE TO REALLOCATE IT.
'CAUSE WE WANT TO, WE WANNA KEEP THAT MONEY MOVING.
AND THAT'S WHY I WOULD, AND WE REEVALUATE
[00:25:01]
THEM BECAUSE IF THERE IS ADDITIONAL FUNDING AND THEY WERE THE ONLY ONES THAT HAD THIS KIND OF A SITUATION, AND THEY MAY BE A, A VALUABLE PARTNER IN PROVIDING SERVICES THAT WE MIGHT HAVE FUNDED.IF MORE MONEY DOES COME DOWN THE LINE, WE MIGHT BE ABLE TO GIVE THEM THE CONSIDERATION THEY DESERVE.
SO THAT'S WHAT I WOULD ASK THE STAFF TO WORK ON.
AND OTHER THAN THAT, I THINK ALL THE OTHER ORGANIZATIONS ARE, ARE VERY DESERVING.
I WONDER ABOUT THE SPORTS FOUNDATION 'CAUSE THEY GET SO MANY CONTRIBUTIONS FROM SO MANY DIFFERENT ORGANIZATIONS OUTSIDE OF THE CITY.
BUT, UM, I'M, I'M NOT GONNA MOVE TO DENY ANYBODY THAT THE CITY'S RECOMMENDING RIGHT NOW.
COUNCIL MEMBER KWA H THANK YOU MAYOR.
UM, I AGREE, UM, LARGELY WITH STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND THANK YOU OF COURSE FOR YOUR WORK ON IT.
UM, I ACCEPT, I, UM, I AGREE WITH MAYOR NUREMBERG THAT I, I, I'D LIKE TO SEE IT STREAMLINED, UM, AND MAYBE NOT GO TO FULL COUNSEL JUST, JUST TO KEEP THE PROCESS CLEAN.
UM, I'M JUST TALKING ABOUT THE 2.4, I THINK THE ONE, ONE AND A HALF OR SO TO, UH, FOR CONSTRUCTION GRANTS.
THAT'S, THAT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE DELIBERATED, UH, WITH INDIVIDUAL ORGANIZATIONS.
IT'S, IT'S A ONE POT OF MONEY.
AND THE, THAT PROCESS, THE APPLICATION OPEN ON MONDAY.
SO AS THIS JUST GIVES US MORE CAPACITY TO DO MORE SMALL BUSINESS GRANTS FOR THOSE THAT QUALIFIED.
SO I, I, I'M JUST THINKING OUT LOUD, BUT MAYBE WE TAKE THE TWO, 2.4 AND APPORTION IT OUT TO, UM, THE DIFFERENT COMMITTEES THAT, UM, THAT WERE IN CHARGE OF IT IN THE FIRST PLACE.
KIND OF JUST SEND IT BACK TO THAT PROCESS.
UM, I, I, AND I ALSO, I HEAR YOU VERY LOUD AND CLEAR, ERIC, ABOUT NOT WANTING TO SET A PRECEDENT.
I WONDER IF THAT HELPS WITH THAT.
YOU'RE NOT TAKING IT TO FULL COUNCIL AND REOPENING, YOU'RE, YOU'RE TAKING IT TO A COMMITTEE SPECIFICALLY FOR JUST ARPA FUNDING.
I DUNNO IF THAT WOULD HELP IN THAT PROCESS, BUT, UM, THE, THE REASON I'M, I THINK THAT MIGHT BE A BETTER PROCESS IS I THINK IT'S SLIDE SEVEN, UM, WHERE YOU LIST ALL THE ORGANIZATIONS.
I, I, YOU KNOW, I I THINK COUNCILMAN COURAGE MENTIONED IT.
I HAVE NO ISSUE WITH ANY OF THESE.
I I KNOW THEY ALL DO GOOD WORK, BUT, UH, I WOULD LIKE TO OPEN IT UP TO, TO MORE THAN JUST THIS LIST.
UH, I HAVE A CONCERN ABOUT THE, UM, THE SYSTEM, YOU KNOW, THE, THE, THE TECH PART OF IT.
UH, I HEAR YOUR, YOUR EXPLANATION.
I, I'M A LITTLE CONFUSED BECAUSE IN TALKING WITH CLARITY, I UNDERSTOOD THAT THEY, UM, RECEIVED SOME KIND OF NOTIFICATION THAT THEY DIDN'T GET SELECTED.
SO I'M CONFUSED ABOUT WHY THEY, HOW THEY GOT, UNLESS THAT'S NOT ACCURATE.
BUT, BUT HOW, IF THEY DIDN'T GET SUBMITTED, THEN HOW DID THEY GET A DENIAL? UM, BUT MY SUGGESTION, MY SOLUTION TO THAT IS IF YOU TAKE IT BACK TO THE COMMITTEES, MAYBE THERE'S A, YOU KNOW, A QUICK REOPENING OF A WEEK OR, YOU KNOW, JUST TO SOLVE ALL OF THOSE, THOSE KIND OF TECHNICAL ISSUES.
UM, SORT OF A SECOND, SECOND CHANCE, UH, BECAUSE I KNOW THAT THERE WERE THE SQUEAKY WHEEL, BUT I WONDER HOW MANY ORGANIZATIONS OUT THERE ARE, ARE NOT LETTING US KNOW.
UM, BUT I, I LARGELY, UH, AGREE WITH THE RECOMMENDATION EXCEPT FOR THOSE CAVEATS.
DO YOU HAVE ANY THOUGHTS? AND, AND JUST TO ANSWER THE QUESTION FROM A COUPLE OF YOU, HOW MANY OTHER ORGANIZATIONS PERHAPS WERE IN THE SAME SITUATION AS CLARITY? UH, TROY ELLIOT, OUR, UM, UH, FINANCE DIRECTOR TELLS ME IS PROBABLY ANOTHER TWO OR THREE.
SO, UM, I MEAN, I'D LIKE TO HEAR MY, MY COLLEAGUE'S THOUGHTS ON THAT, THAT PROPOSED SOLUTION.
COUNCIL MEMBER CABELL, HARVARD.
UM, MR. MINE, WHEN I LOOK AT THAT SLIDE, MARIA, THAT MAY GIVE ADDITIONAL CREDENCE TO, TO JUST BRINGING THE COMMITTEES BACK IN, UH, IS HAVE ANY OF THESE, UH, PROPO, HAVE ANY OF THESE ORGANIZATIONS BEEN NOTIFIED OF A RECOMMENDATION OF 50% FUNDING? 'CAUSE I, I WONDER IF THERE'S ANY OF THESE PROPOSALS THAT ARE NOT FEASIBLE UNLESS THEY'RE A HUNDRED PERCENT FUNDED AND THEREFORE MIGHT FALL OFF THE LIST.
SO WE INFORMED THEM THIS MORNING, UH, RIGHT BEFORE THIS, UM, MEETING, SO THEY WOULD BE AWARE THAT WE WERE HAVING THIS PUBLIC DISCUSSION.
UM, NOW THE AGENCIES, THE CONTRACTS THAT YOU APPROVE ON FEBRUARY THE SECOND, THERE WERE ONLY A FEW.
ONLY A FEW THAT WE RECOMMENDED AT A HUNDRED PERCENT OF THEIR APPLICATIONS.
MOST OF THEM WERE FUNDED AT A PERCENTAGE LESS.
UH, FOR INSTANCE, ON THE NON-PROFIT, UM, UM, SECTION, WE HAD A COUPLE OF C OVID 19 IMPACTS THAT WE WERE TRYING TO RESOLVE.
SO A GROUP OF THOSE ORGANIZATIONS WAS FUNDED
[00:30:01]
AT SLIGHTLY AT 52% OF THEIR APPLICATION ON AVERAGE, AND THE OTHER GROUP AT 78% OF THEIR APPLICATION.SO, UM, MOST OF THEM, AGAIN, WERE FUNDED AT A LESSER AMOUNT.
WE NEGOTIATE WITH THEM AS WE, UM, BEFORE THE CONTRACTS ARE EXECUTED, JUST TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY, THEY'RE WE'RE RIGHT SIZING THEIR BUDGETS TO BE ABLE TO PROVIDE THE SERVICES.
IT'S NOT UNCOMMON THAT WE DO THAT WITH THE NONPROFIT ORGANIZATIONS.
IT IS JUST 'CAUSE I SEE SOME THAT ARE INFRASTRUCTURE RELATED, UH, PROPOSALS.
UM, AND JUST SO I'M CLEAR ON THE PROCESS, AND I APOLOGIZE IF YOU ALREADY WENT OVER THIS, BUT WHEN THE DOLLARS THAT ARE GOING BACK TO COMMITTEE, GO BACK TO COMMITTEE, IS THERE A NEW COMPETITIVE PROCESS OPENED OR ARE WE USING OLD APPLIC OR, OR THE EXISTING APPLICATIONS? WELL, WE WOULD RECOMMEND BECAUSE OF WHERE THE DOLLARS CAME FROM.
SO FOR INSTANCE, ON MENTAL HEALTH, UM, FOR THOSE, UM, AREAS OF THE COMMITTEE, PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE WANTED TO ADDRESS, WE DID NOT GET APPLICATIONS THAT MET THE SCOPE OF WORK.
SO, UM, I DON'T WANNA SPEAK FOR THE CHAIRWOMAN, BUT, UM, LIKELY THAT WE WOULD DO PROB IS, UH, ANOTHER COMPETITIVE PROCESS.
THAT DECISION WILL BE MADE AT THE COMMITTEE? YES.
AND THEN BROUGHT TO THE COUNCIL.
UH, COUNCIL MEMBER COURAGE, THE CONCERN I I SEE IN LOOKING AT THE RECOMMENDATIONS FROM THE STAFF FOR THE 2.4 MILLION IS HOW DO YOU BREAK IT DOWN BY COMMITTEE? DO YOU SAY, FOR EXAMPLE, WE'VE GOT THREE COMMITTEES THAT ARE GONNA BE LOOKING AT THE THREE POINT, UH, 4,000,001 COMMITTEE HAS LIKE 70,000, ANOTHER ONE HAS THREE AND A HALF MILLION, AND THE OTHER ONE HAS SOMETHING IN BETWEEN.
SO DO WE BREAK THIS DOWN BY SAYING, THIS PERCENTAGE GOES TO THAT COMMITTEE AND THIS PERCENTAGE GOES TO THAT COMMITTEE AND, AND, YOU KNOW, HOW DO WE THEN, UH, ASCERTAIN, CAN WE GIVE ONE GROUP THAT HAS 700,000, UH, ANOTHER ONE THAT HAS 250 IF IT'S BROKEN DOWN BY CERTAIN AMOUNTS OF MONEY TO CERTAIN COMMITTEES? I DON'T KNOW THAT YOU'D HAVE TO, UH, BREAK UP SOME OF THESE OFFERINGS BECAUSE THEY WOULDN'T BE COVERED BY THE, THERE'S NOT ENOUGH MONEY, UH, DEDICATED TO THAT COMMITTEE.
OR DO YOU DO IT BASED ON HOW WE EVALUATE WHAT THAT PROGRAM'S GOING TO DO? UH, AND SO ANYTHING MENTAL HEALTH WOULD GO TO THE MENTAL HEALTH COMMITTEE AND ALL THE MONEY ASSIGNED TO THOSE GROUPS WOULD GO TO THAT MENTAL HEALTH COMMITTEE.
BUT WHAT WOULD THE COMMITTEE ITSELF WANT TO DO? YOU KNOW, WOULD THEY START DIVIDING IT UP EVEN DIFFERENTLY? AND SO, YOU KNOW, I I, I'M RELUCTANT TO AGREE TO SEND IT TO THE COMMITTEES BECAUSE IF WE HAD HAD ENOUGH MONEY, WHICH WE FIND OUT NOW, WE DID, PROBABLY ALL THESE WOULD'VE BEEN CANDIDATES TO GET FUNDED AT THAT TIME.
SO NOW WE'RE FINDING WE DO HAVE THE MONEY INSTEAD OF PUTTING THEM AT RISK AND SENDING 'EM TO DIFFERENT COMMITTEES THAT MIGHT MAKE DIFFERENT CHOICES.
I THINK THAT WE OUGHT TO GO AHEAD AND, AND FOLLOW THROUGH WITH WHAT WE HAVE HERE.
'CAUSE IT'S IN ALIGNMENT WITH THE ORIGINAL PLAN.
UH, AND BECAUSE WE'VE GOT EXTRA MONEY, IT, IT JUST ACCOMMODATES THEM INSTEAD OF GOING THROUGH A NEW PROCESS AND SAYING, WELL, ARE THEY STILL ELIGIBLE? OR WOULD ANOTHER ORGANIZATION WHO'S LOOKING AT THAT 3.4 MILLION, SHOULD THEY GET MORE OF THIS MONEY THAT SOMEBODY ELSE GOT? AND YOU END UP GETTING INTO, I THINK, TOO MUCH OF A INDECISIVE, UH, ACTION.
SO THAT, THAT'S JUST WAY I FEEL ABOUT IT.
AND, AND THANK YOU TROY FOR ANSWERING THE QUESTION, UM, THAT I WAS ASKING ABOUT.
WELL, HOW MANY OTHERS? WHAT ARE THOSE OTHER TWO OR THREE? DO YOU HAVE THE NAMES OF THEM? NO, NOT, NO, I APOLOGIZE.
I WAS JUST TRYING TO FIND THEM.
I DON'T HAVE THEM, BUT ONCE I GET THEM I CAN FORWARD THOSE.
AND I THINK I WOULD BE, UH, HESITANT TO TO APPROVE ANYTHING ELSE WITHOUT KNOWING RIGHT.
LIKE WHAT, WHAT THOSE OTHER ORGANIZATIONS ARE.
AGAIN, SOME NONPROFITS ARE A LITTLE BIT BIGGER AND SO THEY, THEY HAVE THESE PEOPLE WHO WORK ON GRANTS AND OTHERS DON'T.
AND SO I I I'D WANT TO GIVE THEM A FAIR, FAIR CHANCE AS WELL.
UM, BUT YOU CAN LOOK THEM UP THEN, RIGHT? IS WHAT YOU'RE TELLING.
WE CAN, AND I APOLOGIZE, I WASN'T HERE, I WAS WATCHING FROM MY OFFICE, BUT, UM, I SAW SOME OF THE DISCUSSION, PROBABLY LIKE TO PROVIDE SOME MORE BACKGROUND.
BUT, UM, WHEN AN AGENCY IS ACTUALLY WORKING IN THE SYSTEM, AS YOU, AS MARIA SAID, THEY HAVE THE ABILITY TO WORK IN THE SYSTEM ON THEIR PROPOSAL.
SO IT'S KIND OF LIKE AN EMAIL.
YOU CAN WORK ON A FILE AND THEN YOU, ONCE YOU HAVE SAVED IT AND IT'S READY, THEN YOU CAN SEND THE EMAIL.
SO THEY WORK ON THEIR PROPOSAL.
THEY, UM, THEY HAVE THE ABILITY TO SAVE THEIR WORK MM-HMM.
[00:35:01]
A POPUP THAT ACTUALLY COMES UP AND SAYS, IT'S A WARNING SAYING THIS HAS NOT BEEN SUBMITTED TO THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO.ONCE YOU SAVE YOUR WORK, YOU MUST SUBMIT IT FOR IT TO BE, UM, TO BE, UM, ELIGIBLE FOR THE DEADLINE AND TO BE, UM, REVIEWED BY THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO.
WE DO HAVE THE ABILITY, UM, TO GO LOOK AND WHAT THEY'RE DOING IN THE SYSTEM WHEN THEY'RE WORKING.
SO IN THE CASE OF CLARITY, FOR EXAMPLE, I CAN SEE THEM WORKING AND SAVING THEIR PROPOSAL ALL THE WAY UP TO THE DEADLINE, AND THEN THEY JUST MISSED THE DEADLINE.
UM, AND THAT'S USUALLY WHAT HAPPENS.
SO WE DO A LOT OF DUE DILIGENCE AND WE LOOK AT IT ON A CASE BY CASE BASIS BEFORE WE ACTUALLY MAKE THOSE DECISIONS, WHETHER TO ACCEPT OR NOT ACCEPT THE PROPOSALS.
SO WOULD IT APPEAR IN THE MY SUMMARY TAB FOR THEM? AND DO YOU USE THE MY TRACKING TAB THEN? I'M LOOKING AT THE SYSTEM? UM, I'M NOT SURE THE TAB, WE ACTUALLY LOOK AT THE BACK END.
WE DON'T LOOK AT THE ACTUAL FRONT END, THE, THE GRAPHICAL USER INTERFACE OR USING THE BACKEND TO SEE WHAT THEY'RE DOING AND WHEN THEY'RE DOING IT.
BUT WE STILL, WE STILL HAVE NO VISIBILITY INTO THEIR PROPOSAL UNTIL THEY FORMALLY SURE.
SO IF THEY HAVE A RESPONSE NUMBER AND IT, IT, IT SAYS RIGHT, THE RESPONSE NUMBER, AND I THINK THIS IS TO COUNCILMAN, UM, KEVIN HALVER'S POINT, UH, THEY CAN, THEY COULD, AND YOU COULD TELL ME HOW MANY TIMES THEY WENT IN THERE TO SEE IF THEIR APPLICATION WAS SUBMITTED.
YOU COULD TELL ME THAT WITH THE OTHER TWO OR THREE AS WELL.
BUT THAT DOES NOT MEAN THAT IT'S BEEN SUBMITTED TO, UM, PURCHASING FOR EVALUATION.
AND JUST, UM, AND I'M LOOKING FROM THE S A P, RIGHT? MM-HMM.
AND SO IS THAT THE SYSTEM THAT THEY USE FOR EVERYTHING? YEAH.
IS IT S A P? WELL, THERE'S NO OKAY.
FOR, UM, PROFESSIONAL GOODS AND SERVICES AND, UM, THEY'LL USE, UH, WHAT WE CALL THE, UM, E-PROCUREMENT SYSTEM.
AND THE CONSTRUCTION USES A SEPARATE SYSTEM.
SO THERE'S TWO SYSTEMS. SO FOR, FOR NON-PROFITS, THEY'VE NEVER USED S A P IN THE GRAND SCHEME OF THINGS.
I, I'D LIKE TO MAKE A SUGGESTION AND THAT IS THAT WE TAKE THE E W D C BUCKET AND JUST SEND IT OVER TO, UH, CHECK TO SAVE Y'ALL SOME TIME.
UM, I MEAN, I, I, I MEAN IF YOU'RE OKAY WITH RECEIVING AN EXTRA TWO 50, COULD YOU REPEAT THAT? SURE.
SO, YOU KNOW, UM, FIRST OF ALL, UH, A MOVE TO APPROVE WHATEVER ACTION ITEM IS IN FRONT OF IT, IS THIS AN ACTION ITEM THAT YOU GUYS ARE ASKING US TO VOTE ON? IT'S, IT'S AN ACTION ITEM.
UH, THE, UH, WAS THERE A SECOND? YEAH, WITH THE COPY OUT THAT, UM, WE CHANGE THIS PLAN TO SEND $240,000 THAT, THAT IS, UM, SET OUT THERE ON LINE NUMBER TWO FOR A W D C.
WE SEND THAT UP TO, UM, TO CHECK WITH THE SAME, WITH THE SAME, UH, FLAVOR THOUGH, RIGHT? THAT, THAT TWO 40 REMAIN YOUTH SERVICES, THAT THE SEVENTIES, 2000 REMAINED, UH, SENIOR SERVICE, BUT THAT'D BE CONSIDERED AT ONE COMMITTEE AS OPPOSED TO THREE, UH, BECAUSE OF THE SMALL AMOUNT.
AND I'LL JUST, I'LL PUT THAT THERE AND, AND SEE IF THERE'S ANY OBJECTIONS, IF YOU GUYS ARE OKAY WITH THAT.
I'M JUST TRYING TO SAVE EVERYBODY SOME TIME.
UM, YOU OKAY WITH THAT? YES, SIR.
NO, WELL, YEAH, IT MAKES, IT MAKES A LOT OF SENSE.
AND MARIA AND I TALKED ABOUT THE 72,000, BUT WE'RE, WE'RE LIVING WITHIN THE BUCKETS, BUT I THINK THAT MAKES A LOT OF SENSE.
UM, AND THEN THE SECOND THING IS, I, I AM CONCERNED ABOUT, UM, OTHER ORGANIZATIONS WHO JUST AREN'T GONNA GET, YOU KNOW, EVEN CONSIDERATION, RIGHT? SO FOR, FOR MARIA, FOR THIS TOTAL $3.7 MILLION, LET'S SAY THE ECUMENICAL CENTER, RIGHT? WHO DIDN'T MAKE IT ON THE LIST OF THE, THE ONES THAT SCORED 70 OR HIGHER, UM, CAN, DO THEY HAVE TO RESUB, DO THEY HAVE TO RESUBMIT AN APPLICATION? OR ARE WE GOING BACK TO SUBMITTING, UH, REVIEWING THE ORIGINAL APPLICATIONS? SO A COUPLE OF THINGS THAT THE, LET'S SAY, UM, THE PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE WANTS TO OPEN A NEW PROCESS, UH, WE CAN DEFINITELY DO THAT OR THEY COULD, UM, CHANGE THE PRIORITIES AND LOOK AT APPLICATIONS THAT WERE SUBMITTED.
WITH THAT SAID, FOR PUBLIC SAFETY, THE REASON WHY WE HAVE THE BALANCE IS BECAUSE THE, THE AREAS THAT WE PUT OUT FOR COMPETITIVE PROPOSALS, THE APPLICATIONS DID NOT MEET THE SCOPE OF WORK.
SO UNLESS THE COMMITTEE CHANGES THE SCOPE OF WORK, WE WOULD HAVE TO DO A NEW PROCESS.
SO THERE'S GONNA BE A NEW PROCESS START ALL OVER AGAIN.
DOES THAT MEAN THAT ORGANIZATIONS THAT DIDN'T APPLY AT ALL CAN NOW HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO COME AND JOIN THE DANCE? THEY COULD, YES.
SO, UH, BEFORE I, I'M SORRY, MAYOR, I DIDN'T CATCH IT.
WAS THERE A MOTION ALREADY MADE OR YOU DID? OH, I JUST DID IT.
SO NOW, NOW IT OCCURS TO ME BECAUSE I NEED TO, I, I MEAN, I, I NEED TO JUST TO MAKE DOUBLE SURE THAT WE'RE OKAY WITH THIS.
IF I, IF, AM I OKAY WITH VOTING ON THIS, LIZ? 'CAUSE LIZ AND I HAD BEEN DISCUSSED EARLIER, WHETHER OR NOT I'M, I SHOULD RECUSE MYSELF FROM THIS VOTE, RIGHT? BECAUSE OF ONE ORGANIZATION NAMED ON SLIDE NUMBER SEVEN.
AM I OKAY WITH VOTING IT JUST AS ONE PACKAGE SINCE IT'S NOT A SUBSTANTIVE VOTE? OR, WELL, COUNCILMAN, I
[00:40:01]
WANNA BE SURE WE WERE TALKING ABOUT THE 3.7 TO GO BACK TO COMMITTEE OR AS THEY SEE YOU VOTE FIRST.WELL, I THINK WHAT I'M, WHAT I, THE MOTION I JUST MADE WAS JUST WHY DON'T, WHY DON'T WE SEPARATE THOSE TWO JUST LIKE THAT? OKAY, LIZ.
'CAUSE IT IS TWO SEPARATE DISCUSSIONS.
SO WE'LL JUST TALK ABOUT THE 3.7 THAT STAFF HAS RECOMMENDED, GO TO THE COMMITTEE THAT, THAT WAY IT CLEARS YOU FROM THAT, THEREFORE.
SO MY MOTION IS THAT JUST FOR THE PURPOSES OF THIS, THIS 3.7 THAT WE SEND IT OFF TO CHECK AND PUBLIC SAFETY WITH THE 240 K PORTION, GOING TO CHECK FOR, UM, THE YOUTH SERVICES PERIOD.
UM, AND WE'RE GONNA SUSPEND THE ROUNDS 'CAUSE THIS IS MORE MEATY DISCUSSION.
UM, SO IN THAT SAME VEIN THOUGH, UM, EARLIER I MENTIONED PERHAPS TAKING THE TWO AND 2.4 AND ALLOCATING IT TO THE THREE COMMITTEES.
I DON'T KNOW IF, IF THAT WOULD BE SOMETHING WE'RE LIKELY TO DO, IF THAT WOULD, I THOUGHT THEY WOULD GO BACK TO THE ORIGINAL THREE COMMITTEES.
UM, I GUESS I'M SORT OF CURIOUS ABOUT YOUR THOUGHTS, Y'ALL'S THOUGHTS ON, ON THAT BECAUSE I, I, I THINK YOU'RE RIGHT.
UH, MAYOR, WE SHOULD, THE MORE, THE MORE I HEAR THIS, THE MORE I AGREE THAT WE PROBABLY SHOULD TO GO FULL COUNSEL, TAKE THEM TO COMMITTEE THE 2.4.
UM, YOU KNOW, 'CAUSE I THINK, WE'LL, IF, IF THERE IS A NEW COMPETITIVE PROCESS, WE WILL, YOU KNOW, DEAL WITH THE ISSUE OF SUBMISSIONS.
THIS CAME FROM VARIOUS SERVICES THAT WERE, UM, AUTHORIZED BY THE CITY COUNCIL ON THE ARPA DISCUSSION WRIT LARGE.
SO A LOT OF IT CAME FROM VARIOUS ELEMENTS THAT WE'RE NOT EVEN TALKING ABOUT TODAY.
DID YOU WANT TO JUMP IN, MARIA? I WAS GONNA SAY THE MAJORITY CAME FROM INTEREST INCOME.
SO JUST, AND, AND JUST TO CLARIFY FURTHER THAT WE, WE DON'T HAVE ENOUGH REVENUE OR WE DON'T HAVE ENOUGH FUNDS TO COVER ALL THE APPLICATIONS.
I THINK COUNCIL MEMBER COURAGE, UM, STATED THAT WE DO, UM, BASED ON WHERE THOSE REVENUES CAME FROM, WE ACTUALLY HAVE MORE APPLICATIONS THAN WE HAVE FUNDS TO DEVOTE TO THEM.
SO DON'T, DON'T BE CONCERNED THAT SOMEHOW WE LEFT SOMEBODY OUT ON PURPOSE.
UM, BUT HOW WE MOVE THOSE INTO THE COMMITTEES NOW IS AN ISSUE.
SO, UH, IF WE DO THE 2.4 YEAH.
TWO COMMITTEES, HOW DO WE WANNA SPLIT THAT UP? I, I, WELL, I MEAN, I THINK THERE'S TWO A COUPLE OF WAYS WE COULD DO THAT JUST EQUALLY.
UM, OR, UH, PROPORTIONATELY THE ORIGINAL AMOUNT THAT THAT WAS PUT INTO EACH OF THE BUCKETS, THE PERCENTAGE, YOU KNOW, UM, BUT I'M, I WANNA HEAR Y'ALL'S THOUGHTS ON THAT.
UH, COUNCILS MEMBER APPLIES THE, UH, I DON'T KNOW.
I, I, I'D BEEN THINKING ABOUT THIS AS TWO PILES, RIGHT? ONE WAS LEFTOVER MONEY AND THEN THE OTHER ONE WAS JUST INTEREST GENERATED BECAUSE IT HAD BEEN SITTING THERE FOR A LONG TIME, RIGHT? AND SO FOR ME, THOSE WERE JUST TWO DIFFERENT THOUGHT EXERCISES AND I UNDERSTAND HOW, HOW IT COULD BE LOOKED AT DIFFERENTLY OR IN THAT, OR HOW THEY CAN JUST BE SET.
YOU KNOW, ONE CAN SAY, WAIT A SECOND, MONEY'S GREEN.
IT DOESN'T MATTER WHAT COLOR THE MONEY IS, RIGHT? IT'S FUNGIBLE.
IT'S ALL IN THE SAME ACCOUNT TODAY.
AND SO, UM, I REALLY HAVE NO PREFERENCE ONE WAY OR THE OTHER.
I DON'T FEEL STRONGLY ENOUGH ABOUT, YOU KNOW, THE FLAVOR OF THE MONEY OR THE COLOR OF THE MONEY.
UM, AND IT, AND THAT COLOR REQUIRING DIFFERENT PROCESSES OR DIFFERENT CONSIDERATIONS.
UM, BUT IF WE WERE TO SPLIT THAT MONEY UP, I ALSO DON'T FEEL VERY STRONGLY ABOUT THE PROPO, YOU KNOW, WHETHER IT'S PRO-RATA OR IF IT'S EQUALLY SPLIT DOWN THE MIDDLE.
I JUST CARE ABOUT IT BEING TRANSPARENT.
RIGHT? UM, AND UM, SO I MEAN, I, I WILL DEFER TO ALL OF YOU AS TO HOW TO DO IT.
I DO WANT TO HOWEVER SAY THAT I'D LIKE TO ERR ON THE SIDE OF NOT HAVING UNNECESSARY MEETINGS, RIGHT? I MEAN, LIKE, THIS IS, THIS IS LIKE THE HOUSE IS ON FIRE FOR A LOT OF THESE ORGANIZATIONS.
AND SO IF WE HAVE TO WAIT FOR THEN E W D C TO MEET AND THEN FOR CHECK TO MEET AND THEN FOR SAFETY TO MEET, RIGHT? SO, WHICH IS WHY I'M PERFECTLY OKAY WITH SPLITTING IT UP WITH TWO OTHER COMMITTEES.
WELL, SO LET ME OFFER A SUGGESTION.
AND LIZ, YOU CAN TELL ME IF THIS IS LEGAL
CAN WE DO THAT? CAN WE CALL A JOINT MEETING OF THE TWO COMMITTEES TO, TO QUORUM COUNCIL? WE CAN'T.
YOU MIGHT AS WELL GO BE SESSION.
NO, IT'S A GOOD RAINING ON MY PARADE THERE.
UM, IT SOUNDED LIKE A GOOD IDEA.
SO I'M, I'M GONNA GO AHEAD, I'M GONNA GO AHEAD
[00:45:01]
AND, UH, MOVE, UM, TO AMEND YOUR MOTION TO SEND THE 2.4 BACK.ACTUALLY, LET'S, LET'S CLEAR OUT THE FIRST MOTION.
THERE IS A MOTION ON THE 3.7 TO SEND IT, UH, TO EACH OF THE TWO.
LET'S GO AHEAD AND CALL THAT VOTE.
UM, ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION ON THAT MOTION? ALRIGHT, AD HEARING NONE.
NOW LET'S HAVE A DISCUSSION ABOUT THE 2.4 AND THE 1.49.
SO I WOULD ENTERTAIN A MOTION FOR THE 1.49 TO CONSTRUCTION GRANTS SO WE CAN CLEAR THAT OUT.
THERE'S A MOTION TO SECOND FOR 1.49.
GO INTO CONSTRUCTION GRANTS MOTION, UH, ROCHA GARCIA WITH THE MOTION, CABER WITH A SECOND.
ANY DISCUSSION ON THE 1.49 GOING TO THE CONSTRUCTION IMPACT GRANTS? OKAY.
OKAY, NOW WE'RE JUST TALKING ABOUT THE 2.4 MILLION IN TERMS OF WHICH COMMITTEE IT SHOULD GO TO OR COMMITTEES AND WHO WANTS TO START THAT COURAGE? WELL, I'LL, I'LL JUST SAY I DON'T REALLY THINK THIS NEEDS TO GO TO A COMMITTEE, SO I WOULD LIKE TO SEE US MOVE FORWARD WITH WHAT WAS PRESENTED BY STAFF, AND I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO THAT EFFECT.
COUNCIL MEMBER COURAGE MADE A MOTION, UM, TO GO WITH THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION ON THE A SESSION IZING THOSE ORGANIZATIONS BEING FUNDED WITH THE 2.4 MILLION.
WAS THERE A SECOND? ALRIGHT, HEARING NO SECOND, THEN THAT MOTION DIES.
LET'S KEEP THE CONVERSATION GOING ABOUT THE 2.4
I THINK WE HEARD, UH, COUNCILMAN VALLIS, BUT, UH, IF YOU, I HAD A COUPLE OF SUGGESTIONS.
ONE JUST BEING DIVIDED UP EQUALLY.
UM, AND IF WE'RE REMOVING EEW ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, THEN IT'S JUST BETWEEN THE TWO COMMITTEES, CORRECT? OR YEAH, THAT MY, MY IDEA WAS, I MEAN, I LIKE THAT, RIGHT? SPLITTING IT DOWN THE MIDDLE SO LONG AS IT'S, YOU KNOW, SPLIT INTO THREE BUCKETS, RIGHT? THAT YOUTH IS STILL IN THERE.
UM, SO EQUALLY OR, UH, UH, PROPORTIONATELY WHAT ORIGINALLY THE ORIGINAL PROPORTIONS, I THINK IT'S, UM, MY, MY OPINION ON IT IS THAT IT SHOULD BE EQUALLY JUST TO CUT IN HALF.
AND, AND SO ON THAT NOTE, LET ME ASK, WOULD THE STAFF FEEL COMFORTABLE GIVING WHATEVER PROCESS UNFOLDS IF IT'S NEW COMPETITIVE PROPOSAL OR NOT? IF THERE'S NOT A CLEAR LINE THAT SOME OF THAT MONEY MIGHT BE NEEDED FOR AN APPLICATION OVER IN A DIFFERENT COMMITTEE, WOULD YOU MAKE THAT RECOMMENDATION KNOWN TO THE COMMITTEE? YEAH, MAYOR, I THINK, I THINK IF YOU, IF YOU DECIDE TO, IF YOU GUYS DECIDE TO MOVE IT TO THE, TO THE COMMITTEES FOR CONVERSATION, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT, THAT'S WHY I WAS TALKING TO TROY, WE'LL NEED TO CLOSE AND FINALIZE THAT SOLICITATION PROCESS THAT YOU VOTED ON TWO WEEKS AGO.
'CAUSE WE'VE LEFT IT OPEN WAITING, PENDING THESE CONVERSATIONS.
SO ANYTHING SUBMITTED OR NOT SUBMITTED IS CLOSED.
AND THEN THAT GIVES THE COMMITTEES THE OPPORTUNITY TO THINK THROUGH A NEW SCOPE, A NEW SOLICITATION FOR WHATEVER WE DO WITH THAT MONEY.
I JUST, THAT, THAT WOULD MAKE IT EASIER BECAUSE THEN YOU'RE GONNA HAVE COMPETING OLD PROPOSALS AND POTENTIAL NEW PROPOSALS AND IT, IT'S EASY, I THINK IT'S EASIER AND FAIR FOR EVERYBODY JUST TO SAY WE'RE THE C THE COMMITTEES ARE GONNA DISCUSS, FIGURE OUT WHAT THE NEW SCOPE IS AND WHAT THE DELIVERY METHOD IS, WHAT SOLICITATION, AND WE CLOSE THE OLD ONE AND BE DONE WITH IT.
ALL RIGHT, SO COUNCIL MEMBER CAB HVAR IS THE CHAIR OF PUBLIC SAFETY.
ROCHE GARCIA IS THE CHAIR OF CHECK.
UH, WE ALL TRY TO SCHEDULE THOSE MEETINGS AS QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE, MAYBE EVEN THIS NEXT WEEK.
SO WHAT, WHAT IS NOW, JUST FOR CLARITY, WHAT IS THE TOTAL AMOUNT GOING TO PUBLIC SAFETY AND WHAT IS THE TOTAL AMOUNT GOING TO CHECK? SO IS, LET ME GO BACK TO THAT SLIDE.
SO IS 3.4 MILLION GOING TO PUBLIC SAFETY RIGHT NOW? AND ROUGHLY ABOUT 310,000 GOING TO, UH, COMMUNITY TO CHECK.
AND IF WE DID THIS, THE SPLIT, THEN WE WOULD JUST SPLIT, HOW MUCH WAS IT? 2.4.
AND, AND THE WAY THAT I UNDERSTOOD THE COUNCILMAN, IF IN ON, IN TERMS OF THE BASE ON THE PROPORTIONATE AND PROPORTION TO THE ORIGINAL AMOUNT, MENTAL HEALTH GOT $26 MILLION, UM, YOUTH IN THIS CASE GOT $10 MILLION.
SO IF, IF THAT WAS A CONSIDERATION, I EVEN KNOW, COUNCILMAN, IF THAT'S WHAT YOU WERE THINKING.
AND IF IT WAS THEN 72%, 72% OF THE 2.4 MILLION WOULD GO TO PUBLIC SAFETY.
AND IF YOU SPLIT IT HALFWAY, IT'S
[00:50:01]
GONNA BE AT THE END OF THE DAY, $4.6 MILLION TO PUBLIC SAFETY AND ABOUT 1.8 TO CHECK.WELL, SO THERE IS AN EMOTION ON THE FLOOR, BUT, UM, I WOULD RECOMMEND WE SPLIT THE REMAINDER RIGHT DOWN THE MIDDLE.
AND, AND THAT'S LARGELY BECAUSE THERE'S NOT GONNA BE A BRIGHT LINE BETWEEN MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES AND THE OTHER TWO BUCKETS.
SO IT MAY BE THAT AN APPLICATION HAS TO COME FROM THE TWO TO FULLY FUND IT OR TO PROPERLY FUND IT.
SO I, I MOVE TO AMEND THE, WELL, ACTUALLY THERE'S NOT A MOTION.
DO WE NEED TO MAKE A MOTION ON THE ATION? NO, JUST MAKE A MOTION ON THE 2.4.
SO I'M, I'M I MOVE TO ALLOCATE THE 2.4, UM, TO CHECK BACK, TO CHECK AND PUBLIC SAFETY, UM, WITH A 50 50 SPLIT.
KNOWING THAT WE MIGHT PUT THE BABY BACK TOGETHER AT THE END OF THE DAY ON A, SO MAYOR, WHAT I, WHAT I'LL SUGGEST IS THAT ONCE THE COMMITTEES HAVE A CHANCE TO TALK ABOUT THAT POTENTIAL SCOPE AND PURPOSE, UM, AT BOTH COMMITTEES, WE'LL BRING BOTH THOSE AT THE SAME TIME TO THE COUNCIL SO THAT IF THERE'S AN OPPORTUNITY FOR THAT, THAT INTERCHANGE, THEN EVERYBODY SEES THAT AHEAD OF TIME.
WAS THERE A SECOND ON COUNCIL MEMBER CAB JADA'S? UH, MOTION SECOND.
THERE'S A MOTION A SECOND FOR SPLITTING THE REMAINING 2.4 TO CHECK AND TO PUBLIC SAFETY.
AND JUST FOR EVERYBODY LISTENING, WE'RE GONNA HAVE, UH, THOSE COMMITTEE MEETINGS POST HASTE, SO WE CAN PUT THIS, THESE DOLLARS INTO, UH, PRODUCTION AS QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE.
AND THIS IS A LOT OF SAUSAGE MAKING, BUT ACTUALLY IT'S NECESSARY FOR US TO COME UP WITH A VERY CLEAN OUTCOME AT THE END OF THE DAY.
I, I LIKE WHERE WE'RE IN, WHERE WE'VE ENDED UP.
SO, UH, IF THERE'S NO FURTHER DISCUSSION, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY, WELL, LIZ, WERE YOU GONNA, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.
WE NEED TO WAIT FOR THE, THE THREE, THE ORIGINAL WE DID, WE DID ALL.
SO WE TOOK THE THREE ACTIONS AND AT THE END OF THE DAY, IT'S STAFF RECOMMENDATION.
EXCEPT FOR THAT REMAINING 2.4.
WE'LL, UH, WE'LL DRAFT UP A QUICK MEMO FOR THE REST OF THE COUNCIL ON THE OUTCOME THAT, 'CAUSE I KNOW OTHERS WERE LOOKING AT THAT.
10 55 ON THE 15TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2023, OUR GOVERNANCE COMMITTEE MEETING IS NOW ADJOURNED.