[CALL TO ORDER]
[00:00:03]
ALL RIGHT, WANT TO CALL IT TO ORDER THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ADVISORY BOARD REGULAR MEETING TWENTY TWENTY ONE OH NINE ROLL CALL, PLEASE.
MR BORKOWSKI, PRESIDENT, MR. MR JOHNSON HERE.
MR LAZEAR, MS. MIRAGE PRESIDENT MR. MORI. MR. PAYNE. MR PRICE, YOU'RE RIGHT.
WERE THE ATTORNEY, RODNEY EDWARDS, YOU'RE.
THANK YOU, NEED MOTION TO ADOPT MINUTES FOR THE REGULAR MEETING, 20, 21 05, PLEASE.
[ADOPTION OF MINUTES]
WE'LL MOVE. AND A MOTION.DO I HAVE A SECOND, I GOT A MOTION IN SECOND, ALL IN FAVOR.
ALL RIGHT. ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU.
OBVIOUSLY, NO PUBLIC COMMENT, SO ON TO OLD UNFINISHED BUSINESS, WE HAVE ANYTHING AVAILABLE. NOPE.
ALL RIGHT. NO PRESENTATIONS ONTO NEW BUSINESS.
[NEW BUSINESS]
I'M GOING TO TAKE AN OPPORTUNITY TO INTRODUCE OUR TWO NEW BOARD MEMBERS, MR. RITO LAZAR, WHO IS NOT PRESENT WITH US AT THIS MOMENT AND MISS CHRISTINA, RIGHT? WELL. AND WE'RE GLAD YOU DECIDED TO COME AND JOIN US.RIGHT. NUMBER TWO, INFORMATIONAL FUNDING REQUESTS FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROJECTS SHIP.
SO THAT LAST FRIDAY, THE CITY RECEIVED A REQUEST FROM GIC PALM BAY APARTMENTS LLC, SEEKING A $50000 CONTRIBUTION TOWARDS AN AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROJECT THAT THEY WISH TO APPLY THROUGH THE FLORIDA HOUSING FINANCE CORPORATION WITH SALE DOLLARS.
THERE ARE THE RFA THAT WAS PUT OUT BY THE STATE IS DUE ON OCTOBER 15TH, AND AS A REQUIREMENT OF THAT, THEY HAVE TO SEEK A LOCAL CONTRIBUTION FROM THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT AGENCY FOR A MINIMUM OF $50000.
AND WE ARE BRINGING THIS FORTH TO YOU AS INFORMATIONAL JUST TO LET YOU KNOW.
SO WHAT WE PLAN ON DOING IS IF IT GETS APPROVED BY CITY COUNCIL AT THE NEXT MEETING, WE WILL BE USING OUR.
FISCAL YEAR, 19 20 SHIP ALLOCATION THAT WE ARE ANTICIPATING ONCE WE ENCUMBER ALL OF OUR FISCAL YEAR 17 OR 18 FUNDS AND.
THEY PLAN ON DOING AN AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROJECT.
IT'S A RENTAL PROJECT, IT FALLS UNDER THE NEW CONSTRUCTION.
RENTAL STRATEGY IN OUR LOCAL HOUSING ASSISTANCE PLAN AND MEETS ALL OF THE THEY'LL IF THEY ARE APPROVED BY CITY COUNCIL, THEY'LL HAVE TO MEET ALL OF THE REQUIREMENTS THAT ARE SET FORTH IN OUR LOCAL HOUSING ASSISTANCE PLAN AND THEY'LL BE NOTIFIED OF THAT.
AND WE'LL LET THEM ALSO KNOW THAT THEY WILL HAVE TO BE PRESENT AT THE COUNCIL MEETING TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS ON THEIR REQUEST.
ALL RIGHT. WHAT LOCATION OF THE CITY WILL THEIR NEW IF IT'S APPROVED RENTAL BUILDINGS BE LOCATED FOR 80 MALABAR ROAD, SOUTHWEST? SO JUST DOWN SO DOWN THE ROAD IN SOUTHWEST PALM BAY? MANY UNITS. NINETY SIX UNITS.
ADDRESS DOWN THERE WHERE MADELEINE LANDON'S IS.
YES, I BELIEVE IT'S DOWN THAT WAY.
THERE'S ALSO IN YOUR POCKET, THERE'S SHOULD BE A THERE'S A MAP OF A LOCATION.
OR IT'S A I THINK IT'S A MAP, BUT IT'S A SIDE PLAN DRAWING FROM THEIR ARCHITECT ON WHAT IT'S GOING TO LOOK LIKE.
AT LOCAL HOUSING ASSISTANCE PLAN, DOES IT SAY? HOW MANY UNITS HAVE TO ALLOCATE FOR LOW INCOME OR LOW RENT OR WHATEVER THE CATEGORY IS? YES, I DON'T KNOW OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD, BUT THAT'S SOMETHING THAT THEY HAVE TO MEET.
A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF THEIR UNITS WILL HAVE TO BE AT A CERTAIN INCOME LEVEL AND MEET CERTAIN REQUIREMENTS. SO IF THIS IF IT GETS APPROVED BY CITY COUNCIL, THEY'LL HAVE WILL MAKE THEM ACTUALLY AWARE AFTER TONIGHT THAT THIS IS THE PARAMETERS THAT ARE SET FORTH IN THE LOCAL HOUSING ASSISTANCE PLAN AND THAT THEY WILL HAVE TO MEET THOSE TERMS AND CONDITIONS.
AND BECAUSE THEY'RE SEEKING FUNDING THROUGH FLORIDA HOUSING FINANCE CORPORATION AND WHERE IT'S JUST DOING THE FINANCIAL CONTRIBUTION, THE STATE IS ACTUALLY THE AGENCY THAT WILL BE
[00:05:01]
MONITORING THEM TO ENSURE PROGRAM COMPLIANCE, NOT THE CITY.SO THEY WILL BE MONITORED TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY ARE IN COMPLIANCE NOT ONLY WITH THE STATE FUNDING THROUGH SALE DOLLARS, BUT ALSO WITH OUR DOLLARS.
QUESTION WITH OUR DOLLARS, TOO.
IS IT A SITUATION WHERE WE CAN DETERMINE WHAT IT'S USED FOR IS JUST BASICALLY ADDED TO THE PILE OF MONEY TO DEVELOP? IT'S JUST A CONTRIBUTION THAT GOES TOWARDS THEIR TOTAL PROJECT FUNDING, THEY HAVE TO THEY HAVE TO PROVIDE THE THE FUNDING.
IF THEY GET APPROVED FOR FUNDING, THEN THEY HAVE SET FORTH HOW MANY UNITS AND HOW MANY OF THOSE UNITS, WHAT ARE THE INCOME LEVELS, WHAT ARE THE SIZE OF THE UNITS? BUT WE CAN'T SPECIFICALLY SAY THAT OUR FIFTY THOUSAND IS GOING TO GO TO ABC.
IT'S JUST. IT'S JUST THE LOCAL MATCH, THE LOCAL CONTRIBUTION REQUIREMENT THAT THEY NEED TO MEET IN ORDER TO SUBMIT THEIR APPLICATION.
ANYTHING ELSE BETTER? ALL RIGHT, SOUNDS GOOD. FISCAL YEAR TWENTY TWO, TWENTY THREE.
YES. OK, SO BEFORE WE BEGIN, I DID WANT TO MAKE A.
CLARIFICATION AND A CHANGE TO THE RECOMMENDATION BEFORE YOU BEFORE YOU START DISCUSSION ON IT. SO ON THE AND THEN I ALSO WANTED TO PROVIDE AND IT'S NOT IN YOUR PACKET, BUT I DO HAVE IT AVAILABLE TO PASS OUT WHAT THE CURRENT CRITERIA IS FOR OUR ENTITLEMENT COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT DOLLARS.
AND THAT WAY, YOU CAN HAVE A SIDE BY SIDE COMPARISON TO HOW IT CURRENTLY LOOKS VERSUS WHAT IS PROPOSED.
AND THEN THE THE ONE CHANGE THAT I DID WANT TO MAKE TO THE RECOMMENDATION IS THE FIRST SECTION A MAXIMUM AMOUNT OF POINTS FOR INTRODUCTION.
INSTEAD OF 10, IT SHOULD BE FIVE AND THEN FOUR D MEASURABLE OUTCOMES INSTEAD OF FIVE.
THAT SHOULD BE 10 TO BE RECOMMENDED.
AND THEN AS A CLARIFICATION ON ITEM E CONSOLIDATED PLAN CONSISTENCY, IT'S SHOULD BE CONSOLIDATED PLAN CONSISTENCY, PRIORITIES AND THAT IS SOMETHING THAT YOU'LL DISCUSS AT YOUR NEXT MEETING WHAT THOSE PRIORITIES ARE BASED ON.
YOU'LL GET A WORK COMPILING THE RESULTS FROM THE COMMUNITY NEEDS ASSESSMENT THAT WAS THAT'S BEEN OUT AVAILABLE FOR RESIDENTS TO SUBMIT SINCE MAY OF LAST YEAR.
YOU'LL ALL PRESENT TO YOU A SNAPSHOT OF WHAT THOSE DIFFERENT PRIORITIES ARE THAT THE COMMUNITY HAS STATED, AND THEN YOU'LL TAKE THOSE PRIORITIES AND MAKE MAKE A DETERMINATION ON WHAT YOU THINK THE PRIORITIES SHOULD BE TO PUT INTO THE REQUEST FOR APPLICATIONS FOR FOR NEXT FISCAL YEAR FOR FISCAL YEAR.
GIVE ME JUST A MOMENT, AND I'LL PASS OUT WITH THE CURRENT CRITERIA.
PEOPLE. ALL RIGHT, SO ONE OF THE CHANGES IS JUST SO YOU HAVE AN UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT HAS BEEN CHANGED, AND I DID MEET WITH ALL OF THE BOARD MEMBERS INDIVIDUALLY AND THEN I TRIED TO TAKE WHAT EVERYONE SAID AND TRIED TO PUT IT ALL INTO ONE CRITERIA.
BUT YOU'RE YOU'LL BE ABLE TO DISCUSS IT AND THEN VOTE ON IT.
BUT I TRIED TO LISTEN TO WHAT EVERYONE SAID AND TRIED TO.
IS IT INTO ONE SCORING CRITERIA, BUT CURRENTLY IN OUR APPLICATION, WE HAVE A SECTION FOR INTRODUCTION AND THAT DOESN'T HASN'T BEEN WEIGHED BEFORE IN THE PAST.
SO I FELT THAT THAT WAS SOMETHING THAT SHOULD BE IF WE'RE ASKING FOR INFORMATION FROM OUR AGENCIES, THEN THEY SHOULD THAT SHOULD BE HAVE SOME WEIGHT TO IT ON THE SCORING CRITERIA.
ONE OF THE OTHER CHANGES IS JUST MATCHING MORE OF WHAT THE TITLES OF THE THE SCORING CRITERIA MATCHES MORE TO WHAT'S ACTUALLY IN THE CURRENT APPLICATION IN NEXT MONTH, THE ALL ACTUALLY. REVIEW THE REQUEST FOR APPLICATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR TWENTY TWO, TWENTY THREE BEFORE WE PUT IT OUT FOR YOU, PUT IT OUT LIVE IN NOVEMBER.
AND THEN. ONE OF THE OTHER BIG CHANGES WAS THE CHANGING OF THE.
[00:10:05]
WHERE IS IT? THE CONSOLIDATED PLAN CONSISTENCY WHEN IT TALKS ABOUT OUR PAST PERFORMANCE, SO I IS ONE OF THE OTHER CHANGES, SO CURRENTLY THAT IS WAS SCORED AT 15 POINTS AND LOOKING AT WHAT SOME OF THE OTHER JURISDICTIONS LOCALLY DO.MELBOURNE, COCO, BREVARD COUNTY AND WHAT WE CURRENTLY HAVE, IT'S EITHER ZERO OR 15 POINTS. AND SO HEARING FROM THE BOARD MEMBERS, IT WAS CLEAR THAT IF WE DIDN'T CHANGE IT, THEN WE WERE PENALIZING NEW AGENCIES OR WE WEREN'T GIVING ENOUGH CREDIT TO THOSE WHO OR WERE GIVING TOO MUCH CREDIT TO THOSE WHO GOT FUNDING, DID WHAT THEY DID, DID WHAT THEY SAID THEY WOULD DO, BUT DIDN'T GO ABOVE AND BEYOND.
SO THE SCORING RIGHT NOW IN THE PROPOSED GIVES YOU THE ABILITY TO GIVE THEM UP TO 10 NEGATIVE POINTS, SAY THEY DID GET FUNDING, BUT THEY HAD.
THEY DIDN'T HAVE GOOD PERFORMANCE, SAY, HAD UNRESOLVED ISSUES.
THEY WEREN'T ABLE TO SPEND ALL THEIR FUNDS.
THEY DIDN'T MEET ALL OF THE THE PEOPLE TO SERVE THAT THEY SAID THAT THEY WOULD IN THEIR APPLICATION, THEY HAD PROBLEMS. OR BE ABLE TO SCORE A ZERO FOR THOSE WHO DID GET FUNDING OR.
THEY THEY'RE JUST A NEW AGENCY, BUT NOT SCORE THEM NEGATIVELY AND THEN BE ABLE TO SCORE A LITTLE EXTRA POINTS FOR THOSE WHO HAVE HAD FUNDING IN THE PAST BUT HAVE HAD REALLY GOOD PERFORMANCE. THEY'VE MET ALL THEIR GOALS, THEY'VE EXCEEDED THEIR GOALS, THEY'VE EXPENDED IT IN A TIMELY FASHION. THERE WERE NO ISSUES.
SO THAT GIVES YOU THE ABILITY TO SCORE.
IT GIVES YOU A FLEXIBILITY WITHIN THAT CATEGORY AND IT REDUCES THE AMOUNT OF POINTS THAT'S AVAILABLE FROM 15, WHICH I HEARD FROM MULTIPLE MEMBERS WAS A LITTLE HIGH.
SO I TRIED TO TAKE THAT INTO CONSIDERATION AS WELL.
AND THEN WE DO TALK ABOUT IT IN THE APPLICATION, THE FINANCIAL CAPACITY, WHICH IS EACH AND THAT IS SOMETHING THAT I FELT WAS I HEARD WAS IMPORTANT TO PUT IN THERE BECAUSE IF AN AGENCY IS HAVING FINANCIAL TROUBLE, THEY'RE THEY'VE HAD SOME ISSUES WITH THEIR AUDIT.
THEY HAD FINDINGS, SIX DEFICIENCIES OR WEAKNESSES, THEN THAT WAS SOMETHING THAT COULD BE WEIGHED. AND I'M RECOMMENDING THAT THAT THAT PORTION OF IT ACTUALLY BE SCORED BY STAFF.
SO THAT SECTION OF THE SCORING CRITERIA WOULD BE SOMETHING THAT CITY STAFF WOULD VIEW AND THEN ADD TO YOUR OVERALL SCORE.
AND THAT'S SOMETHING THAT I FOUND THAT OTHER THAT AT LEAST ANOTHER JURISDICTION DOES AS WELL. WITH THAT, I WILL LEAVE IT TO FOR DISCUSSION.
SO YOU WOULD WE WOULD ACTUALLY GET THE PACKAGE WITH THAT SCORE.
EDGE SCORED OUT ALREADY AS TO WHAT YOU'D RECOMMEND.
IT WOULD BE ADDED WHEN AT THE MEETING, BUT IT WOULDN'T BE.
YOU WOULDN'T GET THAT SCORE AHEAD OF TIME.
HOW SO YOU WOULD JUST TELL US AT THE END THAT, YOU KNOW, IF WE SCORED A PARTICULAR AMOUNT AND THEN ALL OF A SUDDEN THERE'S A MYSTERY SCORE FOR SOMEONE NOW, WE WOULD TELL YOU AT THE MEETING WHAT THAT SCORE WAS, BUT I.
I DON'T KNOW IF WE IF TELLING YOU BEFOREHAND WOULD.
OK, BUT JUST THIS WAY OR WAY, HOW YOU WOULD VOTE ALL THE OTHER CATEGORIES, AND I DON'T WANT THAT TO.
I WANT TO BE AS OBJECTIVE AS POSSIBLE AND LEAVE THE ABILITY FOR YOU TO BE ABLE TO SCORE WITHOUT HAVING ANY OUTSIDE INFLUENCE THAT YOU ARE READY TO GIVE US RECOMMENDATIONS.
IN THE REPORT. YOU ALREADY TELL US THAT YOU RECOMMEND SOMEONE BASED ON THAT, AND WE ALWAYS ASK YOU ANYWAY.
I'M NOT SURE, YOU KNOW, I DON'T THINK WE'RE EASILY SWAYED BY, YOU KNOW, THAT INFORMATION, BUT. AND SOMETHING SOMETHING THAT WE CAN CONSIDER THAT'S NOT SET IN STONE, WHETHER WE CAN GIVE IT TO YOU BEFORE OR AFTER, THAT'S.
BUT THAT'S EVEN IF YOU DECIDE THAT YOU WANT TO MOVE FORWARD WITH STAFF SCORING THAT PARTICULAR PIECE.
IN THE INTRODUCTION SECTION, WOULD THERE BE WITHIN THAT SECTION YOU SAID YOU JUST ADD AN EXTRA POINT, FIVE POINTS OR SOMETHING? WHAT POINT WERE YOU THINKING OF FOR THE INTRODUCTION SECTION? THE INTRODUCTION IS THE IS THE SECTION.
IT'S A VERY FIRST PART OF THE APPLICATION WHERE THE AGENCY GETS TO TELL YOU WHO THEY ARE, WHAT THEY DO, HOW LONG THEY'VE BEEN DOING IT FOR, AND IT'S JUST GIVES YOU AN IDEA OF WHO THAT AGENCY IS AND WHAT OTHER SERVICES THEY PROVIDE.
WELL, I UNDERSTAND THAT I WAS TALKING IN REGARDS TO THIS SCORING.
SO INSTEAD OF 10, IT WOULD I WOULD RECOMMEND A MAXIMUM OF FIVE POINTS AND THEN INSTEAD OF FIVE POINTS FOR D MEASURABLE OUTCOMES, THAT WOULD BE A 10.
THOUGH YOU JUST SWITCH THOSE TWO NUMBERS, SO YOU WOULD STILL HAVE A TOTAL OF 100 UP TO 100 POINTS. AND THE OTHER THING THAT THIS SCORING CRITERIA DOES VERSUS THE OTHER ONE IS IT GIVES YOU. IT GIVES YOU MORE CATEGORIES SO THAT THERE'S LESS POINTS ASSOCIATED WITH
[00:15:07]
EACH ONE, SO THERE'S MORE FLEXIBILITY AND THERE'S NOT SO MUCH WEIGHT ON ANY ONE PARTICULAR. ON SCORING CRITERIA, AND IT TAKES AWAY THE PRESENTATION SCORE, SO ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE ALSO HEARD FROM FROM MEMBERS IS.IF. YOU KNOW, AN AGENCY IS REALLY GOOD AT GIVING PRESENTATIONS, BUT IT'S NOT WHAT THEY'RE SAYING IN THEIR PRESENTATION DOESN'T MATCH WITHIN THEIR APPLICATION.
THEN THEY COULD GET MORE POINTS OR YOU HAVE A REALLY AN AGENCY THAT HAS A REALLY GOOD WRITTEN APPLICATION, BUT THEY MAY NOT BE VERY GOOD AT PRESENTING.
SO TO GIVE HIM MORE POINTS TO US FOR THEIR PRESENTATION AND THEN WHEN WHEN THE CITY, WHEN WE HAVE TO GO AND WRITE THEIR CONTRACT, IF THEY'RE AWARDED, I CAN ONLY GO BY WHAT'S IN THEIR APPLICATION. I CAN'T TAKE WHAT THEY'VE SAID VERBALLY AND PUT THAT INTO AN AGREEMENT. SO IF THERE'S SOMETHING THAT'S DIFFERENT THAN IN THEIR APPLICATION VERSUS THEIR THEIR PRESENTATION, THEN IT MAKES IT A LITTLE TRICKIER TO TO MAKE AN APPLICATION.
SO. AND THAT'S NOT UNCOMMON FOR MOST PLACES WHEN YOU WHEN THE CITY HAS TO SUBMIT AN APPLICATION EITHER FOR FEDERAL FUNDS OR FOR STATE FUNDS.
BUT ONE OF THE THINGS THAT YOU COULD DISCUSS AT THE NEXT MEETING WHEN YOU DISCUSSED YOUR REQUEST FOR APPLICATIONS IS AND I HEARD THIS FROM MULTIPLE MEMBERS IS IF YOU WANT TO AT LEAST MAKE IT MANDATORY IN THE APPLICATION THAT THE AGENCY HAS TO BE PRESENT AT LEAST FOUR QUESTIONS, BUT YOU'RE NOT SCORING THEM BASED ON THAT.
IT'S MORE OF IF YOU HAVE CLARIFICATION ON WHAT'S IN THEIR APPLICATION, THEY COULD BE PRESENT TO ANSWER THOSE QUESTIONS FOR YOU.
ALL RIGHT. THAT'S WHAT IT'S BEING PROPOSED.
SO YOU'RE SAYING THEY WOULDN'T COME UP AND TELL US ANYTHING, WE JUST READ IT AND THEN CALL THEM UP. HE YOU WOULDN'T HEAR.
AND THAT'S ONE OF THE THINGS THAT YOU CAN DECIDE IS IF YOU STILL WANT TO HAVE PRESENTATIONS AND NOT HAVE THAT WEIGHTED OR SCORED OR IF YOU JUST WANT THEM, IF YOU WANT, IF YOU'RE SCORING JUST THE APPLICATION AND THEN YOU'RE YOU'RE ASKING QUESTIONS IF YOU HAVE ANY, BUT THEY MAY NOT NECESSARILY GIVE A PRESENTATION, SO YOU WOULD ONLY YOU'D RATHER HAVE THEM GIVE PRESENTATIONS OR YOU WOULD HAVE THEM JUST THERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. AND THAT WOULD BE SOMETHING THAT YOU COULD YOU WOULD DISCUSS AT YOUR NEXT MEETING, YOU CAN JUST VOTE ON, I SHOULD SAY YOU CAN DISCUSS IT TONIGHT, BUT THAT WOULD BE SOMETHING THAT YOU WOULD VOTE ON IF THAT IS SOMETHING THAT YOU WANT TO MAKE MANDATORY IF YOU PRESENTATIONS OR JUST BEING PRESENT.
I KNOW PERSONALLY I WOULD WANT TO SEE A PRESENTATION, ESPECIALLY WHEN THEY'RE BRAND NEW MEMBER PERSONS COMING HERE, IT'S IMPORTANT TO REALLY GET THE NITTY GRITTY BECAUSE SOMETIMES IT'S ON HERE.
WE SEE IT, BUT HEARING THEM SPEAK ABOUT IT AND BE ABLE TO ANSWER QUESTIONS.
AND I AGREE. WE DON'T WANT TO HAVE TO PUT.
SOME PEOPLE ARE REALLY DYNAMIC SPEAKERS AND SOME PEOPLE ARE DESHAZO THE FIRST TIME.
BUT I THINK IT'S A PART OF THE WHOLE THING TO BE ABLE TO HEAR AND ASK QUESTIONS OF A LIVE PRESENTATION. I THINK THAT ADDS VALUE WHAT WE GIVE AND ALSO TO REMEMBER, IT'S NOT US, ONLY THERE ARE CITIZENS OF PALM BAY ARE WONDERING WHERE THE MONEY GOES.
SO I THINK IF SOMEBODY WANTED TO GO BACK, THEY SEE WHY THAT ORGANIZATION GAVE OR JUST EVEN LEARNING ABOUT THAT ORGANIZATION.
SO WE HAVE TO LOOK AT IT BOTH WAYS.
IT'S AN OPPORTUNITY TO SHARE INFORMATION WITH THE ENTIRE CITY.
AND I'M DEFINITELY UP TO YOU WHEN YOU JUST WHEN YOU APPROVE THE APPLICATION, AS IF THAT'S SOMETHING THAT YOU WANT TO MAKE MANDATORY OR NOT, THAT IS UP TO YOU AS A BOARD.
NO, SANDRA, I DO HAVE ONE QUESTION ABOUT THE FINANCIAL CAPACITY.
WILL WE BE ABLE TO ADJUST THE NUMBER OR IS THAT GOING TO BE A FLAT NUMBER RECOMMENDED BY THE STAFF THAT EVERY THAT WE CAN'T ADJUST? THE WAY IT IS UP TO 15 POINTS AND SAY YOU COME IN, IT WAS A RECOMMENDATION OF 10 POINTS AND WILL WE BE ABLE TO ADJUST THAT? BUT WE I GUESS I COULD ANSWER MY OWN QUESTION SAYING THAT WE DON'T KNOW THEIR FINANCIAL BACKING BECAUSE YOU'RE ALREADY EVALUATING IT FOR US.
BUT HOW IT'S THE FINANCIAL CAPACITY PIECE IS STILL GOING TO BE SOMETHING THAT IS PART OF THEIR APPLICATION. SO YOU'RE GOING TO SEE ALL THE SAME STUFF THAT ALL THE SAME DOCUMENTS, THE AUDITS, THE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS THAT THAT STAFF WOULD BE SEEING.
IT'S JUST WE'RE JUST TAKING THAT PART IN.
RUNNING IT BY OUR STAFF THAT KNOWS HOW TO REALLY REVIEW THOSE AUDITS TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE LOOKING, WE'RE LOOKING AT IT, BUT I DON'T NECESSARILY KNOW IF YOU WOULD CHANGE THE SCORE. BUT LIKE I SAID, THIS IS JUST A RECOMMENDATION, SO IT'S REALLY UP TO YOU AS A BOARD, WHETHER. WOULD WE IF WE WERE TO KEEP THE FINANCIAL CAPACITY AT 15 AND TAKE THE
[00:20:07]
RECOMMENDATION OF STAFF, WILL WE GET THAT INFORMATION BEFORE WE GO TO TABULATE BASED OFF OF THEIR PRESENTATION AND EVERYTHING ELSE GOING IN? OR WILL WE GET THAT AS A FOLLOW UP BEFORE WE SUBMIT TO YOU TO BE ABLE TO SCORE EVERYTHING? I DON'T KNOW IF I'VE REALLY THOUGHT ABOUT THAT, BECAUSE I DON'T KNOW IF IF YOU GET IT BEFORE, IF THAT WOULD SWAY YOUR DECISION AND IF YOU GET IT AFTERWARDS, THEN YOU DON'T GET TO SEE IT.NANCY, I'M GOING TO CALL YOU OUT.
FOR THOSE OF YOU WHO I BELIEVE EVERYONE'S MATTER, BUT I KNOW THAT YOU'RE MORE FAMILIAR WITH THIS PROCESS OVER WITH WHEN YOU WERE WITH THE CITY OF COCOA.
DID THEY GET IT BEFORE OR DID THEY GET IT AFTER? AND WE JUST YOU JUST TABULATED THIS WAR ZONE? GOOD EVENING. I'M NANCY BUNK, MEANING ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR.
WE WOULD GIVE THAT TO YOU BEFORE, AND WE WOULD HAVE OUR FINANCE DEPARTMENT REVIEW IT.
THEY THERE ARE STILL DISCREPANCIES THAT TYPICALLY STAFF DOESN'T QUITE CATCH.
BUT THE FINANCIAL STAFF IN OUR FINANCE DEPARTMENT WOULD ACTUALLY BE ABLE TO CATCH SOME OF THAT. SO LET'S JUST SAY THEY HAVE CONCERNS AND FINDINGS TO WHERE THE FINANCE STAFF WOULD RECOMMEND ZERO OR A VERY LOW NUMBER.
WE WOULD WANT TO LET YOU KNOW THAT THERE WAS SIGNIFICANT FINDINGS AND THEIR AUDIT AND THAT WOULD IMPACT THAT OR SHOULD IMPACT YOUR DECISION IF THEY HAD SOME SOMETHING SERIOUS LIKE THAT. SO WE WOULD LET YOU KNOW THAT AHEAD OF TIME, THAT WOULD BE MY RECOMMENDATION.
OK. AND SO THAT WOULD PROBABLY BE SOMETHING THAT WE COULD.
WHEN WE GIVE YOU THE PACKETS AND THE SCORING SHEET, WE WOULD HAVE THOSE NUMBERS PRE-POPULATED AND THEN THAT INFORMATION WOULD ALSO GO ON OUR STAFF SUMMARY.
QUICK QUESTION, BECAUSE THAT WAS WHAT I WAS KIND OF ONE WANTING WHEN I ASKED THE QUESTION FIRST, BUT THEN HOW DOES STAFF OR WOOD STAFF GIVE US AN IDEA OF HOW YOU'RE RATING LIKE IF THAT PERSON OR THAT ORGANIZATION IS PERFECT, THEIR AUDIT IS FINE.
YOU JUST GIVE THEM MAXIMUM SCORE.
I SAY IT'S 15. DO YOU ALL GET 10 15? BUT IF ONE, THEY HAD ONE ISSUE, DO YOU GIVE THEM 10 OR YOU GIVE THEM 14? YOU KNOW HOW THOSE? DO WE HAVE LIKE A WAY OR TYPICALLY FROM MY TENURE IN REVIEWING THESE APPLICATIONS FOR THE LAST TWENTY SIX AND A HALF YEARS, I'VE ONLY REALLY HAD TWO THAT HAVE HAD AN ISSUE, SO MOST OF THEM WILL GET THE 15 POINTS.
ONE WAS THEY HAD SOME SERIOUS CONCERNS AND FINDINGS WITHIN THEIR AUDIT.
SO YOU REALLY WANT TO LOOK AT WHAT THOSE CONCERNS AND WHAT THOSE FINDINGS ARE.
AND SO THEY DID SCORE SIGNIFICANTLY LOWER.
AND THEN THE OTHER ONE WAS A START UP AGENCY THAT DIDN'T HAVE AN AUDIT.
SO THEY HAD JUST FORMED A NONPROFIT.
THEY WERE VERY SMALL, DIDN'T REALLY HAVE A LOT OF MONEY.
AND SO THEY WERE A LITTLE BIT LOWER.
BUT UNDERSTANDING THAT THEY DIDN'T KNOW THEY MAY NOT GET THE FULL 15 POINTS BECAUSE THEY JUST STARTED UP AND THEY REALLY DIDN'T HAVE THAT FINANCIAL CAPACITY AND THEY DIDN'T REALLY HAVE A NEED FOR AN AUDIT AT THAT POINT.
SO I WOULD, BUT MOST OF THE TIME THEY'RE GOING TO BE 15.
SO, SO A NEW AGENCY THAT THAT MAY HAVE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS BUT DOESN'T TRIGGER THE NEED FOR AN AUDIT MAY SCORE, SAY.
TEN, BECAUSE THERE ARE HIGHER RISKS, BECAUSE THEY DON'T HAVE THAT ESTABLISHED FINANCIAL CAPACITY. SO I THINK THAT'S WHY IT'S SO IMPORTANT TO GIVE US BEFORE AND GIVE US A BRIEF, SO WE UNDERSTAND BECAUSE THEN I WILL LOOK AT IT LIKE THIS A BRAND NEW PERSON, WHY ARE THEY GETTING 10 VERSUS THE REASON THEY ARE GETTING 10 IS BECAUSE OF, YOU KNOW, THE FACT THAT THEY HAVE WE HAVEN'T SEEN THEIR FULL CAPACITY OF WHAT THEY'RE ABLE TO DO.
I'M AND YOU MAY NOT EVEN WANT TO EVEN RECOMMEND THAT.
OF COURSE, THEY'RE NOT GOING TO HAVE BECAUSE WE'RE GOING TO BE ASKING FOR THIS DOCUMENTATION IN LIKE NOVEMBER, DECEMBER.
AND SOMETIMES IT'S A TIMING THING AND THEY MAY NOT.
LET'S SAY THEY'RE IN THE PROCESS OF DOING THEIR AUDIT, AND IT JUST HASN'T COME COME TO THEM YET. AND SO YOU MAY WANT TO WEIGH THAT IN, BUT THAT'S SOMETHING STAFF ON THE BACK END WOULD HAVE DECIDED BASED ON THE CONVERSATION.
WE WOULD WAIT IN AND RECOMMEND IT TO YOU.
AND OF COURSE, YOU CAN MAKE THAT ADJUSTMENT IF YOU FEEL NECESSARY.
BUT I MEAN, I WOULD KIND OF UNDERSTAND BECAUSE OF THE TIMING.
WE'VE HAD THAT IN THE PAST WHEN WE WHEN STAFF ASKED FOR THESE, THEY MAY NOT HAVE THE AUDIT COMPLETE AND SO THAT WE GET THE PREVIOUS YEAR'S AUDIT, NOT THEM, BECAUSE THEY'RE WORKING ON THE CURRENT AUDIT.
SO SOMETIMES IT'S A TIMING ISSUE.
[00:25:01]
BUT THAT'S THE QUESTION ALLEN ASKED EARLIER.WOULD WE BE ABLE TO ADJUST THAT THOSE SCORES? I THINK THAT YOU THAT YOU WOULD.
I MEAN, IT'S OUR STAFF RECOMMENDATION TO YOU ALL AND THEN YOU ALL MAKE A RECOMMENDATION TO THE COUNCIL.
SO THAT FINANCIAL PART ONLY STAFF WOULD RECOMMEND BASED ON INFORMATION FOUND.
AND THEN WE WOULD CHOOSE TO ADJUST IF IT WAS NECESSARY.
AND THE ONLY REASON WHY WE THOUGHT THAT IT WOULD BE A GOOD IDEA TO HAVE THE STAFF GIVE A RECOMMENDATION IS BECAUSE WE WOULD PROVIDE IT TO OUR FINANCE STAFF WHO HAS THAT ABILITY TO READ AUDITS.
AND MAYBE NOT EVERYONE ON THE BOARD HAS HAD THAT EXPERIENCE SO THAT THEY COULD SEE THINGS THAT POSSIBLY YOU MIGHT NOT SEE.
I MEAN, THE ACTUAL APPLICATION IS GOING TO BE GENERIC TO WHERE EVERYBODY COULD REVIEW IT AND LOOK AT THEIR MEASURABLE OUTCOMES OR PAST PERFORMANCE, BUT TYPICALLY WITH AUDITS, DEPENDING ON SOMETIMES ITS AGENCIES.
THERE'S A BIG AGENCY WITH UMBRELLA AGENCIES UNDERNEATH IT, AND SO THEY ALL GET MIXED IN AND IT'S HARD TO READ LIKE IF YOU'VE EVER SEEN SALVATION ARMY, IT'S THE ENTIRE SALVATION ARMY. AND AND THEN THERE'S LITTLE THERE'S THE DOMESTIC VIOLENCE AND THEN THERE, YOU KNOW, SO IT GETS IT CAN GET A LITTLE CONFUSING.
SO WE LIKE TO ALWAYS HAVE THE FINANCE STAFF ACTUALLY REVIEW IT, AND THEY MAY PICK UP THINGS THAT WE DON'T SEE.
THANK YOU. I JUST HAVE ONE FOR NOT UNDERSTANDING OR ARE OUR COMPREHENDING YOUR QUESTION EARLIER? NOW JUST LAST.
AWESOME. I DON'T KNOW IF YOUR MICROPHONE IS ON.
OK. IS IT POSSIBLE FOR THOSE SPECIAL CASES WHERE IT IS A NEW AGE OR A NEW ORGANIZATION? THEY DON'T HAVE THAT AUDIT BACKGROUND, SO IT IS A RISK.
IS IT POSSIBLE TO JUST NOT SCORE THEM ON THAT AND SORT OF HAVE A DIFFERENT POINT, OBVIOUSLY FOR THEM SPECIFICALLY RULE THAT PART OUT? NOT PUT IT FOR THEM. NOT PUT IT AGAINST.
I THINK YOU GET INTO SOME REALLY GRAY AREAS IF YOU START PICKING AND CHOOSING WHAT YOU'RE GOING TO SCORE WITH ONE VERSUS ANOTHER.
I THINK YOU REALLY I WOULD NOT RECOMMEND THAT.
I WOULD RECOMMEND YOU BE UNIFORM ACROSS THE BOARD.
YEAH, THE QUESTION I HAD WAS BASED ON WITH THIS SECTION THAT WE'RE LOOKING TO ADD IN THE PAST THAT WE HAD ANY OF THE ORGANIZATION THAT PROBABLY SHOULDN'T HAVE FUNDED BECAUSE OF SOME FINANCIAL ISSUES WITH THEM.
DOES ANY COME TO MIND? I'VE ONLY BEEN WITH HOUSING FOR JUST OVER A YEAR, SO IT'S REALLY HARD FOR ME TO GAUGE THAT AND BECAUSE THERE WASN'T REALLY MONITORING DONE IN THE PAST.
I CAN'T, I DON'T REALLY I CAN'T REALLY SAY RIGHT NOW IF THAT FINANCIAL PIECE.
WAS SOMETHING THAT THEY HAD AN ISSUE WITH.
IT'S VERY POSSIBLE THAT IT DID HAPPEN.
BUT THAT THERE ARE FINANCIAL CAPACITY JUST SPEAKS TO THEIR THEIR RISK, THEY'RE BEING ENTRUSTED WITH FEDERAL FUNDS AND THERE ARE REQUIREMENTS THAT COME WITH SPENDING THE FUNDS IN ACCORDANCE WITH FEDERAL REGULATIONS.
SO. YOU HAVE TO KIND OF WEIGH THAT OUT, BUT THAT IS SOMETHING THAT.
CDBG SPECIFICALLY DOES LOOK AT AND THERE AND THERE GUIDEBOOKS AS FAR AS WHAT YOU SHOULD USE TO SCORE AN AGENCY.
I'M JUST TRYING TO UNDERSTAND THE RELEVANCE OF IT.
IF IT WAS NEVER AN ISSUE, BUT YOU JUST MENTIONED THE LAST PIECE THAT TALK ABOUT THE CBD, AND IT ALSO SPEAKS TO THE RISK IF YOU HAVE AN AGENCY THAT HASN'T DEALT WITH A LOT OF FUNDS OR NEW AGENCY.
THEY HAVE A HIGHER RISK THAN IT DOESN'T MEAN THAT THEY WON'T PERFORM WELL, THEY HAVE A HIGHER RISK OF NOT PERFORMING WELL BECAUSE THEY'RE NOT USED TO THE FEDERAL FUNDS, BUT THAT DOESN'T MEAN THAT. OR IF THEY HAVE FINDINGS IN THE FINDINGS AND THEIR AUDIT AND THEY HAVE ISSUES WITH, ESPECIALLY IF IT'S SIGNIFICANT WEAKNESSES THAT THEY CAN'T CURE OR THEY HAVE SIGNIFICANT WEAKNESSES OVER MULTIPLE AUDIT CYCLES, THEN IT SPEAKS TO THEIR ABILITY TO BE ABLE TO EXPEND THE FUNDS APPROPRIATELY.
IF THEY THAT THEY CAN'T SPEND THE FUNDS APPROPRIATELY, BUT IT JUST MEANS THAT THEY'RE AT A HIGHER RISK. BUT.
I THINK YOUR MICROPHONE IS ON, THOUGH.
THAT'S WHAT. UM, A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS IN THE INTRODUCTION.
OK, SO NOW WE'RE WE'RE SCORING THE INTRODUCTION.
OR IN THE INTRODUCTION, BECAUSE OF WHAT I WOULD THINK THAT THAT'S THEIR REASONABLE
[00:30:02]
SERVICE TO BE ABLE TO TELL US WHAT THEY ARE, WHO THEY ARE, WHERE THEY WHERE THEY COME FROM, AND DOES THAT GET POINTS? IT HASN'T IN THE PAST, BUT IT'S SOMETHING THAT YOU'RE REQUESTING IN THE APPLICATION.I DON'T THINK THAT IF WE'RE GOING TO ASK THEM TO PROVIDE THIS INFORMATION, THEN IT SHOULD BE SCORED IN SOME CAPACITY, WHICH IS WHY I SAID TO JUST RANK IT.
FIVE BECAUSE YOU WANT TO BE ABLE TO GET AN IDEA OF WHO THE AGENCY IS.
IF YOU IF THEY SUBMIT AN APPLICATION AND YOU HAVE NO IDEA WHAT THE AGENCY DOES, YOU HAVE YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT KIND OF SERVICES THEY PROVIDE.
YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT KIND OF HISTORY THAT THEY HAVE IN PROVIDING THOSE SERVICES.
I MEAN, I GET THAT I'M JUST SAYING I THINK THAT'S JUST BASIC, THAT YOU WOULD PROVIDE THAT ANY WAY YOU ANY WAY YOU GO.
I MEAN, AND LIKE PUTTING YOUR NAME ON THE APPLICATION ITEM, BE B DEMONSTRATION OF NEED AND ITEM E CONSOLIDATED PLAN CONSISTENCY.
THOSE TO ME WOULD SEEM TO BE THE SAME THING UNLESS YOU HAVE A DIFFERENT DEFINITION FOR A DEMONSTRATED NEED.
AND WHAT THE PLAN WOULD SAY? YES. SO THE DEMONSTRATION OF NEED IS THE AGENCY TELLING YOU AND THE APPLICATION WHY THEY NEED THIS FUNDING? WHAT ARE THEY GOING TO PROVIDE THOSE SERVICES FOR? HOW MANY BACKGROUND AS TO? SO FOR MEALS ON WHEELS, DON'T JUST PICK AN EASY ONE.
THEIR DEMONSTRATION OF NEED, SO THERE'S THEY HAVE THIS MANY PEOPLE THAT THEY'RE CURRENTLY SERVING, BUT THERE'S SO MANY MORE PEOPLE, SO MANY MORE SENIOR CITIZENS THAT DON'T HAVE ACCESS TO THAT FOOD AND THAT THEY NEED IT.
SO IT'S GIVING YOU A REASON WHY YOU SHOULD FUND THEM THE CONSOLIDATED.
LAND CONSISTENCY SLASH PRIORITIES, IS THEM TELLING YOU THIS IS MY.
BASED ON WHAT THEIR NEED IS THE CONSOLIDATED PLAN THAT THEY HAVE TO? ALIGN THEIR APPLICATION WITH IS THEM TELLING YOU THAT WHAT THEIR NEED IS FALLS WITHIN THE CONSOLIDATED PLAN, WHICH THEY HAVE TO MEET.
AND WHEN YOU RANK YOUR PRIORITIES NEXT MONTH THAT THEY'RE MEETING ONE OF THOSE HIGH PRIORITY NEEDS AND THIS IS HOW THEY'RE DOING IT.
SO IT'S MAKING SURE THAT WHAT THEY'RE ASKING FOR IS CONSISTENT WITH THE PLAN BECAUSE IF IT'S NOT CONSISTENT WITH THE PLAN AND NOT A PRIORITY LISTED WITHIN THE PLAN, THEN IT'S INELIGIBLE FOR FUNDING.
BUT THAT'S THEM TELLING YOU HOW THEIR NEED FALLS IN LINE WITH THE PLAN AND THEN DESCRIPTION OF THE TARGET CLIENTELE.
I MEAN, THE TARGET CLIENTELE FOR EVERYBODY IS LOW TO MODERATE INCOME.
SINCE WE CAN'T DESIGN, WE CAN'T JUST SAY, OK, WELL, THE PEOPLE YOU'RE SERVING ARE IN ONE OF THESE SEVEN LOW AND ONLY SAY, YOU'RE IF THE PERSON OR WHOEVER IS THEY'RE SERVING INCOME IS FALLS INTO THAT LOW TO MODERATE INCOME.
IT COULD BE EITHER SO THEY COULD EITHER BE DOING AN AREA BENEFIT WHERE THE LOCATION OF THEIR SERVICES UNIQUE TO THAT AREA, AND IT DOES FALL WITHIN A CENSUS TRACT THAT MEETS THAT 50 ONE PERCENT LOW TO MODERATE INCOME OR THE TARGET CLIENTELE IS VICTIMS OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE, ITS SENIOR CITIZENS.
IT'S THE HOMELESS POPULATION, IT'S YOUTH.
THAT'S THE DESCRIPTION OF TARGET CLIENTELE WHERE THEY'RE TELLING YOU WHAT, WHO IS GOING TO BE THE BENEFICIARY OF THE SERVICES.
AND THAT COULD THAT COULD BE A VARIETY OF DIFFERENT CLIENTELE THAT EVERYBODY HAS TO BE LOW TO MODERATE INCOME, BUT WHICH WHICH SECTION OF THE OF THE CITY ARE THEY OF THE POPULATION WITHIN THE CITY? ARE THEY GOING TO USE THOSE FUNDS FOR AND IT COULD BE VERY DIFFERENT.
ESPECIALLY IF YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT YOUR PRIORITIES AND YOUR LET'S SAY YOUR PRIORITIES ARE SENIORS, KIDS AND PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES, THAT'S THEY'RE GOING TO.
THEY SHOULD BE DESCRIBING THAT IN THEIR DESCRIPTION OF OF TARGETED CLIENTELE, SO IT COULD BE A VARIETY OF DEMOGRAPHIC.
OR TYPES OF GROUPS THAT THEY'RE SERVING, AND THAT'S WHERE THEY'RE GOING TO BE DESCRIBING THAT TO YOU. RIGHT.
SO IF IT'S PART OF OUR PRIORITIES BASED ON SOME OF THE WORKSHOPS THAT THAT COMMUNITY WORKSHOPS I'VE ATTENDED, IF HOMELESSNESS OR HOUSING LOW INCOME HOUSING SEEMS TO BE A PRIORITY, SO THEY WOULD BE SAYING, OK, WE'RE SERVING CLIENTELE THAT ARE GOING TO BE MEETING THIS PRIORITY.
MM HMM. SO WE DID A COMMUNITY NEEDS ASSESSMENT AND I WILL BE PROVIDING THE THE RESULTS OF THAT TO YOU. AND THERE ARE CERTAIN ACTIVITIES THAT WERE ALLOWED TO USE THOSE CDBG FUNDING FOR. AND SO THOSE ARE ALL CAPTURED IN THE COMMUNITY NEEDS ASSESSMENT.
SO YOU'RE GOING TO BE REVIEWING THAT.
AND IF YOU SEE AN OVERWHELMING RESULT AT THE COMMUNITY SAYING ALMOST THE HOMELESS POPULATION IS IS A DESPERATE IS A NEED OR YOUTH ACTIVITIES AS IT IS A HIGHEST NEED.
AND THAT'S SOMETHING GOING TO TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION WHEN MAKING YOUR PRIORITIES, BECAUSE THAT'S THE COMMUNITY SAYING THAT THIS IS WHAT THEY SEE AS NEED, BUT IT HAS TO MEET CERTAIN. ELIGIBLE CRITERIA, ESPECIALLY UNDER PUBLIC SERVICES AND THEN THE OTHER ELIGIBLE ACTIVITIES, SO CBG WON'T PROVIDE LOW INCOME HOUSING, BUT IT MAY PROVIDE, SAY,
[00:35:01]
DOWN PAYMENT ASSISTANCE OR OWNER OCCUPIED REHAB, WHICH IS A DIFFERENT THING ENTIRELY.OR, LET'S SAY PUBLIC FACILITY IMPROVEMENTS IS A REALLY BIG NEED OR CODE ENFORCEMENT.
DEMOLITION OF BLIGHTED STRUCTURES THEY'RE GOING TO.
THOSE ARE ALL ELIGIBLE CDBG ACTIVITIES, AND THEY'RE GOING TO BE TELLING YOU THE NEEDS ASSESSMENT WILL GIVE YOU A RESULT OF WHAT THE COMMUNITY HAS SAID.
AND LET'S SAY THERE'S 10 REALLY HIGH, HIGH NEEDS PRIORITIES AND YOU MAY SAY, OK, I'VE ONLY GOT THIS MUCH FUNDING.
I'M GOING TO WE'RE GOING TO AS A GROUP, WE'RE GOING TO SAY THESE ARE THE TOP FIVE AND THEN THAT WILL GO INTO THE REQUEST FOR APPLICATION.
SO WHEN AN AGENCY IS, IT GETS THE APPLICATION AND IS WRITING IT, THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE TO MEET THAT NEED. AND IF THEY DON'T MEET A NEED, THEN THE OLD SCHOOL, YOUR SCHOOL, YOUR SCORE ACCORDINGLY.
FROM THE OLD SCORING CRITERIA WE USED TO HAVE, AGENCY HAS SET FORTH CONCISE AND MEASURABLE GOALS.
NOW WE'VE CHANGED TO MEASURABLE OUTCOMES.
HOW ARE WE GOING TO ASSESS MEASURABLE OUTCOME? IT'S GOING TO BE THAT ESSENTIALLY IT'LL BE THIS, I PERCEIVE THAT TO BE THE SAME INFORMATION. I JUST TITLED IT MORE CONCISELY.
AND CAN LEVERAGE IN THE FINANCIAL CAPACITY, CAN THOSE TWO JUST GO TOGETHER AND.
GIVE THEM GIVE THAT BE ONE SCORE AS FAR AS FINANCES GO AND TAKE THE EXTRA POINTS THAT ARE THERE AND DISTRIBUTE THEM IN A COUPLE OF OTHER CATEGORIES.
UH, WELL, YOU'RE ABOARD, YOU CAN YOU COULD DO THAT.
BUT LEVERAGING IS VERY DIFFERENT THAN FINANCIAL CAPACITY, LEVERAGING IS THEIR ABILITY TO USE THE FUNDS AND LEVERAGE OTHER DOLLARS TO GO TO TO MEET THAT.
SO IF THEY GET THIS FUNDING, THEN THEY'RE ABLE TO GET, SAY, FOR EVERY DOLLAR THAT THEY GET THROUGH CDBG, THEY'RE ABLE TO GET TEN DOLLARS FROM ANOTHER FUNDING SOURCE THAT MAY NOT NECESSARILY SPEAK TO THEIR FINANCIAL CAPACITY.
SPEAK TO THEIR ABILITY FOR GRANT WRITING AND THEIR ABILITY TO USE THE FUNDS TO GET MORE TO BRING IN MORE DOLLARS, BUT THAT MAY NOT SPEAK TO THEIR OVERALL FINANCIAL CAPACITY.
I MEAN, IT'S SOMETHING THEY ALL SOMEWHAT TIE TOGETHER, BUT.
THAT WOULD BE SOMETHING THAT YOU BET, AS A BOARD CAN DECIDE.
I I WOULD NOT RECOMMEND IT, BUT IF THAT'S THE BOARD'S WILT AND YOU CAN DEFINITELY DISCUSS THAT. THAT LEVERAGING HAS TO DO WITH THE ABILITY.
THE THE REASON WHY A LOT OF APPLICATIONS AND CITY OF PALM BAY IS NOT UNIQUE TO THIS, SO LEVERAGING IT ALLOWS IT ALLOWS THE COMMUNITY TO GET MORE DOLLARS IN.
SO IF AN AGENCY IS ABLE TO MATCH OUR DOLLARS 10 TO ONE, IF FOR EVERY DOLLAR WE GIVE THEM WITH CABG FUNDING, THEY'RE ABLE TO TAKE THAT AND GET 10 MORE DOLLARS FROM, SAY, ANOTHER.
ANOTHER FEDERAL ENTITY TOWARDS THAT PROGRAM.
AND IF THEY DIDN'T HAVE THAT DOLLAR, THEN THEY WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO GET THAT ADDITIONAL $10. THERE MAY BE AN AGENCY THAT DOESN'T LEVERAGE OUR FUNDING AT ALL, AND IF WE GIVE THEM A DOLLAR, WE GIVE THEM A DOLLAR AND THEY'RE NOT ABLE.
SO THE MORE AN AGENCY IS ABLE TO LEVERAGE, THE MORE DOLLARS THEY'RE ABLE TO BRING IN TO HELP THE COMMUNITY. THERE ARE SOME AGENCIES WHEN I USED TO WORK AT BREVARD COUNTY, THEY HAD LEVERAGING WITHIN AND THEY ALSO REQUIRED A MATCH FOR SOME OF THEIR COMMUNITY BASED ORGANIZATIONS. SO IF WE AND THAT MATCH WAS USUALLY TWENTY FIVE PERCENT MATCH, WHICH IS DIFFERENT THAN LEVERAGING, BUT SO THAT SPEAKS TO THAT AGENCY'S ABILITY TO EITHER MATCH DOLLARS OR BE ABLE TO BRING IN ADDITIONAL DOLLARS.
SO IT JUST. YOUR YOUR DVD DOLLARS ARE ESSENTIALLY GOING FURTHER.
THE MORE AN AGENCY IS ABLE TO LEVERAGE, THEY'RE BRINGING MORE MONEY INTO HELP VERSUS AN AGENCY WHO DOESN'T HAVE THAT ABILITY TO LEVERAGE.
I WOULD JUST ADD ONE OF THE WAYS I ALWAYS SCORE THAT SECTION IN TERMS OF LEVERAGING NOT ALL AGENCIES COME WITH A MATCH.
I THINK THERE'S ONE OR TWO I'VE SEEN COME IN THE MATCH, BUT WHAT I'VE ALWAYS BEEN ABLE TO DO IS IF THEY ARE GETTING ANY OTHER DOLLARS BECAUSE SOMETIMES YOU'RE GIVING THEM 10 20 THOUSAND, BUT THE REAL COST IS $50000.
ARE THEY STILL ABLE TO FUNCTION WITH THAT? AND THE FACT THAT THEY'RE ABLE TO GET OTHER DOLLARS MAKES ME FEEL VERY COMFORTABLE IN ADDING, YOU KNOW, GIVING THEM, YOU KNOW, MORE POINTS SIMPLY BECAUSE I KNOW THE PROGRAM WILL CONTINUE.
THAT'S HOW I USE THAT SECTION, THE LEVERAGE IN SECTION.
WHEN NOT LEVERAGING IS THAT IF AN AGENCY DOESN'T GET THIS FUNDING, THAT'S LESS MONEY THAT THEY'RE BRINGING IN BECAUSE THEY HAVE TO HAVE A CERTAIN AMOUNT TO BRING IN A CERTAIN AMOUNT. AND I KNOW THAT THE SCORING CRITERIA LOOKS A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT, BUT.
WE'RE NOT REALLY PROPOSING A COMPLETE OVERHAUL OF THE GRANT APPLICATION BECAUSE A LOT OF THE THE SAME INFORMATION AND THERE IS STILL VERY RELEVANT AND STILL NECESSARY.
[00:40:03]
IT'S JUST TAKING EVERYTHING THAT'S CURRENTLY IN THE APPLICATION AND MAKING SURE IT'S SCORED IN SOME CAPACITY.AND THEN HE GETS FINANCIAL CAPACITY WAS ALWAYS IN THE APPLICATION, BUT IT WAS NEVER SCORED. SAME WITH THE INTRODUCTION TO TO HAVE THE BOARD UNDERSTAND WHO THE AGENCY IS AND THEN. SO FOR FOR ME, I JUST THOUGHT THAT THAT IF WE'RE ASKING AN AGENCY FOR INFORMATION, THEY SHOULD BE SCORED.
AND SO I TRIED TO TAKE NOT ONLY THAT, BUT REALLY LISTEN TO WHAT EACH BOARD MEMBER SAID BECAUSE SOME SOME OF YOU HAD SIMILAR THOUGHTS, SOME OF YOU HAD A LITTLE DIFFERENT THOUGHTS ON HOW IT SHOULD BE.
SO I TRIED TO TAKE ALL OF THAT AND MAKE IT AS COHESIVE OR COMPLETE AS POSSIBLE WITH MULTIPLE OPINIONS.
KENDRA, I GUESS WE'LL BRING IT BACK TO THE BOARD TO DECIDE IF WE WANT TO MAKE ANY ADJUSTMENTS, IF WE WANT TO.
PROCEED WITH THE STATUS AS IT IS, I NEED A MOTION OF SOME SORT BEFORE YOU CALL THE MOTION. I KNOW DEPUTY MAYOR JOHNSON IS ON THE LINE, BUT I'M NOT TRYING TO CALL YOU OUT, DEPUTY MAYOR. I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT YOU THAT IF YOU HAVE IF YOU IF YOU WANTED TO SPEAK THAT WE WEREN'T TALKING OVER YOU AND YOU HAD THE ABILITY TO SPEAK.
I'M STILL HERE. AND WE JUST WANTED TO KNOW.
WE WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT WE GIVE YOU AN OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK IF YOU HAD SOMETHING TO SAY. I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE WEREN'T TALKING AGAIN.
I'M SORRY. ON THE SCORING CRITERIA BEFORE THERE IS A MOTION, I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT WE WE DIDN'T MISS.
IF YOU WANTED TO SAY SOMETHING.
ARE WE MAKING OUR DECISION TO GO WITH THIS FOR DISCUSSION, FURTHER DISCUSSION OR WHATEVER IF WE DO THIS? AND WE WON'T BE ABLE TO DISCUSS NEXT.
OK, LET'S LET ME TRY AND BREAK THIS DOWN INDIVIDUALLY, SO LET'S DO THE CRITERIA FIRST.
MAKE A MOTION TO ACCEPT THE CRITERIA, AS IT STATED FOR FISCAL YEAR TWENTY TWO TWENTY THREE, THE RANKING WORKSHEET LIKE IT IS, AND THEN WE CAN GET INTO AN ADDITIONAL MOTION FOR THE POINTING SYSTEM TO MAKE SURE THAT THE POINTS ARE, YOU KNOW, ADEQUATE PER INDIVIDUAL CRITERIA.
DESCRIPTION MAKES SENSE TO EVERYONE.
WE WOULD NEED TWO MOTIONS ONE TO ACCEPT AND THEN WANT TO ACCEPT THE POINTING RATIO POINTING SYSTEM. OK.
OK, WELL, LET'S START WITH THE FIRST TWO CRITERIA.
DO WE HAVE EMOTION? DO WE HAVE ANY DISCUSSION? IS I KNOW WE JUST HAD SOME DISCUSSION BACK AND FORTH WITH STAFF SO THAT I'M SURE THAT ANSWERED EVERYONE'S QUESTIONS.
OK, WELL, NOW I'LL GO SIMPLY FOR THE FACT THAT I THINK REQUESTING A PRESENTATION, SHE MADE SOME VERY GOOD POINTS REGARDING THE PRESENTATION, REGARDLESS OF WHETHER IT BE MANDATORY OR NOT OR VOTED.
I DO THINK THAT THAT PRESENTATION WOULD NOT ONLY GIVE THE ORDER TO PRESENT TO US, BUT WHATEVER END UP BEING HERE WOULD HELP THEM GET THE WORD OUT AND IT WOULD JUST OPEN BE MORE PROSE THAN I.
OK. AND MIKE IS ON, AND I'LL TRY AND GET A LITTLE CLOSER NEXT TIME.
I DO WANT TO CLARIFY THAT THE WHETHER THEY MAKE A PRESENTATION OR OR NOT OR THEY JUST ARE MANDATED TO BE HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS WOULD BE STATED IN THE APPLICATION, WHICH YOU WILL BE REVIEWING AND VOTING ON IN NOVEMBER.
BUT IF THAT'S BUT IF IT'S SOMETHING THAT YOU WANT AS FAR AS THE CRITERIA FOR SCORING, IF THAT'S SOMETHING THAT YOU WANT TO SCORE ON, THEN WE COULD ADD IT IN.
BUT WHETHER AN AGENCY IS PRESENT OR IS MAKING A PRESENTATION WOULD BE DISCUSSED IN NOVEMBER WHEN YOU REVIEW THE REQUEST FOR APPLICATIONS.
THE U.S. JUST WE NEED A SEPARATE MOTION TO DETERMINE.
I KNOW THAT WAS A QUESTION YOU WANTED TO SEE WHETHER OR NOT.
SO THAT'S A SEPARATE MOTION THAT I'M ASSUMING.
RIGHT? YES. SO NEXT MONTH, YOU WILL BE DISCUSSING THE YOU'LL BE REVIEWING THE REQUEST FOR APPLICATIONS BASED ON THE SCORING CRITERIA.
BUT MISS WRIGHT, I JUST WANTED TO TO CLARIFY, ARE YOU ARE YOU SUGGESTING, DO YOU WANT TO
[00:45:06]
HAVE THE PRESENTATION SCORED? I GUESS THAT'S UP TO THE BOARD TO DETERMINE.I, IN MY OPINION, I THINK IT'S ONE OF THOSE THINGS.
WE CAN BE OPEN TO IT. WE CAN BE INDIFFERENT TO IT.
I DON'T THINK A PRESENTATION SHOULD BE MANDATORY.
I THINK IT'S MORE OF AN OPPORTUNITY, SO NO, I DON'T THINK IT SHOULD BE GRADED, BUT I DON'T THINK THE WAY THE POINTS ARE AS OF RIGHT NOW, I THINK I DON'T THINK I'M A HUNDRED PERCENT ON BOARD SIMPLY BECAUSE THERE WERE OTHER BOARD MEMBERS THAT MADE SOME POINTS THAT I AGREE WITH, THAT POINTS MIGHT OR SHOULD BE MOVED AROUND HERE AND THERE.
I WAS THERE, I THINK THE FIRST MOTION WAS JUST FOR THE CRITERIA ITSELF, AS FAR AS THE PRESENTATION NOTE, I DON'T THINK IT SHOULD BE GRADED.
OK? I THINK WHAT THE CHAIR WAS SAYING IS THAT THEY WERE GOING TO MAKE TWO SEPARATE.
YOU WERE GOING TO MAKE TWO SEPARATE MOTIONS TO APPROVE ONE FOR JUST THE CRITERIA THE THE CATEGORIES AND THEN A SEPARATE ONE FOR HOW MUCH EACH ONE WOULD BE WEIGHED.
OK. OR I UNDERSTANDING THAT CORRECTLY, CHAIR, MR. CHAIR. OK. JUST A CLARIFICATION ON INTRODUCTION IS SO WHEN I ANTICIPATED, BUT I THOUGHT ABOUT INTRODUCTION, I'M THINKING OF WHAT THEY HAVE ON THE PAPER AND THEIR PRESENTATION COMBINED. IS THAT WHAT WE'RE THINKING? OR THAT'S SOMETHING DIFFERENT BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT I REMEMBER WE SCORED USED TO SCORE ON.
SO I'M JUST TRYING TO. I WOULD LOOK AT IT, AS YOU KNOW, FROM AN INTRODUCTION STANDPOINT, THAT IS THEIR PRESENTATION, THEM TELLING US WHO THEY ARE, WHAT THEY WANT AND WHAT, YOU KNOW, ENTITY THEY'RE, YOU KNOW, THEY'RE GOING TO WORK FOR, WHETHER IT'S DOMESTIC VIOLENCE, WHETHER IT'S FOOD, YOU KNOW, WHATEVER THE CASE MAY BE.
SO THAT IS WHAT I'M TAKING INTRODUCTION TO BE, YOU KNOW, IN JUST.
EXACTLY. SO IT'S SEPARATELY, SO I WOULD SAY THEIR INTRODUCTION WILL BE ONE THING AND THEN THEIR APPLICATION GOES UPON THE INDIVIDUAL MERITS.
I CURRENTLY HAVE I HAVE THE APPLICATION IN THE DESCRIPTION FOR INTRODUCTION PULLED UP.
AND SO CURRENTLY, AS IT STANDS IN OUR APPLICATION, IS INTRODUCTION IS DESCRIBE THE GOALS OF YOUR AGENCY ORGANIZATION YEARS IN OPERATION TYPES AND SOURCES OF FUNDING RECEIVED LAST YEAR. TYPES OF SERVICES PROVIDED THE NUMBER AND CHARACTERISTICS OF CLIENTS SERVED.
SO IT GIVES YOU AN OVERVIEW OF WHO THAT AGENCY IS, WHO THEY SERVE.
HOW LONG HAVE THEY BEEN IN BUSINESS? WHAT TYPES OF FUNDING THAT THEY HAVE? SO THAT'S SOMEBODY PHYSICALLY COMING UP.
DO THAT, RIGHT? NO, THAT'S THAT'S OUR THAT'S WRITTEN IN THERE ON THE PAGE.
THAT'S THE FIRST PROPOSAL QUESTION IN THE APPLICATION, AND THAT'S WHAT YOU WOULD BE SCORING. ON.
SO WHAT ALAN AND I ARE THINKING IS NOT THE CASE THEN, BECAUSE WHEN AGAIN, THE WORD WHEN I SEE INTRODUCTION, I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE.
SO WHEN I SEE THE INTRODUCTION 10 POINTS, ALL I'M DOING IS LOOKING AT THE APPLICATION PHYSICALLY AND SEEING IF THEY WROTE EVERYTHING DOWN.
IF IT WAS CLEAR, IF IT WAS CONCISE, IF I UNDERSTOOD IT.
YES. AND IF THEY ADDRESSED ALL THE THE QUESTIONS IN THE PROPOSAL AS FAR AS THAT SECTION FOR INTRODUCTION, DID THEY TELL YOU? THE TYPES OF SERVICES THAT THEY PROVIDE, THEY TYPE TELL YOU HOW MANY YEARS THEY'VE BEEN IN OPERATION. DID THEY ANSWER ALL THOSE QUESTIONS IN THE FIRST SECTION? SO ALLAN, JUST TO SAY THAT IT DOES INCLUDE WHAT WE'RE THINKING, BUT IT DOESN'T INCLUDE THEM COMING UP HERE PHYSICALLY? YEAH, NO. SO AT THAT POINT? EXACTLY. SO I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, EVERYBODY UNDERSTANDS THAT INTRODUCTION WHEN WE LOOK AT IT, IS OUR PHYSICAL PAPER NOT COMING UP? YES. AND THAT'S WHAT EVERYTHING ON THE CRITERIA IS THAT YOU'RE SCORING ON IS EVERYTHING THAT'S IN THEIR APPLICATION.
IT'S NOT. IT'S TAKING INTO ACCOUNT EVERYTHING THAT'S ON PAPER.
IT'S NOT TAKING INTO ACCOUNT WHAT THEY PRESENT TO YOU IN THE PAST.
SO LAST YEAR, YOU DID HAVE A SECTION PRESENTATION UNDERSTANDING OF THE INTENT OF THE CDBG PROGRAM. THERE'S THAT PRESENTATION ISN'T SOMETHING THAT THEY WRITE DOWN, IT'S SOMETHING THAT THEY DID THAT THEY DID VERBALLY.
SO THAT WAS SOMETHING THAT YOU'RE SCORING THAT WASN'T IN THEIR APPLICATION.
SO WE'RE JUST SO ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I HEARD WAS TO TAKE THAT OUT BECAUSE YOU SHOULDN'T. BECAUSE IT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT IS IN THE APPLICATION, AND IT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT CAN BE TRANSFERRED INTO AN AGREEMENT.
AND. WANT ONE OTHER THING, SO IT MEANS THAT WE WOULD HAVE TO GET.
THESE PACKAGES BEFORE STUDY THEM AND COME READY FOR IT, SO WE COULDN'T JUST RELY ON THERE.
YES, AND THAT'S WHAT'S DONE IN THE PAST.
AS WE SEND YOU WITH OUR YOUR PACKET, WE SEND YOU THE APPLICATIONS, WE SEND YOU OUR STAFF SUMMARY. AND THEN THAT'S WHAT YOU WOULD REVEAL AHEAD OF TIME AND THEN YOU WOULD SCORE AT THE MEETING. I'M JUST SAYING THAT OUT LOUD.
I KNOW THAT'S WHAT YOU DO. THANK YOU FOR THAT.
EVERYBODY KNOWS THAT'S WHAT WOULD HAVE TO HAPPEN.
SO MY RECOMMENDATION WOULD BE WE GET RID OF THE INTRODUCTION AND TAKE THE FIVE POINTS AND STICK THEM SOMEPLACE ELSE.
[00:50:03]
I LIKE I SAID, I THINK THE INTRODUCTION IS THE BASIS.IS THAT FIRST PORTION OF THE APPLICATION, IT'S LIKE PUTTING YOUR NAME ON A TEST PAPER.
SO YOU'RE SAYING WE'RE GIVING THEM TOO MUCH POINTS? WELL, I WANTED TO REMOVE IT.
I JUST DON'T THINK WE SHOULD SCORE AN INTRODUCTION.
BUT SOME PEOPLE JUST DON'T FILL OUT THE APPLICATION, RIGHT, I THINK THIS CAME UP BEFORE I REMEMBER. AND WHAT WAS HAPPENING IS THAT SOME PEOPLE JUST DIDN'T DO A GOOD JOB OF.
AND SO I THINK WE WERE SAYING THAT POINTS SHOULD BE AWARDED FOR PEOPLE WHO TOOK THE TIME OUT TO THE COMPLETED PROPERLY.
WHETHER OR NOT IT'S 10 POINTS IS ANOTHER STORY, BUT THERE SHOULD BE SOME.
SOME POINTS GIVEN TO ACTUALLY WELL, FOR ME, YOU HAVE JUST SO YOU KNOW, MR. CHERRY, MR MORTON'S WHEN HE HAD HIS HAND HIGH.
WHAT? HE HASN'T SAID ANYTHING.
I THINK I PRETTY MUCH UNDERSTAND WHAT WHAT KAY AND ALLEN ARE TALKING ABOUT, WHAT THE WHAT I'VE BEEN SEEING IS IS THAT YOU'VE GOT AN APPLICATION THAT'S REALLY SUPPOSED TO GIVE US INSIGHT TO ALL OF THE VARIOUS IMPORTANT ASPECTS.
AND SOME PEOPLE DO A BETTER JOB THAN ANOTHER.
AND THEN WE'VE GOT PEOPLE THAT COME UP TO THE LECTERN TO COME UP TO SPEAK, AND THEY PRETTY MUCH TELL YOU WHAT THEY THINK YOU WANT TO HEAR.
AND THEY THINK THEY'RE GOING TO GET THEIR MONEY THROUGH THEIR PERSONALITY OR THEIR WAY, YOU KNOW, WHATEVER THEY HAVE TO SAY.
AND I'VE SEEN IN THE PAST WHERE WHAT THEY'RE TALKING ABOUT.
I'M LOOKING WHICH APPLICATION IS IT, I CAN'T FIND IT, YOU KNOW, SO LIKEI SAID A WELL-DONE APPLICATION INDICATES A VERY THOUGHTFUL APPROACH.
AND I THINK THAT IF SOMEBODY HAS TROUBLE.
DOING A WELL-DONE APPLICATION.
THEY TALK TO YOU, SANDRA, FOR GUIDANCE.
YES, AND ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE ARE GOING TO BE DOING DIFFERENT THIS YEAR IS EVEN THOUGH WE DID HAVE A MANDATORY TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE WORKSHOP LAST YEAR, IF THERE ARE A NEW AGENCY THEN.
AND THAT'S ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I'M SUGGESTING TO PUT IN THE REQUEST FOR APPLICATIONS IS THAT THEY HAVE TO HAVE A MANDATORY ONE ON ONE, BUT THEN ALSO IN THE THE MANDATORY TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE WORKSHOP WITH ALL OF THE AGENCIES IS TRY AND GO THROUGH THE APPLICATION A LITTLE BIT MORE DETAIL SO THAT THAT CAN BE AN OPPORTUNITY FOR AGENCIES WHO.
HE MAY NOT HAVE WHO MAY HAVE QUESTIONS AS TO HOW TO FILL THAT OUT, BUT TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE HAS ALWAYS BEEN SOMETHING THAT AN AGENCY CAN UTILIZE DURING THE APPLICATION PROCESS, AND THE APPLICATIONS ARE OUT FOR AT LEAST 30 DAYS, SO THEY HAVE PLENTY OF TIME TO REACH OUT TO STAFF.
I'VE NEVER TURNED AWAY AN AGENCY WHO HAS WANTED, WHO HAS ASKED FOR TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE.
I'VE ALWAYS GIVEN IT, AND THAT'S ALWAYS SOMETHING THAT WE ACTUALLY DO.
PUT THAT IN THE APPLICATION THAT THERE'S INFORMATION ABOUT THE TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE, BUT THAT ONE ON ONE TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE IS AVAILABLE DURING THE PROCESS AS WELL.
SO YES, AN AGENCY HAS EVERY OPPORTUNITY TO MEET WITH STAFF TO GO OVER THE APPLICATION, ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THEY HAVE ON THE APPLICATION AHEAD OF TIME.
NOW, ONE LAST THING I'D LIKE TO SAY ALSO IS IS I DON'T KNOW HOW THE REST OF OUR TEAM UP HERE FEEL ABOUT IT, BUT WHEN SOMEBODY COMES UP AND THEN THEY PASS OUT 10 OR 15 PAGES THAT WE'RE SUPPOSED TO BE LOOKING AT WHILE SIMULTANEOUSLY LISTENING TO THEM AND ANALYZING WHAT THEY GIVE US, I DON'T GET IT.
I I THAT'S NOT HOW IT SHOULD BE DONE, AT LEAST IN MY OPINION, I DON'T KNOW HOW EVERYBODY ELSE FEELS ABOUT IT.
I MEAN, THE APPLICATION SHOULD PRETTY MUCH COVER THAT STUFF, AND THAT'S WHAT I HAVE TO USE TO WRITE THEIR GRANT AGREEMENT I CAN'T TAKE.
EXTRA INFORMATION, SO THAT'S SOMETHING THAT YOU CAN DISCUSS IS IF THEY DO GIVE A PRESENTATION, NO HANDOUTS ARE REQUIRED OR THEY THEY SHOULD STICK TO JUST WHAT'S IN THEIR APPLICATION AND EXPOUND ON THAT, BUT THEY SHOULDN'T.
AND THAT'S ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I'VE I'VE HEARD IT.
I'VE HEARD DIFFERENT MEMBERS SAY DIFFERENT.
VIEWS ON WHETHER AN AGENCY SHOULD GIVE A PRESENTATION OR NOT, AND THAT'S ONE OF THE REASONS THAT I'VE HEARD FROM SOME BOARD MEMBERS IS THAT THEY'RE GIVING OUTSIDE INFORMATION THAT'S NOT IN THEIR APPLICATION.
OR SO, I MEAN, I'VE HEARD IT BOTH WAYS, BUT THAT'S WHY IT'S IT'S UP TO YOU AS A BOARD TO DECIDE IF THAT'S SOMETHING THAT YOU WANT TO HEAR AND HOW AND YOU CAN LIMIT.
LIKE I SAID, IF YOU WANT THEM TO NOT HAVE ANY HANDOUTS OR IF YOU WANT THEM TO JUST STICK
[00:55:04]
TO WHAT'S IN THE APPLICATION, WHICH IS WHAT YOUR YOU HAVE TO SCORE ON.SO THAT'S THAT'S SOMETHING THAT YOU CAN DECIDE AS A BOARD WHEN YOU DISCUSS THE REQUEST FOR APPLICATIONS AND YOU.
ARE TELLING THE AGENCIES WHAT THEY HAVE TO DO.
WELL, FOR ME, WHEN I LOOK AT THIS, I SEE MEASURABLE OUTCOMES.
AND I THINK THAT'S VERY IMPORTANT AND I SEE IT'S FIVE POINTS.
SO I WOULD BE OK WITH MOVING INTRODUCTION.
THIS IS JUST THE APPLICATION THAT YOU SHOULD BE DOING ANYWAY.
AND YOU WOULD HAVE GOTTEN HELP GIVEN THE APPLICATION FIVE POINTS WITH MEASURABLE OUTCOMES BECAUSE WE HAVE JUDGE PEOPLE HERE BASED ON THE FACT THAT THEY COULD NOT TELL US HOW WHAT WAS THE END RESULT OF THIS? HOW MANY PEOPLE THERE ARE GOING TO IMPACT, HOW ALL THE DOLLARS WOULD BE SPENT? AND IT WAS INTANGIBLE.
SO I THINK THAT IS VERY IMPORTANT AND I WOULD BE I WOULD SUGGEST THAT WE MOVE PUT AN ADDITIONAL FIVE POINTS ON THAT.
AND AS YOU SAID, THAT'S GOING TO SAY SANDRA ACTUALLY TOLD US THAT WE SHE WANTED TO WAIT INTRODUCTION TO FIVE POINTS INSTEAD OF 10 AND MOVE THAT FIVE POINTS TO MEASURABLE OUTCOMES FROM FIVE TO 10.
WE'RE ON THE SAME WAVELENGTH. OH, THAT'S GOOD.
SO I AGREE WITH THAT STATEMENT.
SO. SO JUST RECENTLY, I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE BECAUSE WHEN WE DO OUR.
WHEN WE TALK ABOUT JUST DISCUSSING THIS, WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT EVERYBODY KNOWS THAT THIS IS EXACTLY WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN.
YOU'RE ACTING OUT, SO YOU HAVE TO.
I HAVE TO MAKE SURE IT SAYS THIS VERSUS IT'S YOU JUST SUGGESTING IT THERE, IT HAS TO BE A PART. YES.
SO WHAT WE SEE HERE? SO YEAH, SO THE THE CHAIR HAD SAID THAT YOU WOULD DO TWO DIFFERENT MOTIONS.
ONE MOTION WOULD BE JUST THE CRITERIA ITSELF AND THEN THE SECOND ONE WOULD BE THE ACTUAL POINTS ASSIGNED TO EACH ONE.
AND SO I THINK YOU'RE STILL ON THE I THINK HE'S STILL WAITING TO CALL THE FIRST MOTION.
THE ONE QUESTION YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT THE APPLICATION ITSELF THAT THERE IS A THEFIRST PORTION AND IT DOES HAVE A SOLID CHUNK OF QUESTIONS TO ANSWER TO MAKE THAT INTRODUCTION ARE THE REST OF THE APPLICATION QUESTIONS OPEN ENDED OR IS THAT THE ONLY ONE? AND THE REST OF THEM ARE JUST, YOU KNOW, FILL IN THE BLANK KIND OF THINGS.
SO WHERE THEY CAN ADD SUBSTANCE, BECAUSE MY I DO THINK, YOU KNOW, MAYBE SCRAPPING THE INTRODUCTION, BUT MAYBE GIVING THOSE FIVE POINTS AS AN OVERALL INTERPRETATION OR OF THE APPLICATION ITSELF, MAKING IT AN OVERALL TYPE OF POINT.
OPTION, RATHER THAN JUST GRADING THE INTRODUCTION, BECAUSE IF THEY'RE NOT TAKING THE TIME FOR THE LET'S SAY, THEY'RE TAKING THE TIME FOR THE INTRODUCTION, BUT NOT FOR THE REST OF IT OR VICE VERSA, I THINK MAYBE MAKING THAT AN OVERALL MIGHT BE A BETTER USE OF THOSE POINTS EAGERNESS ABOUT HOW THAT APPLICATION IS.
OK, SO EACH OF THE SCORING CRITERIA IS LISTED AS A SEPARATE PART OF THE APPLICATION AS PROPOSAL QUESTIONS AND THERE IS A DESCRIPTION OF WHAT THEY HAVE TO PROVIDE AND EACH OF THOSE SECTIONS. SO.
AND IN THE APPLICATION, I NEED TO STATE HOW MUCH EACH SECTION IS GOING TO BE SCORED.
SO IF YOU DECIDE THAT INTRODUCTION, YOU'RE NOT GOING TO SCORE IT AT ALL, THEN I NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT I KNOW TATE THAT IN THE APPLICATION AND MAYBE NOT MAKE IT PART OF THE PROPOSAL QUESTIONS AND MOVE IT SOMEWHERE ELSE OR COMBINE IT WITH ANOTHER QUESTION SO THAT THOSE SAME QUESTIONS THAT WE NEED TO KNOW ARE BEING ADDRESSED.
THEY'RE JUST BEING ADDRESSED DIFFERENTLY.
BUT EACH EACH OF THESE CRITERIA HAS A SET PARAMETERS AS TO WHAT YOU HAVE TO ADDRESS WITHIN THAT SECTION. SO ON THE APPLICATION ITSELF, IT'LL SAY INTRODUCTION VALUE OF FIVE POINTS. AND THEN THE QUESTIONS THAT THEY WOULD ANSWER YES.
OK, GOTCHA. AS A BOARD, WE WOULD HAVE TO DETERMINE EXACTLY WHAT WE'RE LOOKING FOR, THEN CORRECT WHAT, WHAT, WHAT YOU MISSED LIKE, FOR EXAMPLE, THEY DIDN'T TELL US, YOU KNOW, THEIR TARGET GROUP WITHIN THAT.
SO WE WOULD BE THEN SAID, OK, WE'RE ONLY GIVING THEM THREE POINTS BECAUSE THEY DIDN'T SAY THAT. THAT WOULD BE UP TO YOU, TO AN INDIVIDUAL OR IT'S AN OVERALL DEAL WORTH IT.
SO LET'S SAY THAT YOU, ESPECIALLY WHEN IT GETS INTO THE ONE, LET'S SAY, DEMONSTRATION OF NEED, AND IF THEY DIDN'T STATE WHETHER IT'S AN EXISTING SERVICE OR IF IT'S A NEW SERVICE OR YOU DON'T UNDERSTAND WHAT IT IS THAT THEY'RE TRYING TO PROVIDE AND YOU CAN'T GLEAM FROM THEIR APPLICATION, WHAT THEY'RE TRYING TO DO, WHAT THEY'RE IF THEY'RE REQUESTING TWENTY THOUSAND DOLLARS TO TO DO SOMETHING, IF YOU DON'T KNOW IF YOU CAN'T, IF THEY DON'T MAKE IT CLEAR AS TO WHAT THEY'RE USING THOSE FUNDS FOR AND WHY THEY NEED IT, THEN YOU WOULD SCORE ACCORDINGLY.
[01:00:01]
I MEAN, I WOULD THINK THAT YOU WOULD GIVE A LOWER SCORE TO AN AGENCY WHO SUBMITS AN APPLICATION THAT YOU CAN'T TELL WHAT THEY'RE WANTING, WHAT WHAT THEY'RE WANTING THE FUNDS TO USE FOR VERSUS ONE THAT ANSWERS ALL THOSE QUESTIONS AND SAYS, YES, THIS IS A SERVICE THAT I'M PROVIDING. IT'S A NEW SERVICE THAT ISN'T CURRENTLY BEING PROVIDED OR IT'S A SERVICE THAT IS BEING PROVIDED.BUT WITH THIS FUNDING, I'M ABLE TO SERVE AN ADDITIONAL, SAY, TWO HUNDRED CLIENTS, AND THEY ANSWER ALL OF THE QUESTIONS THAT ARE THAT ARE LISTED THERE AND YOU CAN UNDERSTAND AND THEY'RE ARTICULATING AN ADEQUATELY WHAT THEY'RE TRYING TO DO IF THEY'RE NOT ANSWERING THE QUESTIONS AND THAT SHOULD BE YOU SHOULD SCORE.
BUT I THINK THAT IF I DON'T THINK THAT WAS MY QUESTION, THOUGH, BECAUSE THAT'S HOW WE DO IT NOW, THAT'S I WAS JUST TRYING TO WITH THE INTRODUCTION.
IF WE'RE GOING TO SCORE IT AND THEY ALL HAVE, YOU KNOW, FIVE LINES THAT YOU HAVE TO FILL OUT. I DON'T KNOW HOW THIS IS SET UP, LIKE, FOR EXAMPLE.
HOW DO I DETERMINE BECAUSE I READ THE INTRODUCTION, IT SOUNDS GREAT, BUT SOMEONE MAY LOOK AT IT AND SAID, OH, BUT THEY DIDN'T MENTION THIS.
YOU KNOW. NOW YOU'LL SEE TO SEE THE PROPOSAL QUESTIONS AND YOU'LL SEE WHAT IT IS THAT THEY HAD TO PROVIDE.
SO THAT WAY, IF THEY'RE IF, IF THIS IS WHAT THEY HAD TO STATE IN THERE IN THAT SECTION AND THEY DON'T ANSWER ALL THOSE THINGS, THEN YOU CAN COMPARE WHAT THEY SAID VERSUS WHAT THEY WERE SUPPOSED TO ADDRESS. SO IF THEY ONLY ADDRESSED THEIR NAME, BUT THEY DIDN'T SAY HOW MANY YEARS THEY'VE BEEN IN OPERATION, THEY DIDN'T SAY WHAT KIND OF SERVICE THEY PROVIDE, WHAT KIND OF FUNDING SOURCES.
AND YOU CAN SEE THAT THAT'S CLEARLY IN THE DESCRIPTION FOR THAT PROPOSAL QUESTION, AND THEY DIDN'T ANSWER ANY OF THOSE.
YOU WOULD SCORE THEM LOWER BECAUSE THEY DIDN'T FOLLOW DIRECTIONS AND ANSWER.
IT WAS JUST THAT WE WOULD HAVE TO BE VERY MINDFUL OF WHAT TO LOOK FOR.
AND IT SHOULD STATE IN THE PROPOSAL QUESTION STATE WHAT THEY'RE SUPPOSED TO BE.
OH, OK, BUT IF THEY LEFT THAT PART OUT OR JUST OK, YEAH.
SO YES, AND THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WHEN YOU REVIEW THE REQUEST FOR APPLICATIONS NEXT MONTH, IF THERE'S SOMETHING THAT'S CURRENTLY IN THOSE PROPOSAL QUESTIONS OR THERE'S NOT SOMETHING IN THERE THAT YOU WANT AGENCIES TO TELL YOU WHEN THE APPLICATIONS, WE CAN ADJUST THE APPLICATION.
SO IF THERE'S IF YOU DON'T CARE ABOUT YOURS OF SERVICE, THEN WE CAN TAKE THAT OUT IF THERE'S SOMETHING THAT YOU WANT TO KNOW MORE ABOUT.
FROM THAT AGENCY, AND WE DON'T ADDRESS IT IN THERE, WE CAN ADD IT IN AS NEEDED.
AND SO IT GIVES YOU AN IDEA OF WHAT, BUT REVIEWING THE APPLICATION NEXT MONTH WILL ALSO GIVE YOU AN IDEA OF THIS IS THE CRITERIA, AND THIS IS HOW MUCH OF WEIGHTED THIS IS WHAT THEY HAVE TO ANSWER IN THAT APPLICATION.
TO. UM, I GUESS BRING IT BACK, AND THE MOTION WOULD BE TO ACCEPT THE CRITERIA LISTED AS IT IS PER CITY STAFF RECOMMENDATION FOR INTRODUCTION DEMONSTRATION, A NEED DESCRIPTION OF TARGET CLIENTELE.
CONSOLIDATED PLAN CONSISTENCY AND PRIORITIES.
ORGANIZATIONAL CAPACITY AND CAPABILITY.
LEVERAGING FINANCIAL CAPACITY AND PAST PERFORMANCE.
YOU DON'T HAVE TO SAY ALL THAT.
I'M JUST PUTTING IT OUT THERE ON THE RECORD.
IT'S JUST OPPOSE A MOTION TO ACCEPT OUR STAFF CRITERIA AS LISTED.
I HAVE A MOTION. I NEED A SECOND BACK, SECOND MOTION AND SECOND ALL IN FAVOR.
I GOT I GOT A COUPLE OF ONE MORE.
WE'VE ALREADY STARTED THE PROCESS, BUT MOTION SECOND.
ALL RIGHT. BUT AFTER THE SECOND, OK, YOU HAVE SOME DISCUSSION.
OKAY. I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU JUST SAID, SANDRA.
SO THAT MEANS THAT THE APPLICATION THAT THAT AGENCIES HAVE BEEN GETTING NOW.
BASED ON THIS CRITERIA HERE, THE APPLICATION FORMAT WOULD CHANGE.
A LOT OF THESE THINGS THEY'RE ALREADY ANSWERING.
SO THE INTRODUCTION, IT'S ALREADY PART OF THE PROPOSAL QUESTION DEMONSTRATION OF NEED IS CURRENTLY IN THERE.
THESE ARE ALL THESE ARE MOSTLY PROPOSAL QUESTIONS THAT ARE ALREADY IN THEIR DESCRIPTION OF CLIENT TARGETED CLIENTELE, CONSOLIDATED PLAN CONSISTENCY, THAT ONE WOULD CHANGE A LITTLE BIT BECAUSE YOU'RE GOING TO INCLUDE THE THE PRIORITIES AND HAVE YOUR OWN LIST OF PRIORITIES RANKED AND THEN SCORE PROPERLY.
SO THAT WOULD BE SOMETHING THAT WOULD BE A CHANGE THAT WOULD BE INCORPORATED INTO THAT SECTION. ORGANIZATIONAL CAPACITY AND CAPABILITY, THAT'S ALREADY SOMETHING THAT'S IN THE APPLICATION. SO MOST OF THESE.
OUR ARE IS ALIGNING WITH WHAT'S ALREADY IN THE PROPOSAL QUESTIONS, IT'S JUST A LITTLE MORE. EASIER FOR THE APPLICANT TO SEE.
INTRODUCTION THIS MANY POINTS ORGANIZATIONAL CAPACITY, THIS MANY POINTS AND WHAT THEY HAVE TO PROVIDE IN THAT LEVERAGING IS ALSO SOMETHING THAT'S BEEN IN THEIR FINANCIAL CAPACITY. SO I NOTICED THAT FINANCIAL CAPACITY IS ALREADY A PROPOSAL QUESTION, BUT THERE
[01:05:04]
REALLY WASN'T A PLACE TO SCORE THAT.AND THAT'S SOMETHING THAT SHOULD BE SCORED AND IT SCORED AMONG OTHER AGENCIES.
AND IT'S SOMETHING THAT HUD SAYS THAT A GRANTEE NEEDS TO TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION PAST PERFORMANCE. THAT'S SOMETHING THAT'S CURRENTLY A PROPOSAL QUESTION.
THAT'S ON THE CRITERIA AS WELL.
SO MOST OF THESE ARE ALREADY THEY'RE ALREADY THERE.
IT'S JUST MAKING IT A LITTLE MORE ALIGNED.
SO THAT'S EASY FOR AN AGENCY TO SEE HOW MUCH SOMETHING IS BEING SCORED.
AND WHAT THE NAME OF IT IS, SO IT'S IT'S YOU'RE NOT GOING TO SEE A COMPLETE OVERHAUL OF THE REQUEST FOR APPLICATIONS.
IT'S MORE OF JUST REFINING IT.
ALL RIGHT. SO I'LL BRING IT BACK, WE HAVE A MOTION IN A SECOND.
IF NO OTHER QUESTIONS OR CONCERNS, I'LL GO AHEAD AND CALL IT ALL IN FAVOR, SAY I I, I OPPOSED. ALL RIGHT.
SOUNDS LIKE WE HAVE FOUR TO TWO, FIVE TO TWO BEFORE OR TO TWO.
MOTION PASSES. ALL RIGHT NOW ONTO THE SECOND PART, WHICH WILL BE THE POINTING SYSTEM, WE CAN EITHER GO THROUGH THE RECOMMENDATION OF CITY STAFF AND, YOU KNOW, OR WE CAN MAKE ADJUSTMENTS, HAVE CONVERSATION NOW.
I'M GOING TO OPEN IT TO THE BOARD TO GUIDE ME.
I THINK THE QUESTION WAS WHETHER OR NOT YOU SHOULD SCORE INTRODUCTION, I THINK THAT'S STILL YOUR POINT.
SO NO, NO, THAT WAS NOT REAL PROOF.
THE POINTS NOW IS THAT YOU VOTED ON THE WRONG.
THE POINT IS NOW WHAT WE'RE GOING TO DO NOW, RIGHT? WELL, IF WE ALREADY APPROVED THE CRITERIA, WE NEED TO WAIT.
INTRODUCTION. SO IF WE WAITED AT FIVE POINTS, DO WE WAITED AT 10? YOU KNOW, THERE HAS TO BE A WAITING, YOU KNOW, A POINTS TOTAL FOR EACH INDIVIDUAL CRITERIA? NO, IT DEPENDS ON WHAT WE.
I DIDN'T KNOW IF YOU WANTED TO.
THAT'S WHAT I WAS ASKING. IF YOU WANTED.
OH, WELL, I MEAN, SINCE WE APPROVED THE CRITERIA, WE'RE KIND OF STUCK WITH AN INTRODUCTION, SOMETHING WHERE THERE'S FIVE POINTS OR 10 POINTS.
HE I MEAN, ME PERSONALLY, I THINK THE PRIORITIES.
DOES THIS FIT INTO THE CONSOLIDATED PLAN? WHAT IS THE MEASURABLE OUTCOMES? WHO ARE THEY SERVICING? THOSE ARE THE BIG EAST TO ME.
REDUCTION. I MEAN, THE WAY WE HAVE IT RIGHT NOW.
SO THE ONLY THING WE COULD DO IS EITHER MOVE IT UP.
I MEAN, THAT'S THE CONVERSATION, I MEAN, WE CAN HAVE THAT.
YOU KNOW, WE JUST NEED TO COME TO A CONSENSUS SO WE CAN VOTE UPON THE WEIGHTING SYSTEM.
HUH. YEAH. NOT CITY STAFF AND THEN ALSO THE INDIVIDUAL AGENCIES, SO THEY KNOW KIND OF WHAT OUR.
OUR THEORY IS THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT FROM THEIR PERSPECTIVE, YOU KNOW, WHEN THEY DO THE APPLICATION. YOU WANT ME TO DO A MOTION NOW OR SO DISCUSSING, I MEAN, WE CAN, YOU KNOW, IF YOU FEEL AS THOUGH THE MOTION CAN GO WITH THE CURRENT SCORING AND I CAN PUT IT OUT THERE ON THE RECORD REAL QUICK INTRODUCTION AT A MAXIMUM OF FIVE POINTS.
DEMONSTRATION TO NEED A MAXIMUM OF 15 POINTS.
DESCRIPTION OF TARGET CLIENTELE.
CONSOLIDATED PLAN CONSISTENCY AND PRIORITIES.
ORGANIZATIONAL CAPACITY AND CAPABILITY.
NEGATIVE 10 OR UP TO A MAXIMUM OF 10 POINTS FOR A GRAND TOTAL OF 100 POINTS AVAILABLE.
ALL RIGHT, I HAVE A MOTION ON THE TABLE, DO I HAVE A SECOND, A SECOND? I HAVE A MOTION IN SECOND, ALL IN FAVOR.
ALL RIGHT. HERE IS UNANIMOUSLY THANK YOU ALL.
WHICH IS BASICALLY OTHER MORE BUSINESS INFORMATIONAL STAFF REPORT.
[OTHER BOARD BUSINESS]
SANDRA, IT'S ALL YOUR ALL ON YOU.AND FOR RIGHT, SINCE YOU ARE THIS IS YOUR FIRST MEETING FOR MY INFORMATIONAL STAFF REPORT, I USUALLY DON'T PUT OUT A MEMO ON THAT.
[01:10:01]
I JUST I GIVE THE BOARD MEMBERS AN UPDATE ON THE DIFFERENT FUNDING PROGRAMS THAT WE HAVE WHERE WE ARE IN THE WHERE WE ARE WITHIN EACH OF THOSE PROGRAMS. SO FOR I'LL START WITH THE FIRST PROGRAM, CDBG FOR OUR PUBLIC SERVICE AGENCIES.WE HAVE STAFF HAS COMPLETED ALL OF THE MONITORING FOR EVERY SINGLE AGENCY.
THE I FOUND THAT AGENCIES HAD NOT BEEN MONITORED SINCE 2013, SO EVERYBODY GOT A BASELINE ACROSS THE BOARD, COMPREHENSIVE MONITORING, WHICH INCLUDED IF OUR FINANCIAL STAFF GOING OUT AND COMPLETING A FINANCIAL MONITORING AS WELL.
AND ONCE THE FISCAL YEAR IS OVER, I'VE HAD SOME MEMBERS WANT TO HEAR THE RESULTS OF THE MONITORING, WHETHER THEY WANT FINDINGS THAT THEY DID HAVE, IF THEY HAD ANY AND THEN IF THEY WERE ABLE TO CURE THEM.
AND THAT'S ALSO, I'VE ALSO HEARD HAD SOME BOARD MEMBERS ASK FOR AN UPDATE AS TO HOW THEY UTILIZE THE FUNDING THAT YOU RECOMMENDED THEM FOR.
DID THEY SPEND ALL OF THEIR FUNDS? DID THEY SERVE THE AMOUNT OF PEOPLE THAT THEY STATED THEY WOULD IN THEIR GRANT APPLICATION? FOR THE SENIOR CENTER, IT AND I KNOW IT'S BEEN THREE MONTHS SINCE WE'VE MET THAT HAS BEEN COMPLETED.
SO WE'RE VERY HAPPY ABOUT THAT OLD FIRE STATION ONE DEMOLITION.
THEY ARE. THEY ARE NOT GOING TO EXPEND THE THREE HUNDRED AND FORTY FIVE THOUSAND DOLLARS THAT THEY WERE AWARDED. SO AT A LATER DATE, WE'LL HAVE TO REALLOCATE UNUSED FUNDS FOR CDBG AND LOOK AT NOT ONLY THAT AMOUNT OF FUNDING, BUT ALL THE OTHER FUNDINGS.
THE BIT, THE BETTER WORD, I BELIEVE, WAS UNDER A HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS.
SO THAT'S GOOD, BUT THAT MEANS THAT WE'LL HAVE TO BRING TO PUT OUT ANOTHER REQUEST FOR APPLICATIONS FOR UNALLOCATED CDBG FUNDING COME BACK.
AND THAT WOULD BE A SEPARATE ALLOCATION THAN THE THE ANNUAL ALLOCATION THAT WE GET.
WHAT ARE THEY PLANNING ON DOING WITH THAT PROPERTY? BECAUSE THEY ARE USING CBG FUNDING, THAT WILL BE A FUTURE FIRE STATION SEVEN.
SO THEY. IF YOU'RE USING CDBG FUNDING TO THE LAND USE HOUSE, THAT STAY THE SAME.
SO BECAUSE IT WAS AN OLD FIRE STATION AT THE TIME, WHEN THEY DEMOLISH IT, THEN EVEN IF IT'S WITH DIFFERENT FUNDING SOURCES, IT HAS TO REMAIN A FIRE STATION OR THE CDBG FUNDING THAT THEY GOT WOULD BE INELIGIBLE.
SO THE PLANS ARE TO KEEP IT AS A FIRE STATION.
AND I BELIEVE THE FIRE DEPARTMENT IS ACTUALLY LOOKING AT DIFFERENT FUNDING SOURCES TO TO TO BUILD THAT FUTURE FIRE STATION BECAUSE THERE IS A NEED IN THE NORTHEAST SECTION AND STATION ONE CAN IS BY FAR THE LARGEST.
FIRE STATION IN THE CITY, BUT BECAUSE THE NORTHEAST SECTION IS SO DENSE WITH POPULATION THAT IT GETS BY FAR THE MOST RESPONSE CALLS AND.
ANOTHER FIRE STATION IS DEFINITELY NEEDED IN THAT AREA TO HELP REDUCE THE RESPONSE TIMES THEIR ORIGINAL ALLOCATION JUST ON THE PUBLIC SERVICE OR WAS IT UNDER A DIFFERENT.
NOW THIS WAS UNDER THE OTHER HUD ELIGIBLE ACTIVITIES, NOT UNDER PUBLIC SERVICES.
AND THEN THE OTHER ONE THAT'S NOT UNDER PUBLIC SERVICES IS COMMUNITY HOUSING INITIATIVES, THEY HAVE SERVED TWO PEOPLE WITH THEIR PURCHASE ASSISTANCE THERE.
ADDITIONAL DOLLARS WILL ROLL OVER INTO NEXT FISCAL YEAR.
ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE WERE FINDING IN THE HOUSING MARKET OVERALL IS HOUSING PRICING HAS GONE UP. AND IT'S THEY'RE FINDING A LITTLE BIT HARDER TO FIND INVENTORY FOR.
ARE THERE THE CLIENTS THAT ARE COMING TO THEM FOR PURCHASE ASSISTANCE? THEY'RE FINDING THAT IT'S HARDER FOR THEM TO FIND AFFORDABLE HOUSING TO EVEN PURCHASE EVEN WITH THE PURCHASE ASSISTANCE.
THEY'RE VERY GOOD AT WHAT THEY DO.
THEY'RE JUST A THEY'RE HAVING TO WORK WITHIN THE CURRENT HOUSING MARKET, WHICH I'M SURE EVERYONE IS PRETTY MUCH AWARE OF THE THE LACK OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING, THE LACK OF INVENTORY IN GENERAL WITHIN THE CITY.
WE'RE CDBG, ONE HOUR CBG ONE, WHICH IS OUR.
UM. OUR CORONAVIRUS DOLLARS THAT WE RECEIVED AS A SEPARATE ALLOCATION FOR THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT, WE AWARDED PUBLIC SERVICE.
ARE YOU AWARDED PUBLIC SERVICE AGENCIES TO? TO HELP THE COMMUNITY AND TO PREPARE, PREVENT OR RESPOND TO CORONAVIRUS DOLLARS, THEY ARE ALL EXPENDING THEIR FUNDS AND THEY WILL BE MONITORED LATER ON IN THE YEAR.
THE HUD HAS APPROVED OUR SUBSTANTIAL AMENDMENT TO INCORPORATE THOSE DOLLARS, WE'RE JUST WAITING ON THE FUNDING AGREEMENT AND THEN WE'LL BE ABLE TO ISSUE OUT OUR AGENCIES THEIR PURCHASE ORDERS, WHICH WE HAVE.
[01:15:02]
WE JUST CAN'T ISSUE THEM UNTIL TO THEM UNTIL WE GET OUR FUNDING AGREEMENT FROM FROM HUD.AND THEN THEY WILL RELEASE THOSE FUNDS.
OH, OH, I REALIZE THAT SINCE THE LAST TIME WE MET, WE DIDN'T HAVE A HOME DISBURSEMENT AGREEMENT, SO I'M GOING TO TALK ABOUT OUR HOME INVESTMENT PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM, WHICH I KNOW THAT MOST OF THE BOARD IS FAMILIAR WITH IT.
BUT FOR FOR YOU, MISS WRIGHT, OUR HOME INVESTMENT PARTNERSHIP DOLLARS ARE FEDERAL FUNDS THAT WE GET THROUGH THE BREVARD COUNTY HOME CONSORTIUM, WHICH IS A IS COMPRISED OF BREVARD COUNTY, TITUSVILLE, COCA, MELBOURNE AND PALM BAY TO.
CREATE AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND TO HELP WITH EITHER NEW CONSTRUCTION, AFFORDABLE HOUSING OR FOR HOUSING RENTALS, DOWN PAYMENT ASSISTANCE OR IN SOME INSTANCES, WE'RE ALLOWED TO USE IT FOR HOMEOWNER REPAIRS.
IT DEPENDS ON THE DIFFERENT PRIORITIES THAT THE BOARD DECIDES AND WE HAVE.
THE CITY IN THE PAST HAS HAD COMPLIANCE ISSUES WITH THE HOME PROGRAM AND THEREFORE HASN'T HAD A DISBURSEMENT AGREEMENT TO RECEIVE THE FUNDING THAT WE ARE ALLOCATED TO USE IT FOR OUR RESIDENTS. AND WE ACTUALLY JUST WITHIN, LET'S SAY, THE LAST MONTH, WE ACTUALLY HAVE A HOME DISBURSEMENT AGREEMENT.
SO WE HAVE PART OF THE ALLOCATION THAT'S BEEN WITHHELD FROM US FROM THE LAST FIVE FISCAL YEARS. WE HAVE A REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS OUT TO OUR COMMUNITY HOUSING DEVELOPMENT ORGANIZATIONS TO EITHER DO DOWN PAYMENT ASSISTANCE OR NEW CONSTRUCTION PURCHASE FOR FOUR UNITS WITH DOWN PAYMENT ASSISTANCE, AND THOSE APPLICATIONS ARE DUE BACK ON SEPTEMBER TWENTY SEVEN. SO SHORTLY WE WILL BE ABLE TO BRING YOU THE SO NEXT NEXT MONTH.
I ANTICIPATE ALSO BRINGING YOU THE REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS TO REVIEW SCORE.
AND HOPEFULLY A WARD AND BEFORE WAS SPENDING $HOME AT THE CITY HASN'T BEEN ABLE TO DO IN QUITE A WHILE, SO THAT'S ACTUALLY A REALLY BIG ACHIEVEMENT AND WE'RE WE'RE VERY EXCITED TO BE ABLE TO GET OUR FUNDING BACK AND DEMONSTRATE THAT WE CAN BE COMPLIANT.
WITH OUR LOCAL OUR STATE FUNDING, WITH OUR STATE HOUSING INVESTMENT PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM, WE ARE MOVING FORWARD TOWARDS MORE COMPLIANCE AS WELL.
WE ARE WORKING ON GETTING ALL OF OUR FISCAL YEAR 17 18 FUNDS IN NUMBERS SO THAT WE CAN THEN GET OUR 18, 19 AND 19 20 FUNDING AND BE ABLE TO ASSIST MORE HOMEOWNERS WITH DOWNPAYMENT ASSISTANCE, HOMEOWNER OCCUPIED REHAB, EMERGENCY REPAIRS OR SPECIAL NEEDS REPAIRS THAT THEY NEED ON THEIR HOUSE.
SO STAFF HAS BEEN WORKING REALLY HARD.
WE HAVE OPENED UP OUR WAITLIST TO ALLOW MORE PEOPLE TO GET ONTO THE WAITLIST, TO BE ABLE TO RECEIVE ASSISTANCE BASED ON CERTAIN REQUIREMENTS THAT THE STATE MANDATES THAT WE HAVE.
AND PLEASE STOP ME AT ANY TIME.
OUR VOLUNTARY HOME BUYER PROGRAM THAT WAS FUNDS THAT WE RECEIVED FROM THE DIVISION OF EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT, WHICH IS FEDERAL FEMA FUNDING AND THEN THROUGH THE DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY, THE CBG DISASTER RECOVERY FUNDS.
AFTER DOING INCOME CERTIFICATIONS ON ALL THE THE FIVE HOMES THAT DECIDED TO MOVE FORWARD WITH IT, NONE OF THEM WERE INCOME ELIGIBLE.
SO AT CITY COUNCIL TOMORROW NIGHT, WE THERE IS A MEMO TO ON THE AGENDA ITEM TO TERMINATE THOSE AGREEMENTS. ZERO FUNDS HAVE BEEN EXPENDED IN EITHER PROGRAM, BUT WITH THE CDBG DOLLARS, WE DO HAVE THAT SAME INCOME REQUIREMENT THAT WE HAVE TO MEET, AND NONE OF OUR HOUSEHOLDS MEET THAT.
AND 70 PERCENT OF THE FUNDS HAVE TO GO TO INCOME ELIGIBLE HOUSEHOLDS AND CURRENTLY ZERO ARE ELIGIBLE. THEY'VE ALL BEEN NOTIFIED THAT THEY THEY DON'T QUALIFY, BUT WE HAVE TO FORMALLY GO TO COUNCIL TO TERMINATE THOSE AGREEMENTS AND THEN WE'LL NOTIFY THE DIFFERENT AGENCIES. RECEIVE WHAT THEY RECEIVE THE NEWS, THEY WEREN'T ELIGIBLE AFTER ALL THESE YEARS. UM, WHEN WE COMPLETED THE INCOME CERTIFICATION PROCESS, WE SENT THEM A CERTIFIED LETTER AND WE'VE BEEN IN REGULAR CORRESPONDENCE, BUT THE THE PROGRAM.
WASN'T EXECUTED APPROPRIATELY, SO THE FUNDING IS THE MATCH FUNDING FOR THAT THROUGH CDBG DOLLARS. IT'S MORE DUE DILIGENCE WAS DONE AT THE VERY BEGINNING, BACK IN TWENTY EIGHTEEN, TWENTY NINETEEN, THEN IT WOULD HAVE BEEN DETERMINED AT THAT TIME THAT THIS ISN'T THAT A DIFFERENT FUNDING SOURCE NEEDED TO BE EXPLORED TO PROVIDE THE MATCH TO THOSE HAZARD MITIGATION GRANT DOLLARS BECAUSE THE THE CDBG HAS THOSE INCOME RESTRICTIONS THAT HAVE TO BE APPLIED. AND IF YOU DON'T MEET THOSE AND YOU'RE FUNDING, ISN'T YOUR YOU DON'T HAVE AN ELIGIBLE HOUSEHOLD TO ASSIST.
[01:20:03]
AND I DON'T BELIEVE THAT ANY OF ANY OF THIS INFORMATION WAS GIVEN PRIOR TO THE CURRENT STAFF. AND SO WE HAVE TO BE THE BEARER OF BAD NEWS.BUT I CAN TELL YOU THAT IT'S DEFINITELY NOT FOR LACK OF TRYING WE.
ARE IN CONSTANT COMMUNICATION WITH THOSE HOMEOWNERS, WE HAVE HELD A WORKSHOP.
WE HAVE TRIED TO GET THOSE INFORMATIONS AND WE ORIGINALLY STARTED OUT WITH 13 HOMES.
AND THEN WE HAD ONE THAT DECIDED NOT TO MOVE FORWARD AT ALL IN THE VERY BEGINNING.
WE HAD ONE THAT WENT THROUGH A FORECLOSURE AND WAS BOUGHT BY AN ENTITY, SO THEY WERE NO LONGER ELIGIBLE.
AND NONE OF THE 11 THAT WERE ELIGIBLE, ONLY FIVE HOMES DECIDED TO SUBMIT THE DOCUMENTATION FOR US TO DETERMINE THEIR INCOME ELIGIBILITY.
WE TRIED TO WORK WITH THE EEO TO GET WAIVERS, TRY AND CHANGE THE NATIONAL OBJECTIVE.
AND AT THE END OF THE DAY, WE WE WERE SHOT DOWN MULTIPLE TIMES.
AND SO AFTER EXPLORING EVERY SINGLE AVENUE, WE ALSO TRIED TO EXPLORE DIFFERENT FUNDING SOURCES TO THAT DIDN'T HAVE SO MANY INCOME RESTRICTIONS.
AND EITHER IT WOULD BE ANOTHER LENGTHY PROCESS TO GET THAT, OR IT JUST WASN'T AVAILABLE.
AND COUNCIL DOES HAVE THE OPTION TO MORROW IF THEY WANT TO FUND IT.
THEY COULD FUND IT THROUGH GENERAL FUND, WHICH WOULD BE AT LEAST SIX HUNDRED AND EIGHTY FOUR THOUSAND DOLLARS.
BUT WITH THE CURRENT HOUSING MARKET, IT WOULD PROBABLY BE A LOT MORE BECAUSE IT WOULD BE GETTING CURRENT MARKET VALUE.
SO IT'S JUST WE TRIED EVERYTHING THAT WE COULD, BUT WITH WHAT WE WERE GIVEN.
SO THE NEXT ONE IS THE NEIGHBORHOOD STABILIZATION PROGRAM, WHICH WAS A.
PROGRAM IN TWENTY TWO THOUSAND EIGHT TO ACQUIRE VACANT AND FORECLOSED PROPERTIES, REHABILITATE THEM, OR BUILD NEW CONSTRUCTION ON THEM AND SELL THEM TO INCOME ELIGIBLE HOUSEHOLDS, RECONCILIATIONS ARE STILL BEING DONE.
I'M MORE OR LESS DOING A FORENSIC AUDIT ON THE FINANCIALS, AND IT'S A VERY TEDIOUS PROCESS. BUT WE HAVE ARE SLOWLY MOVING FORWARD WITH TRYING TO GET AN ACCOUNTING FINANCIALLY OF.
WHAT FUNDING WAS SPENT WHERE IT WAS SPENT? IS IT IS IT IN THE APPROPRIATE ACCOUNTS? IS IT TRACKED? AND THEN HOW MUCH SHOULD WE ACTUALLY DRAW DOWN FROM THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT, HOW MUCH FUNDING WE HAVE LEFT? SO THAT'S STILL AN ONGOING PROCESS, BUT WITH VERY LIMITED STAFF, WE'RE WE'RE SLOWLY TRYING TO TO GET TO THAT IN ADDITION TO EXPENDING ALL THE FUNDING THAT WE HAVE. AND I BELIEVE THAT IS IT FOR ME.
ALL RIGHTY. WELL, UNLESS THERE'S ANYTHING ELSE.
I'M GOING TO GO AHEAD AND CALL IT MOTION, NOT A MOTION.
I'M SORRY. MEETING ADJOURNED.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.