- which is going to take weeks to send out to council for council's approval.
- But the main goal today is to go through our rubrics, discuss sort of what conclusions we've
- all come to collectively, and then we will move from there. I'd like to, we can make a
- just if there are first, are there any desired amendments to the to the agenda?
- Basically, we're going to go over, go over the rubrics, talk about our recommendations,
- sort of work through it, and then, and then adjourn there. I'm happy to. Anybody else want to
- do anything else today? Okay. I might say we maybe might be useful to have a moment of public
- comment, just at the, we, so unless there's any objections, would we all entertain that public
- comment after our, so in between us discussing it and us sort of, you know, making our
- recommendation,
- I think might be good to have a section of public comment. So can somebody motion for that to be,
- I mean, I know this is a committee meeting, but I think. I move to have a period of public comment
- at the end. So we have a first and a second, a motion and a second. All those in favor say aye.
- Aye. All those opposed? Yay, that carries. So we'll add a section of public comment to the agenda.
- Great. In which case, let's just do a quick roll call. I'm Isak, council member at large, present.
- Eddie Ryu. Courtney Daly, here. Cameron Green. Norah Damnick, Michigan. David Harlow, council.
- Yay. Now's your chance to do it, Andy. Now's your chance to call yourself president.
- Great. So everyone is here. So Lisa, would you be willing to put up,
- or if I can't share my screen, but could you put up the shared rubric? Sure.
- While I'm doing that, could we proceed with the agenda topic for the disclosure?
- Yes. Yes. How would you like to handle that? I think it would be appropriate for each member,
- Eddie and Nordia to briefly state the nature of their relationship with each applicant and
- why they each do not have a financial interest in the application.
- My name is Eddie Ryu. I'm the executive director of the Saucer from the Action Program.
- We have applied for one of these grants, and I do not have financial interest in this grant.
- And I will accuse myself when they discuss my organization.
- My name is Nordia McNeish. I'm a board member for New Life. They applied for one of the grants.
- I do not have any financial interest in the grants, whether denied or approved.
- And I will accuse myself when voting is happening for that organization.
- Great. And for public awareness, they all signed appropriate documentation to that end.
- So let's go through this. And this year, we're trying out this rubric here.
- And what do you think? What's the best way of going about this, y'all?
- We could sort this by our averages and then maybe discuss through? And you're welcome.
- As long as you're doing it here publicly on this sheet, you can change if you want to change your
- scores or whatever, we can do that. But what's your suggestions for how we should handle going
- through this? Do you think we should look at the highest average ones, get those out of the way
- we want on those, and then get to the middle and see if there's any conflict? And if we're fully
- funded by them, then we don't really need to get to the lower scores. Does that seem reasonable?
- Unless somebody who could advocate for a lower score might be able to convince others, I don't
- know. But I agree. I think that's a good way to proceed. Okay. You know, it's interesting
- because if we sort them, and then maybe perhaps the... Well, here they are sorted. This is sorted
- by our average scores. And we had sort of said that 4.5 was very high score or 4.7, did we say?
- What was the... What's the cutoff for a very high score? Very high was five or more.
- So how did you all go about your suggested allocation amounts?
- For me, I fully funded all the ones I was confident that were very high,
- which is five or higher. And then I went through some of my high scores before 4.5 and tried to
- figure out which ones I wanted to fund out of those. But then I left... These are so many that
- were in the high category. I left money on the table. I only used around $440,000 instead of
- full $500,000 because I couldn't decide just by looking at the scores which ones I wanted to fund.
- And I wanted to be fair and hear what other people had to say about certain organizations. And then
- I would lean towards that direction. And that's the idea here.
- Okay. So I've just noticed we have a kind of a glaring issue here because it seems like some of
- us... It seems something has changed. What has changed on this sheet? There's a medical order.
- Okay. Sorry. I'm going to put them back in the order that we had them which is
- based on their score. So some of these scores are high because they're missing rubric entries from
- us. Is there... Is this a clerical error or did some of you leave things off of your...
- Wait. We know that but... They're higher or low because...
- Well, I mean, it will probably go in both directions, right? Because if you only have
- a few scores, it's going to weight those scores higher, right? Presumably.
- So I think my score is that deleted out of that column maybe whenever...
- Maybe I deleted it somehow or whenever. So my score is supposed to be five for motherhood recovery.
- Okay. And Dave, did you give...
- I did. I left some things. Let's see. Did I score everything? I did score everything.
- I think we should score everything. Yes. Well, with the exception of one,
- that was a double applicant, but then whatever. I left the amount blank for a number and I also
- left some money on the table because I wanted to hear from others in terms of whether to make
- shifts.
- Okay. So maybe... Okay. So it seems like order of operation here is that we should first...
- We need to fill in the missing scores, right? Because otherwise it's going to be a skewed
- rubric. No. We can just call them out. You mean what I left blank? Yes. Yes. Let's see. I left...
- Mother Hubbard's covered. Mother Hubbard's covered. Yeah. One. And the other, the last one was Habits
- After Humanity restored. Yep. I left blank. Now, I guess since then that was their priority. Wow.
- But I'd already filled it out. So I didn't change it. What would you like to...
- Well, if you maybe take a few minutes and just then square it right now based on... Okay. Am I the
- only
- one who failed? No, no, no, no, no. No, there's no worry. Nardia, you also didn't fill out
- Mother Hubbard's covered 22. Do we want to kind of maybe look at approaching it,
- you know, similar to... I'm going to start over again. Similarly to how we did it last year,
- which was we looked at the average amount recommended and went from highest to lowest that
- way. That was another way we could... If there was blanks, it's going to be... So like if I fully
- funded it and we partially funded it, it's just the two of us, then it's not going to give us the
- right. But yes, I think that's what we should do. Because my approach was I didn't... I don't know
- that I fully funded anything just because I was trying to give everybody or as many people as I
- could something. Okay. What about you, Cameron? How did you approach it? Yeah, I tried to fully
- fund all of the very highs. Last year, I funded by percentage, but this year I went through all
- with budgets to see what the partial funding would look like. It was prioritized from there,
- but I think that for everything that was very high or high on my list, I tried to fully fund
- those for the most part. So I took the same approach, which is I fully funded the very highs.
- I think I, you know, nominally knowing that we'd have to talk through it, did like 90% for the
- highs
- and then I think it was 70% for the bids. Just like to give a sort of marker and then I stopped.
- For the, I kind of took, I know you were saying like some of them, you had extra funds left over.
- Like for those, I kind of went to some of the smaller asks and then decided to kind of take
- the bigger remainder that were still explored high and then kind of spread them across all the
- smaller asks as I could. So that was my approach.
- Mordia, how did you approach deciding the amounts?
- Well, depending on the project, the criteria of meeting the population, all the listed criteria
- is actually on the rule book was a decider, but mostly for fully funded one is depending on the
- project, something that definitely would not work if it's not funded fully or partially for
- something
- that is more prominent that it can do without. Yeah, I mean, and that's a good point, the question
- of where we make that to Courtney's point, like where you make that cut off if you're partially
- funding. And then if people can't, but then if you... So then would you advantage somebody who said,
- let's say they were a high or a mid high or something like that, and they had said,
- this wouldn't happen unless it's fully funded. Do you give them the advantage then
- over a person who said that they... Well, it's not really based on what they said,
- it's based off the project and how they state what the project is, unless of so what them saying
- that, oh, it can't be funded without full funding. So what is the project that's being asked for?
- Is
- it something that is sustainable? Is it something that they will survive without at this point in
- time? Would it benefit the population that we're trying to target and so on? So that's kind of...
- But what I'm saying is that's our general rubric, but then the question is, there were a handful
- of applicants who were very clear about, hey, priority one, two, three, and if you can't fund
- us all, we can still do the project, and this is the order that we'd like the things funded at,
- which gives us, I think, a clear indication of if you're going to fund 75%, 50%,
- whatever. You know where that marker should be, but if there's an example, there were a handful
- here where they just asked for a lot of money and there wasn't any. It was just like, this is what
- we're asking for. There wasn't like, or this or that, but where do you balance that?
- I also use that for one particular anyway in terms of the other way. If they're asking for so much
- and it wouldn't make any sense partially funding, I did not. You did it funded even if it was
- highly
- ranked. Yeah. What are our thoughts on that? I think the one that I mentioned, it had some
- concerns from the beginning in terms of completing all the requirements.
- You know that there's a list at the bottom. We'll talk about 401(c), 5013, or whatever,
- whatever those fit marks. When there's some criteria like first year, this is the first
- time applying, or didn't submit summary, or... I'm curious what the rest of us think though.
- So I think we're saying that we like, first off, we've adopted a rubric.
- I think that if we've adopted a rubric and somebody scores high, they have to get
- proportional funding to a high score. However, we decide that that works. It doesn't make sense
- for us to say all of these high people, but these ones we're going to give a little bit too,
- and these ones we're going to fully fund, because then we don't have a rubric. We might as well
- just
- go off of fives. And so I do think that we need to take our rubric to scores, I mean to funding
- allocation in some consistent way. Now what that way is, I think is the hardest, is the hard
- question.
- So do we agree? Okay, so then have you worked out a score yet, Dave and Nordea for
- Mother Hover's Cupboard? I mean if you have suggestions for how we can rectify this, I
- feel like, I mean Mother Hover's Cupboard is a good example, because I gave them a seven,
- like so full points and everything, and a bonus point, and you know, Courtney gave them a four.
- So if my seven wasn't that powerful without these two scores, I feel like we really need to have
- numbers in every one, so I don't know if it makes sense to go through all the ones that have full
- information now, just to do it, and then go to it, and then that gives time to come up with the
- numbers for the missing ones. I think the problem is just that if we, scores, scores do get filled
- out later, then they can get bumped up, or bumped down, so yeah, and they also, I'm also thinking
- that, you know, people calling out scores right now, just being in the room could influence those
- scores, and maybe we should take a short break, so that way we can fill those scores out, or they
- can fill out the scores and populate it here. I feel a little uncomfortable, like, making people
- on the spot to ask for a score, and then, you know, if Dave says something different, that could
- change the audience score, just my two cents. That makes sense, everyone? Yeah. Is that okay?
- We're accepting it, Andy, because that evens everything out, right, without the scores, so yeah.
- Okay, so then, how much time we have? There's not that many here, but
- how much time would the two of you, like, for, we can take this 15 minutes? See, it's just, like,
- notice, like, five scores, and Dave, it's, like, three that can be recessed for 15 minutes, and
- then,
- is it, unless there's any?
- Uh, yeah, I'm just finished, actually, in just a moment. I don't know which time
- anyone else needs 15 minutes. Okay, so let's, yeah, let's take a quick 15 minute recess.
- All those in favor? Any opposed? All right, we'll take it, so it is now, what time is it?
- 620, so we'll start back at 635.
- Thank you.
- So, um, her boss, and, uh, you know, I was watching, you know, how I got you as far as I had
- another side just a little presentation decision, you know, but, oh, we had some of this, you know,
- or so, I mean, the other one just so we had two professors going there.
- Separated professors kind of going in and they kind of poking holes and like, yeah, I'll be
- positive leadership.
- Yeah, I really think so and they want that for their first game is that we measure all those counts.
- Yeah.
- And then, um, maybe like, are these undergrads? Yeah.
- Yes. Yeah. And there was one that was like, you know, we recommend that this is one of them for a
- family, we recommend that they check out the A&M, we looked on their website and we found them much
- cheaper.
- That they're, they just, every year, I'm kind of glad. Except for full-time, they have a bigger
- player.
- Like, this year was just like, are you going to be so much, it's just like, no, you can't get pros
- to do that.
- Yeah, I am surprised every time.
- This is a priority, but I'm looking forward to hopefully catching some of it at least.
- I was going to be like, my cat, I couldn't find my cat, he was outside somewhere.
- So yeah, I eventually found him and scooped him up, but I think he got me on a journey.
- It's like, you're lucky you're cute. Exactly.
- I think weird how like bits and pieces of conversations kind of everything's kind of come together
- so sad about it.
- Yeah, I think.
- Yeah.
- So, um, my flight was delayed by an hour, which is fine, it got me plenty of time to get up there.
- And we flew frontier, it's like, you just don't you don't know like when they don't inform you
- until it's too late, we want to make sure we got up there.
- You know, almost every time I've learned a gender from frontier, and there have been a few horrible
- experiences where I've sworn to never do it again but then the tickets were so cheap.
- It's usually is part of, and I'm willing to pay just a little bit more but it's just like some
- reason frontier had all the contract flights, and my friend, like, he had to switches rounds and
- stuff to make this trip happen so we just have to suck it up
- and you know, we made it, we made it there made it back so okay come on.
- That's all that matters was your friend you were surprising your friend. Yeah, so we walked, we
- walked in.
- And so we were, we were celebrating my friend's 50th birthday, and he didn't know we were coming we
- were kind of doing stuff with his wife to make sure that you know you would see a surprise.
- So we finally went to Denver, drove to Boulder, got there and then we were texting like we're at
- the bar and we should see them in the window and then we walk in the front door.
- Like what's going on, like, yeah, I had too much to drink like he was just like rubbing his eyes
- and, but he was, he was really touched and, you know, for me, he was a high school friend.
- And for, for my friend, they went to college together, we're in a fraternity together so we don't
- have too many of those sorts of friends where we try to go see folks so it was good.
- Tell us when we come back to business.
- Tell you when I when you come back. Yeah, yeah, so we unless you guys want to reconvene, you
- shouldn't talk business when we're not convened.
- I was, I was recommended for that.
- I'm not knowing all those rules but yeah.
- We have to wait till the stated time.
- Yeah, yeah, we have to wait to 635.
- Because that's what we said we're going to do. Okay, somebody was online and they went away.
- What should I ask if someone can get information.
- We can when we get back. We can talk through it.
- Okay.
- That's what he said.
- Okay.
- And then when do we reconvene.
- I think I leave the next day for our vacations. That's why I it's like the second week of July.
- Okay.
- Yeah.
- We're going when we leave on the fifth or two weeks to go to Europe and Africa.
- We're we're only Paris, Barcelona, and then several places around Morocco.
- My niece is in the Peace Corps in Morocco. So she's going to be our, our tour guide and translator.
- Yeah, right.
- So we reconvene on the 16th.
- The 16th. Yeah, I'm in the full council.
- There's a committee counts.
- Process.
- Committee and council process in the 14th.
- Oh, okay.
- We do that.
- My committee and.
- Are you okay. I've had a lot of conflicts with the meetings lately.
- I'm not allowed.
- Very hard, especially with the way my work calendar.
- Fills up. I mean, my whole meeting, my whole days of meeting.
- So I can't really do.
- I mean,
- I don't know if that makes things worse or better.
- I mean,
- Some,
- there are some time slots that I can work in during the day,
- but I need like two weeks advanced notice at least.
- Right.
- But then I can't guarantee that I'll still be available either.
- If.
- You know,
- I can't guarantee that I'll still be available either.
- Yeah.
- for them.
- Okay, let's um let's be back in um convening or something. Um all right so uh Dave were you
- able to get your scores for us? Yes I did. It was mother of others cover score here. I believe I
- put
- 3.5. Okay very good yeah we did that because it changes things dramatically and then the um
- yeah and then uh 37 restore how death for humanity. I did that as well. Uh score. Oh gosh
- sorry you don't do this on me. Yeah it's because you're not working on the live. Sorry about that.
- Okay um three. Okay thank you and then Nordia will you be able to do any of your numbers?
- The reason for not filling out anything for mother of others was I didn't even see the application.
- You know the document that I received it actually was blank blank except for the staff comment
- section which noted that the application summary no not filled out. Project budget BS. There wasn't
- even a name I just assumed it's that because it falls between um humane society and you hope I
- think it is. So the full application is there? Uh not online. Okay so. So is everybody else the
- same in terms of that blank? No. I know the summary was missing but the whole application
- was there the mic? Oh okay. And the same like begin or um the habitat you told us why you missed
- that because we were deciding between which which they needed to decide which one was going to be
- considered. So how do we want to handle? So it's just as a matter of explanation so if it's if the
- cell is left missing does it just take an average of the ones that were in there? It was yeah we'll
- just take the average of the ones that were made. So I mean if it's okay with you just could we
- just
- go on the average of the worst what we responded. So yeah I mean if that's okay with everyone I
- mean
- I'm just trying to let's see let's make sure this is added correctly um I mean so say say
- that had been a one or a three or a seven that's how it changes it actually.
- Right but I guess what I'm saying is see the missing cell there for beacon yeah enter a five
- and it doesn't matter right? Sure but like so for these ones I think where there's not a big spread
- I mean but okay but let's I mean I'm okay to proceed and just leave these blank as we've left
- and these blank as well and then I guess as we talk through them if there's any concerns I guess
- around sort of where they're ranked um which I think just I mean to your point maybe maybe it's
- just this mother helpers cover fund just because I sort of ranked it so high that maybe it's you
- know
- bringing it up a little higher so okay and for you know if people are watching this now or later I
- mean the thing I'm sorry for being a bit um you know it's just that we're trying to work through
- like what is it you know how do we deal with having a rubric right I mean we um is one one thing
- that
- we that I that one of the things the two things that I realized going through the rubric were one
- we we didn't actually talk about how then we would do allocation tied to rubric um and then two was
- that a lot of it was not contested information I mean so so a lot of it was just like okay it is
- what it is it wasn't you know it wasn't like left to interpretation um uh with the exception of
- like
- two or three of our categories and then we had the space to do bonus points so um so so that's
- you know the those those two present a sort of tension for me with with dealing with how we're
- going about um um the the rubric so um okay but anyway so so okay let's go back then to how we
- were doing it we have them have them in order here and um i'll put them back in order because
- with dave's scores those two change there we go okay so this is our current order
- and we said we said very high is a four point what or five five wait it's a sorry it's five
- or higher and really fast that's ginger boy that emerged for me is that i think adding the bonus
- points and we added one more category meant that those points were higher once added than right
- they were so that so i didn't notice that until i was in in it but it was because the categories
- looked different last year right when i used it right so yeah something something okay so
- yeah okay so so so if we i don't know how we got debut overfunded um community kitchen
- i did um and that's what you want to do that's that's or was that okay okay so i i can explain
- why but yes yes that's what i chose to do yeah excellent just just making sure that that was on
- purpose um so okay so so like how do we want to approach this i mean well maybe we should
- go around and see if the top 10 or something kind of align with
- or how agreeable it is to everyone um and that gives us an idea of you know at least dispensing
- of those do you think that's appropriate that makes sense but if we yeah let's let's let's
- okay i have a i have a thought could we discuss can we send eddie out of the room and discuss scab
- first because because that is actually a there's a there's a that swings in a lot of ways here even
- though they're not in our top 10 just because of the amount that was requested um does that would
- that be okay yeah yeah oh thanks go ahead i don't know if effectively if he needs to leave the room
- per se but um so so i don't know if that affected the way that you all ranked oh they're not in our
- top 10 anyways so they're in the middle um here and so okay maybe actually oh here we are 33 yeah
- but i didn't actually um suggest any amount for them because it was such a ginormous ass and
- and i and so you know i sort of just left that blank ranked everybody else and then dealt with
- them later they're sort of in the middle here but sure but i but like when i look at all of our all
- of the amount funded like if we if we just went off of our averages we're at 573 um which is you
- know so we're 70k over so we're close which is like that yeah like everybody took a haircut
- exactly someone out we could fund most basically fund almost almost almost all the requests and
- there's only it looks to me like there's only the one that um did any of us suggest
- is anybody did anybody get zeroed out there are no it doesn't look like what well doesn't look
- there's a single there's a single person who who got where does is it crested hill where does that
- fall because that was another ginormous ask yeah i mean their average is 20 29 000 oh is that right
- okay so somebody and it looks like somebody funded them yeah um i mean uh south central
- committee action program i actually recommended the full amount right so okay so that was the
- only thing i just posted i mean we can we might have to send eddie out again but i just wanted to
- see because that was one thing pending for me about you know and how that's weighing and what
- we actually you know averaged out to people regardless of server where they um where they
- ranked but and here they get six and seven okay yeah um okay okay so sorry um we're jumping all
- over the place so i'm so i'm sorry yeah let's let's bring eddie back and then eddie come back
- go back do we so do we have any disagreements on these 10 or anything that jumps out to you
- i see because i have to send you out in a second but yeah um
- could you scroll to the time come oh yeah i'm not i'm okay lisa's the one oh i'm sorry
- lisa's the one that has the power mass can you read off the top then i so top top 10 right now
- our community kitchen blomington st vincent de paul's beacon and they're not their joint one
- um community cjm pantry 279 and the other beacon application mother hubbard's cupboard
- uh new leaf new life healing hands outreach center and um who's your hills feedback
- and and in terms of averages here the those are our top 10 the average is
- sort of showing that we also slightly different approaches here and how to fund
- um range from you know none of these get 100 percent of the ask based on based on our average
- giving so so may i suggest for this first round that we take that take the approach of saying
- that everyone over a 4.5 you fully fund yeah can i ask a question though yeah um since i'm rather
- rather new with this so we we we had said that restore habitat for humanity and then the habitat
- was a double applicant right yes so they should choose one or the other yes doesn't that exist for
- beacon health net great question and no so so the difference is the reason why um why that existed
- for for um restore was because they're so organizations are allowed to submit two
- applications if their second application is a collaborative application um for restore they
- submitted two one is a collaborative one is normal but the entity with which they submitted
- their collaborative was was the same entity as themselves um so that's why um and and they you
- know we we then decided as a group that we would allow them you know that that we'll sort of you
- know hear it allow them we found out at the interviews that that that was the case um because
- that was our main question about about the about their application and i called and spoke with them
- in restoring habitat for humanity confirmed they are one in the same entity yeah so that's so that's
- why whereas beacon whereas beacon is a they're two two different applications as a result of my
- conversation with them they both indicated that they wanted uh resource application to proceed
- okay got it um so you're proposing 4.5 and above fully funded just as a placeholder for now
- to give it to so that we can make fully funded or funded in the amount or the average amount
- it's there i think fund i think fully fund which so i mean or i mean if we do that i mean i don't
- know some will decrease some because we've got averages above that only one is above
- you want to say higher than 4.5 is fully funded is it like 4.5 and five like very high higher two
- different levels um okay can we say and so five or five about 400 or 4.7 or i mean just something
- between 4.5 and five i just don't want 4.5 to be before since yeah because 4.5 is uh what did we
- say on our rubric was very high very high is five or more okay okay yes so so i so i think we
- should
- stick with that and say and say five okay five or higher right so if we so um so if if we but okay
- but then but that that would represent a very different way of assigning i mean that's that's
- i mean that's me saying assign the way i assign so i just want to i want to you know at least
- disagree with myself for a second because that's not the way that everybody else assigned
- so i mean the the alternatives that we say let's just take our averages right it's yep so i'm
- saying
- 10 and so that's the one we mean fully fund i mean take the average of what we funded
- the average of five or higher for the rubric the average yeah so so so if it's a five or higher
- this amount is what goes here yes that's that would be i said this i'm sorry i'm not on the live
- document the average amount recommended or no the full amount full amount not average requested
- yes the amount the full this is yeah this is a question are we so so do we for these for those
- who have five and aboves do we do we for now as a placeholder we can say that they get the amount
- requested yes yes everybody agrees with that yeah okay i mean so so that goes down to this one ah
- no no oh did it okay sorry it's something on my screen okay there we go okay do you scroll over
- to the right ever so slightly at least yeah somewhere and i would just say because i don't
- think we need to need the average scores is enough so and it's it's already uh there's a frame um
- um freeze so if you just if you scroll at the bottom i think we'll be okay i don't think because
- this is making it too small so let's see okay you guys can see that's good um okay then what
- do we want to do with what's the next ranking is high yeah 4.5 to i think it's four and 4.5
- that's high yeah so or or two so so the the fours how do we want to do we what amounts do we give
- them how can we just scroll down for a second and see yeah how many points we have that's going
- from
- three brothers big sisters so that's entry 26 to um eight that's 19 okay can you tell me
- what crested bell refuge scored on the average rubric crested hill their average is a 3.58
- just cares okay what if i don't know i because so what i did on my rubric
- anything that scored below a medium i didn't fund at all so anything below a 3.5 got no funding
- i think what if we took a second well i'm just i'm just trying to think of like a fair across the
- board at least start our point what if everything that's a high or to 4.5 we put in is 75 and then
- everything that's a medium we put in is 50 i don't know that that's and then we see where we're at
- well then we can go through and actually see where the right breaking point is yeah i also
- want to suggest and i'll lean on the group of whatever they want to do but i think anything
- above 4.5 to 4.99 should kind of hits a threshold there that was close to five
- i think that between 4.51 and 4.99 in my opinion should be good so yeah so you're saying you're
- saying the yeah yeah is that the 4.5s also be so that would be okay so let me get it thoughts on
- that everyone so this would be um an additional uh oops an additional eight for full funding
- we can try it again the placeholders
- where are we at money lines that's going to be one second equals
- so that would be 265,415 a little bit over half
- yeah i mean yeah
- we want to look at the rest of the highs the four to the 4.5 and see where that puts us because
- i'm fine if the medium score and then we go to the mediums and see which ones
- so if we go fours so what's the thoughts on then how to deal with the the rest of these the um
- then we look at the highest scores well i'm sorry i'm
- thinking is crested hill no in the
- i was just worried about if we apply that across the board then we're
- other funds i mean but we have yeah i mean we we wouldn't be able to do 100 here um
- because of the well you know back to my reasoning for sending eddie out
- don't worry i can't see it so
- oh i see okay so so i i a lot of these though okay so this is it gets it's it's interesting because
- you know if you look down if you could scroll down to um i scroll up sorry um so that you can see
- starting at entry um uh column 16 it's in the columns which is entry 30
- yeah so so if you i mean we're fairly
- you know up high in terms of our average amount funded on on these and then down here it starts
- to get really variable relative to each other right so you have a 61 then an 81 then a 72 then
- a 46 percent i see yeah so i mean there's um so so i mean yeah you might want to
- have that you know sort of deal those out a little bit more
- maybe we we create a new course we're pulling from the high category or 4.25 or 4.5 or
- i just don't it's i mean it's you know where we set high is is maybe arbitrary in this sense
- because we set that we set the number we set the number without knowing how people would score
- so so should high very high etc not be relative to the way they actually scored because let so
- so you know hypothetically had everybody scored a two on our rubric would would we have not funded
- them all except you think we would have to have i think we would have done the rubric yeah that
- or then we would have gone back to what we did last year and go through each one trying to figure
- out because remember that would put you a bigger problem when they're just not the applications
- aren't meeting the criteria of but but that's it but but but so but uh was five i mean we you know
- we we we set five it was an arbitrary place for it to be high or very high right right right now
- like right now right now eddie's arguing that a four is it should be treated as a five so what
- if we think about it versus those thresholds what if we think about it in terms of our averages
- like
- you were saying earlier our top 10 you know right so we look at our top and maybe we don't
- necessarily
- have to create thresholds in that way and beyond a certain point maybe we we take more seriously
- our
- average amount recommended yeah um because those are all you know those all of our input created
- that number right i mean because because the way i was thinking about is if we thought if we
- thought
- like in a standard distribution right that there's that there's some portion of that very high
- equals
- you know that you know whatever 14 percent or you know that bottom of the bell curve and that is
- statistics but you know that that amount and then there's some amount that's just sort of our mid
- and then our lows or something like that um and but it's not relative to how they actually
- scored rather than the arbitrary numbers that we set as high very high
- do you see what i'm saying i mean as last year i used the percentages but i didn't actually love
- that whenever we went to conversation about it because i do think the partial funding
- piece deserves to be considered as well so i almost think that beyond a certain point like
- we figure out who we want to fully fund and then beyond that point even though it takes longer i
- think we just go we go through and then figure out what appropriate yeah because i just feel like
- it's more effective that way yeah because i mean just looking here let me just take you for example
- pals we averaged less than under twelve thousand dollars for them right by this
- approach we're giving them full funding right when none of us none of us wants to give them funding
- yeah yeah we only gave them 61 percent and then this has us just automatically giving another
- percent
- yeah the others are closer yeah those are others are all you know 85 and above i agree with that so
- so so well what what we're saying is you know stopping at uh healing hands was number 10
- it's healing cancer is it now 10 who's your most sweet bag of sight
- is it that high we had um because we started okay yeah looking at looking at top 10 instead of
- okay so okay so top 10 there
- but then same thing there are similar situation here i mean maybe there maybe there's a some point
- which is to get fully funded you should have even though you have the score that you want
- um you know average funded percentage higher than 90
- i don't know or does it i mean are you okay with maybe just close enough but
- maybe because an interesting case that super high scoring but on average we didn't give them
- but i guess well david i had a question for you really fast so i think you said that you put in
- there that you thought community kitchen like you overfunded community kitchen but you ranked
- them at a 4.5 which is like relatively low on the list of all of your scores so i'm just wondering
- all my scores are lower than yours or most people's so 4.5 is like a higher it's high for me
- okay yeah i think so you know in so my perspective is a terrific is a great way sort of as a
- thumbnail
- so kind of under you know kind of feel out where you know the priorities are but when it comes to
- actual funding and i'm looking at the application i'm looking for you know really important needs
- you know food shelter you know kids you know kids needs especially if they're traumatized
- or something like that i mean that that was my personal you know you know so so the rubric might
- differ from but this is a question about the rubric though because it's like but we that's
- what we started was the story of rubric yeah but i was gonna say like of the things that we were
- ranking so um we didn't score partial funding project location is there's no like there's no
- gray area there right we're giving more points to people that are Bloomington specific versus
- Montero County generally Montero County generally was half a point and not in Montero County more
- Bloomington's no points well right but they wouldn't have been eligible if they yeah yeah yeah so
- so but
- but that but that's a that's a black or white thing it's not a like there's no like was this really
- Bloomington or was this really Montero County no it is there is gray absolutely there is well
- because
- sorry yeah i mean if we're you know if if if uh people would you know without shelter are you
- know are looking for food shelter they're going to do it in Bloomington because it's central
- yeah whereas if i'm funding something you know it's federal for boys and girls club or whatever it
- was
- yeah well you know that's that you know Monroe County should be looking out for that
- do you know what i'm saying i do i do but you know we've got that population is in Bloomington even
- though they may disperse into the county at times or but for this but that's my point i don't think
- that that if we went one by one over this that we've been tested that we can test that on any
- of these applications all right kind of like combining what you're starting with the union
- first right yeah i was just going to ask the general question if um there's a scoring on the
- rule to take away the significance of the product but what do you mean like in terms of what he was
- mentioning um seeing the impact for it um will it uh will benefits yeah you know those
- considerations
- that we mark at the beginning for focused for john alkins you know project that support the
- community
- the people certain people who are in need and so on so i'm wondering if this foreign is kind of
- deviating away from that aspect of it. But where, what things are not captured in the rubric
- that are supposed to be captured in the priorities of Jack Hopkins, because that's why we did put
- bonus points. My point here is that I'm interested in like what are the points that are,
- that are, that would have a different analysis of both to inform our rubric as we continue working
- through it. And I think to get at this question, which is like, you know, like how reliable is our
- scores to begin with, right? So I kind of, I think adjacent to what we're all saying a little bit,
- but kind of what Dave was saying about it being kind of a thumbnail, I think that the difference
- is that we all scored the rubric and then made a funding recommendation based on our personal
- scores on the rubric. So I really think that what we could be taking the most seriously
- is our average that we, that we talked through. And then we can kind of relate that to like the
- partial funding piece where it's appropriate, because I think that like he was saying,
- I thought about a lot about emergency services whenever I was scoring and like those things
- tended to get more funding versus, you know, citing. And so it was kind of, you know, I feel like
- our rubric average maybe means something different to all of us, but we all made recommendations
- based on how we interpreted our own rubric. Yeah. You know, so maybe it's just the funding
- number we just us. Yeah. So we should be looking at the ranking of the average funding. Yeah. No,
- but then, but then you, so, okay, so ranking average amount, percentage. Yeah. Good. Let's
- sort it that way and see what that looks like. So that's what we used to do, right? Historically,
- that's what the Hopkins committee did. We all made estimate, we all gave an estimated amount
- that we would fund. And then those all got averaged. And then if there was big disparities
- or people wanted to really advocate for something, they might persuade other people to change.
- That's the way we always did it. Not that the rubric approach hasn't got its merits. I'm just
- saying, yeah, that is what we've done. Yeah, it was helpful in a lot of ways to help guide me
- to going, oh, okay, I do see certain things that maybe I hadn't picked up on. But then there were
- times where I was like, I've got to give it another point because technically, but I don't want to
- give
- it another point because then it bumps it up to high or very high. And I don't deem it that in my
- personal, but like you said, that's going up high. Which is exactly why, I mean, to the historical
- point, this is exactly why we're pushing to adopt a rubric because if all of us stay here for the
- next
- 20 years or something, we continue to be on this and it just becomes this like, how does Andy feel
- about stuff? Bored. That's what we don't want to do. We want to be very clear about this is what
- we're funding. And this is the reason why we're funding it. I mean, and I'll give an example openly
- here. Like, I mean, frankly, I didn't want to fund Crested Hill, but the rubric, they filled it out,
- they asked the questions. It's like, you know what I'm saying? And it's like, so it's not about
- like,
- do I think that people should have horses? Like that's not really the question, right? Like it's,
- and so the question is like, this is what we said we're looking for. And then you came and answered
- our questions, right? Like, you know, and so I think that there's some equity in that type of
- approach. But then we're, so back to our core question is about, we're still trying to figure
- out how do we from that decide. So notice the way you've ranked it right now, that the average,
- you know, score, everything there is about 4.25 except for one, which has changed over living. So
- it's not so askew, right? I mean, at or at odds, I think that this is, and I'm looking at the
- ranking
- and it's very much like what I saw were priorities. I don't know people concur with that in terms
- of
- really emergency services, food, shelter, the needs, you know, we really need to find them.
- And this is where I actually think you can zip through the list pretty quickly and saying like,
- let's go through the amounts. Do we really fund this? Do we have a partial funding? Like can we
- round? I think last year we rounded to the closest partial funding, which I thought was really.
- Okay. Okay. So, okay. So, so then, um, back. So, so I'll put them back with our average scores. Yes.
- They're right. Cameron or keep the average funding amount. I think average funding. Okay. So,
- okay. So then, so courage to change. So we're living keep, just do what we average said here.
- It's not very much to start from the beginning of the list again,
- just to talk through each of them. Okay. Okay. So back. Okay. So, so community kitchen, highest
- score, um, highest amounts given fully fund. I think so. Yeah. Um, Bloomington, St. Paul's
- also high score. I mean, very high score. Um, you know, we average amount was high, fully fund.
- Now, and I'll keep going until there's a contention. Okay. Um, pantry 279 high score, um,
- high amount funded, fully fund. Mother Hubbard's covered getting now at, uh, at a not very high
- score, but a high score. Um, but a high amount, high amounts across the board for all of us,
- fully fund. Um, that is the answer for all of these that are already on the board. Basically
- high scores, um, fully fund. So then courage to change sober living is the next one in terms
- of percentage that we all recommended. Um, I think we should call it, but they're pretty low score.
- But we don't recommend it. I don't know. We all did because we did say at the beginning
- that we all dealt with, with recommendations differently in the sense that some of you
- after you had done your high scores, basically found low, low things to fund, which then gets
- us in a, it does get us in a weird situation that it's like, what we're saying is if you apply for
- little, we'll give you extra points. So, so we have that extra rubric, which is, which again,
- like maybe that's what we want to do, but, but, you know, and we, we saw that in the presentation,
- remember a lot of people asked, why didn't you ask for more? And they were like, ah, well,
- you guys tend to think they're a little, right. And, and we, when, and, and that puts a tentative
- that we were like, we want people to go for big stuff. We want you to try cool things. We want,
- we want, we want, and then we're going to say, ah, the data applied for too much.
- Okay. I mean, I know that I recommended fully on them on mine. So maybe it's like, we have to talk
- about
- below scores, especially to get across the board. It looks like we're at three, 3.5. It's like
- three,
- three, Courtney, 3.5. You had a five cam, um, then Nordia's 3.5, Eddie's a 4.5 and the Dave's a
- three.
- It was high frame, but again, I mean, for the, I, I realized your point about, you know,
- the nickel and diamond kind of thing or whatever, you know, people applying for a little amount,
- et cetera. But I mean, I can be convinced to give them the amount they are the average amount.
- Okay. So let's go with the average amount for now. Yeah. Three, seven, oops, I'm doing this
- wrong, doing this wrong, doing this wrong, doing this wrong. Wait, I should be more technical.
- Do you want to highlight the ones that we put as partial funding just so we can revisit them if
- we need to? Yes. Well, I would like to just add, I'm not so sure. I see quite as much
- tension with between the smaller grants and the larger in terms of what we seem to be willing to
- fund. I feel like a really innovative, just great idea, great proposal by an agency that is proven
- track record. And I feel like at least I would not hesitate to give them a hundred thousand dollars.
- Exactly. That's exactly right. All I'm saying is here, you have a middle score for Curves to
- Live, but we're saying we'll give them the full funding or near full funding. That's what I'm
- saying is the tension. And the reason why that showed up this way is because some of us,
- after applying our high scores, distributed money to low scores. So that's essentially contra.
- There's a disconnect between the average rubric score and the average amount funded.
- Because in the back of your mind, you're thinking, well,
- what difference does it make to give two more thousand dollars to it?
- Yeah, I did it. I gave them, I'm the poster child for this. I scored them a 3.5,
- they're ranked a medium on my score sheet. But I gave them full funding because I was like,
- it's 3000 bucks. We can find that. I had a lot of fives the way that I scored with the rubric.
- And then courage change was at a 4.5 for me. And I mean, the biggest, like I was trying to find
- emergency services that seemed to be something that pushed a lot of stuff over five. Drug tests
- aren't necessarily, it's not an emergency, right? They're in stable living, it's a maintenance
- thing.
- So I think that for some of the years, the funding makes sense, but at some point you get to that
- bottom and I ended up leaving money on the table because I wanted you all to decide what was left.
- But I think something for courage change, I mean, if you look at why you scored it the way that you
- did, it was probably it was an emergency service for you and that scored it lower. But at some
- point
- near the bottom, we all had money left over, right? It's like we're assuming that all of the top
- priorities got funded and we had leftover funding to distribute to then what became the next
- highest priorities. And this is why I think what I'm trying to say here at this juncture is just
- that
- us now looking at average amount funded is misleading because there is in a handful of
- cases there's going to be a disconnect between average amount funded and the average score.
- So you want to just go back to looking at the average?
- I think it makes more sense because and I realize also in my case how I'm skewing the numbers here
- is that I didn't know what to do with SCAP. I didn't know what to do with restore and the
- two habits at once so I left them blank in terms of average amount. I gave the score but I didn't
- give them funding because I didn't know what to do and so that's going to skew what you know the
- number here though the score is going to be consistent. Yeah I kind of resolved to scoring
- as opposed to assigning funds because that process is efficient but at the same time when looking
- at
- the project itself like what they're trying to do and the necessity of it compared to others like
- where do you put the value in that. I'm a critical thinker sometimes I get too caught up in the
- critical part and assessing too much things as the criteria in China it's so based off the scoring
- alone in itself I feel like it doesn't represent what the need. But I think you're right I think
- looking at it in order of average score in conjunction with our amount are dependent makes sense.
- Yes so what if we do this okay so if you take you know our window so let's say you know you
- take everything that's you know 4.5 as an example right or the between 4.5s and then fives as an
- example and you look at the average amount yeah given across those as a placeholder we average
- 84.7 percent across those so you could then give 84.7 percent to all those that fit in that
- category.
- Okay I'm going to push back please like I'm just I'm just like thinking out loud.
- So I think that I think that something that came up I think maybe Andy you brought this up in the
- beginning with like some part of having a rubric can sometimes feel rigid and fitting everyone into
- a box and that the value of having a committee is being able to use a rubric on top of having a
- conversation and I don't think we can fit people into let's all let's give them all 82 percent I
- think that we align the conversation to then come to a consensus about even though it takes longer
- and it would be easier just to be like yes but but you know what I'm thinking I totally agree with
- you I still I 100 agree that the next step is for us to go through and peg them but I'm but I'd
- like
- us to set a you know if you will a floor at least conceptually for for ranges is what was I was
- thinking so we say you know if we imagine that everybody under our top 10 is going to get some
- type of partial funding or you know that everybody that we can fund is going to get partial funding
- that there's no more fully funded people outside of our top 10 then we sort of take they will aim
- for like 90 here as an example and then and then that way we go and we're like we round to the
- closest thing to 90 that fits within the way that they prioritize their budget I mean I don't like
- that approach but I would do it I don't like it either actually I mean okay so I'm being difficult
- and I'm sorry so so okay what are we going to do with Avalon then how do we project you want
- to look at their at their grant I think we should fully fund them because I think that
- the project has lots of layers I think really beneficial to the community
- there's no objection that's what I'll do I'm trying to I'm gonna put the project description this
- it's the garden oh it's the gardens yeah yeah yeah I ranked food especially you know food security
- I think we talked about this and giving people the opportunity to actually grow food
- is a skill that I think is really uh you know has a long-term benefit and we need to expand on
- it is here's a question I have and this is taking us back and you guys are all going to grime at me
- I'm so sorry this was one where I had to disconnect because the so going through the rubric you
- know we
- we answered residents served
- and you know we got that off of their application but it's it was tricky for me in a lot of these
- to go well does this project actually serve that many people really are over 500 people going to
- benefit from these gardens maybe they would I I'm not envisioning how large it is necessarily but
- are we really going to be feeding more than 500 people so I had that question with with several
- of these numbers where I found it a little bit hard to believe that you know there were
- so many people that they stated would benefit from this I thought they said 20 to 50 where
- was the range that they landed at for that one on their application where it says you know how many
- people are served benefit by this 600 I was almost saying I don't know the number but
- yeah it was something like that that's what that's one of the areas that I got tripped up with the
- rubric where I would have that disconnect and I would go oh I have to give them that point
- but you know so they scored highly on my rubric but I lost now where it was but I only
- they scored very high yeah but I only recommended 10,000
- so that's just another wrench I'm throwing in there and I'm sorry to
- throw a bomb and run I'm wondering next year it would make sense before we call them in for
- questions for us to go through them with the rubric because then I feel like some of those
- questions would like pop out then yeah you know yeah that's a good because I feel like
- it would have been a good one like if we had been able to catch it early to be like can you explain
- us how that's going to actually serve that many people right so so Courtney I had the same dilemma
- but when I looked at I mean I thought well maybe 50 will be or more than 50 yes that's me and that
- was you know the full point under resident stern so it didn't matter so much to me that they had
- put
- something inaccurate yeah and I'm not saying it was an intentional inactive no not how many do we
- generally serve as opposed to the project yeah yeah so then that's a problem for me too that they
- they get you know those points uh well so we haven't recommended full funding for them though
- across the board 50 to over 500 I'll get the same amount yes sorry we haven't recommended full
- funding to them the question is what within their application what did they say was or prioritize
- um okay I have it up here so the so they have priority priority one three thousand eight hundred
- priority two two thousand eight hundred and fifty pretty three one thousand five hundred and twenty
- five five thousand nine hundred so um a natural a natural place that's close to should have a
- calculator what's um what's 17 what's seventeen thousand one hundred minus three thousand twenty
- five fourteen thousand that would be that would be funding priorities one through four for them
- so can we should we stay with that for now which is right on target we said for our average amount
- was fourteen eight oh five does send the journey okay yeah so what was what was that amount
- fourteen
- thousand seventy five uh okay I'll go back and do this in a second um this is all worth Santa's
- money
- I thought the closed captioning translated what you just said as
- which is all worth Santa's money okay and I think that's pretty accurate
- okay Catholic charities
- right I rate this pretty high because of
- mental physical and social trauma or impacts trauma yeah um that to me is
- this no you're thinking about the Kendrick um Hendricks Hendricks um county one
- guess is Catholic Charities one too Catholic Charities was also providing therapy services
- for children oh is that right yeah oh yeah I'm confused I'm the Saint Vincent um the Saint Vincent
- one I gave them 75% funding I thought they were um very high I'm skewing this one I'm wondering why
- why did I why did they I got they gave me a 3.5 but I'm not remembering why um
- you're really I hate children and I don't care but
- let me see what I did here um
- so
- did I count did I count the I mean I'm going to count it wrong that's something we should do
- also next year is have automatic points and things after you fill it out because
- okay well I'm not I would not be opposed to funding them as you all suggested
- yeah I mean access to mental health care especially for youth is extremely
- difficult in this town yeah and so I feel like the more we can give them the better
- yeah they basically said that there's no partial but partial funding just means they have less
- people yeah yeah I mean even honestly even getting into Catholic charities
- can be difficult for some people because they don't have enough funding
- yeah and I know this because we tried at one point so yeah okay so it's what's your what is
- the what are you saying what are you going to go with the 17,000 I don't think with that is
- did you all fully fund this one where were you at I fully funded I didn't I didn't do any I guess I
- worked money on the table I didn't partially find anyone so I gave him 75% so no I I didn't pull my
- weight on this I know but this I did go through and give it allocated funds from what I thought
- were
- my priorities and I fully funded this one I just my logic was simply look this is investing in
- reducing the need for all the other services in the future by nipping these situations in the blood
- to the extent that we need very good economic argument I don't have a problem with putting down
- both of these right now okay would you have I left it blank but I rated it high and I would
- like to understand it fully okay um okay well then that that is what it will be um
- and I'll go ahead in a second and see if I miscounted or something because it looks like
- it's strange that that's the score based on what they did across the board so um okay um
- Monroe County Humane Society is the next one
- it would be it would be helpful somebody else could also pull up the
- end the fund the full application if you have yeah I have it yeah but thank you
- yeah so I actually funded this fully given though I rent ranked it medium
- as I was thinking about spay and neuter services again as an investment you know
- what's that it's a full five thousand so what is the full funding is this okay yeah this is um
- 13 000 13 000 so a natural cut off would be 10 I also fully funded um I gave them 75 percent but
- again I really I don't think I gave anybody for most people I didn't give full funding
- yeah we're not going to be able to give everybody full funding so like this was just me trying to
- spread the money I mean so I if we if we so what we suggested altogether lost my place sorry um if
- if we give what what we've all suggested it's 11 125 but um but that's not a natural
- cut point and actual cut point would be 10 naturally well in the sense that they rank
- their priorities on there and they and they say priority one this one though for that
- three thousand dollars that's hanging it's for spay and neuter surgeries and so I feel like that
- I feel like that could be partially fun yeah that's fine okay yeah I agree
- I'll highlight them because we are going to get into difficult conversations later right so um
- you know that we could cut a thousand dollars there if we if we needed to okay um that pals
- it's a collaborative center stone
- so and maybe I'm you know when I was thinking of like you know emergency services real priorities
- this break pretty low is crested hill does is does somebody want to offer something that would
- change my viewpoint on it I mean this is something that really I had it very low also yeah so it's
- mental health right and and they're you know they're pairing this you know it's therapy
- I write this one pretty high versus crested hill um but uh yes you know how do you think what they're
- doing is effective therapy for for their target demographic rate so I don't wonder if there's any
- measure of well it's by the way in the in the ask was it you know out of this world
- well that's true the area crested hill shouldn't be irrelevant consolidation and is it my
- I mean I'm new here but last year they asked for funding did they get any
- no they asked him they asked for a vehicle um also don't think it's relevant yeah I don't know if
- there's a relevant consideration like we can't penalize people for you know well I'm only asking
- about your experience and right right hearing from them and maybe they had to convince you that it
- was right right right partial funding was just a reduction in service because it was program
- funding for two week little one-hour sessions for six months and so I
- right they were a medium rate for me and I just offered 50 of the funding because then that was
- but three months of the that same thing
- I wouldn't post that how many months again go back to it is 24 24 weeks and they
- how much time do they have to spend the money again is 24 weeks the full periods of that
- so did they by chance did they by chance do yeah no that's right because they've spent back in
- february is that right we had a lot of people who proposed six months six months yeah projects are
- for everything okay so so the proposal is 50 here anybody against that which is pretty much what
- what
- we said so nine thousand six hundred fifty percent yeah indeed that work for now yes
- okay hendrix county um you know yeah you rank them the lowest one of your lowest scores
- because otherwise they would have been very high across sort of across us all
- any thoughts so that's really came in with the scoring versus what's the actuality of what the
- impact would be um and i see if i've felt disconnected in some way when i'm reading
- but there's some questions on there that maybe um because i'm new fairly new i'm not um the
- question i'm asking about um location project location one or family versus
- loomington oh they told they told us at the interviews that they're loomington
- i'm just wondering if we if there's room for
- but either way you said you think there'd be high high rank but um we were very close here what
- they
- asked for to what we're averaging so yeah i kind of feel like we should just fully fund them
- because
- i really liked how she talked about funding too and she was like we have our main priorities
- like service priorities covered but this is a need that we identified well actually i think
- that was one of the ones that i it's the specific thing from what they were asked and funding for
- was that the one that was asking for furniture for yeah i picked area to fund
- when i was considering that one and it was more so too
- would anybody be opposed to us fully funding as has been suggested interview rooms
- you didn't fund interview rooms i funded into oh i got okay got it as opposed to waiting room and
- other i see that was my explanation yeah that makes sense okay because there was prices based on
- places that they wanted funding and i thought that the interview rooms were
- more necessary in terms of upgrades and comfort for children's being interviewed and i kind of
- saw the other ones like the waiting room and so on as the less priority they'll be spending more
- time to be interviewed right on them yeah i need to be more that makes sense but they said that
- their number one priority was waiting room one then number two is interview room one two one
- and then interview room two i felt like the argument that she made where she was like you
- know when you go eat at a restaurant the food's good but it's kind of a bad environment so it
- changes your experience like i thought you know kids are already in scary situations and the
- waiting room being kind of scary would be getting them kids experienced trauma yeah so i was that
- this was one i could fully fund once especially after hearing more about the work that they did
- yeah and the relative need um i think it's a huge difference so i think i would advocate fully
- funding do we oppose to that no no no i had a 3500 and i just gave a number outside yeah
- we go up to the full funding is not the same i'm just you're okay relative to other organizations
- that we do have to fund we have to prioritize sure needs within the organization and we can
- come back to them too because i mean if i think the natural place and natural i'm using that word
- to to loosely i'm sorry um the possible place to cut would be at priority four and not funding the
- laptop or the monitoring cable which they said were there there will be supported priorities
- that would add on 500 to 500 roughly and 70 dollars so if we if we return to it
- but let's come back to it i'll highlight them we'll come back to it okay my sister's closet
- and amethyst house is next i ranked them high with full funding because there's really
- the technology piece feels really important and then um
- yeah that's sad you see last year we didn't fund my sister's closet
- i rank them high also when i gave them about 75 percent i have very high
- so you guys basically fund enough for that great guy in terms of fully person thresholds
- listen that again um you rated your um high adverse for your ones that are high
- free stones funding uh our show i only i only did full funding like i said earlier i said i left
- some money on the table and i funded all projects that i felt ranked very high on my rubric and it
- made sense um just trying to be impartial and i was going to listen in and hear what how other
- people thought about other organizations that might have been at the high level for me um but
- didn't get over that hump so i i did not do any partial funding i mostly did it almost partially
- funding so i i'm not opposed to funding near the whole thing let's look at the sabbatical where
- i mean the bulk of their ask is fifteen thousand five hundred for the salary assistance for the
- client service coordinator that's a thousand hours of 1550 an hour so anything we reduce there
- would
- just reduce hours of service okay so i recommend fully funding but i feel like
- i'm not i mean i'm not opposed there's no other proposals we can
- put in full funding i agree
- okay amethyst house is next
- i've funded the tree removal
- yeah i give them what does that what does that put it where tree removal actually oh i actually
- recommended around 10 000 but that was just because i put some leftover funds that direction
- yeah i only recommend 60 yeah no proposal someone else i read it fully funding it because
- you know they've been around for a while they've done a lot of stuff for people going through
- substance use i you know and kind of the same argument when we talked about um cc's place on
- having a place where it can get healthy and i just felt like hey you know we we have to
- we have to invest in these places so that way people can feel safe and get healthy but
- i'm fine with partial funding especially if you know and lose money around because these are all
- well so so they so they have um the women's restoration men's restoration tree removal
- and they have funded everything by the tree that was the part that was hard because when he talked
- to us he said the tree removal was the more urgent yes but then it's like third on the priorities
- yeah yeah exactly um tree almost fell on my house it fell in my yard missed our roof and our solar
- panels by just inches so i i can tell you that well so i mean how about funding it i feel like
- that your mom for the tree was something that can be fundraised or something you know i'd say we go
- with with funding priority one and two that i mean if they then want to say that the tree was more
- important than they wrote it wrong so to them but i don't i don't think we should be fully funding
- them at this at this or at this stage yeah and they can i mean they they because we're providing
- the amount of money for the first two doesn't mean they can't say tree is actually the priority of
- the money toward the trees we don't need to say what i mean though we use this as sort of helping
- us to pay it yes but they're not obligated they're out to do so that's 18 450 18 4 we do
- yeah that's the exact amount i had 18 it's not seven 17 18 should be 17 59 18
- what did you do between 20 000 minus 2975 or did you do 11 000 plus 6000
- i'm just like how is that 18 that's the same number i got
- but i think it was just a tree that bad in my head 11 11 020 plus 16 is 17 50
- 11 720 plus 67 30 no it's not 67 30 it's 60 30 oh i'm looking at their budget it's a 67
- yeah my sister okay so their priorities how about the regular priorities and what the regular
- budget is different but an amount so i just took 20 025 and minus 3575 for the tree rule
- yeah i'll see on there okay on their priorities they have that is 2975 uh so it's supposed to be
- 3975 yeah i went from the budget yeah we didn't sorry i didn't i did not i did not know this when
- you're reviewing it and instead of we this is something we should have asked when we're talking
- to them but um okay so so we're going off of actual budget figures not what they've ranked
- in the priorities well regardless we still say funding restorations and not free removal and
- whatever that wait no i still see i see the same number on i'm i'm i don't know what number you
- get i'm going to the full application yeah look at page it's the summer okay you're looking at
- summary the summary is wrong yeah yeah so it is okay okay yes okay i was i was so like i'm like
- what is wrong with me yeah did i read this wrong yeah the summary is wrong it is so the the number
- is 17 oh 17 oh five oh okay next one restore habitat for humanity we did not fund very high
- but this is this is in part because i i put zero funding on there only because it was by the time
- they pulled by the time sam pulled all these together we hadn't had the answer yet so i just
- like that point um but i didn't rank them so they're high highly ranked um
- i gave 30 000 this was one of the highest that i ranked and afforded yeah if i were to let me go
- and do it if i would have done it the way i did it so uh yeah yeah yeah yeah excuse me
- me
- which one's the same sorry uh there's shared one yes yeah um
- it's not really shared right i would have given them 90 percent
- so so yeah i mean i recommend a full but i'm not supposed to
- and just be clear the trucks not a picture of anything anymore that's correct
- this is the appointment so we have a proposal of 30 000
- 30 000 one month but twice sure and yeah anyone opposed to picking them at 30
- no okay we are
- central okay we're gonna have to fix that in a second all right um okay the central
- i gave them i only gave two groups bonus points this was one of them um which one they are
- sent through i think those are one of them that i specific i gave a specific amount for specific
- things as well because i feel like that was more of an impact the books and printer
- there's the books you can copy and make copies to distribute and reuse and i feel like the books
- and the copy it was more of a necessity for them but they're trying to move forward rather than
- other things that in this thing so you funded 3750 yes i think that's uh that makes sense and
- not fund the printer yeah no i mean the printer was included the books and printer oh but they
- said priority one was books priority two was educational materials and the printer was priority
- three well my my amount was well this was in south tropics was two thousand three thousand
- okay yeah so you did so yeah that's what i did too i did three thousand
- i i don't i don't i i would i don't know if i like not funding one of their priorities while saying
- that we like their higher priority while saying that we rank them too highly i just think that
- they're kind of like where we're seeing the priority differently from right there because
- you know like um what can you say importance importance and you know for books yes printer
- yes that's something that's good you can reproduce the books with the printer are we i mean so we
- should choose their priority over yes we see as the priority yes i think so because because the
- whole idea is that these is that the service providers understand the people that they're
- serving better than we do i mean if we're not going to take them at their word it's we're like
- wow we think we think that you know the way you should do this is okay but handing out what's the
- difference in a funding a population that is currently super vulnerable culturally and education
- like education and as a culture being attacked by the administration that at the very least if
- we're not going to use an inflammatory word like attack or maybe defund it and so i feel like it
- makes more sense for us to give as much funding as we can even it's a fairly small ask to um
- support the work that they're doing in a population that could be a forgotten population based on
- current administrative priorities and also that was innovative way that they wanted to do it
- you know and it's a low-cost volunteer um and i i don't i don't see why we wouldn't put the whole
- thing in i can be convinced of you're convinced for full funding i'm okay with it i just don't
- think they have much time fundraised if the same people are administering and organizing i i mean
- the lead volunteer is a teacher himself yeah exactly like yeah i mean is there something that
- would i mean so so cam and eddie both ranked and they've ranked very this very highly
- they relative to themselves um well i i i ranked it high at four which isn't so high relative but
- 3500 is what i thought would you know suffice but then the total request is 4000 right so everybody
- reading the same numbers yes on the sheet it says 3500 so yeah i think the minute that the real
- request was 4000 yeah and i don't want to nickel and dime something that is so that it's a pilot
- project it's operational but it's pilot could have real impact it's a vulnerable population
- and i actually i actually think i think i on column k going i'm going back over this i could
- i i said in my initial review that this was uh indirect um effect i actually think it's a direct
- one which would change my score to 4.5 or 3.5 so i would not be opposed to fully funding
- the question though as as relates to the rubric um should we as we're we should probably be
- changing
- i mean as we're openly discussing it like i i mean should we be viewing this the draft this draft
- because it will be publicly available so should we probably need to be going in and making set
- adjustments and comments right i feel like the rubric really has identified the order that we're
- having a conversation yeah yeah i think it's certain to purpose and i think we need to
- make it all match now um i think the discussion is convincing me to prioritize things that i do
- necessarily but then so people go give us feedback and we go here's the rubric now i'm confused on
- this one for example just looking at my answers right so they got a point project location
- bloomington right that's great emergency services it's not got a red right residents served 20 to
- 50 okay that's yellow cameron argued that it is emergency service i assume based on what you're
- saying earlier i just think because it's not a population that's captured right every places
- that i fall by as an emergency service just because the context of the time right yeah yeah
- yeah that's where the last information i gave them agree and i said yes directly number of full-time
- staff that you can't really that's not open for debate you know and then community partnerships
- no so like but yes because they're working they're working with casa yeah there's a library
- yeah see then i think i think i had i think i needed clarification yeah about
- what community projects partnerships meant because i really just have yes yeah there were a lot
- that
- i put on yes yes but so i think that wouldn't yeah so yeah yeah so i think i messed up on
- my rubrics with the community partnerships question not only so okay so so that settles
- the question of whether we're going to go back and change our rubrics at this point but we should
- so it's the answer now whether we're thinking back through it just to you know double check our
- sense
- but so we're happy to fully fund yeah sure i mean that's not arguing that which is actually four
- thousand yes and that's similar for yes for grants okay what's the tally on the total for
- you actually that i need to agree although you saw when you look at the amount requested it says 35
- yeah but all the actual application is four thousand so i don't know where this number came
- from okay um i just see maybe just maybe just clerical error i think that must be
- and then i know is this populating from somewhere now yeah this has just risen down so i will
- make sure i change that appropriately uh where are we total money okay
- we're at 324,000 okay tandem is next
- so uh within their their average uh four point can you see it out there
- i see it yeah i mean it's making it down that
- um if we're going to
- fund one priority the top one was 3750 and their second was 2145 uh no i did all
- no it's so full funding
- i think we're super close to recommending full funding based on our average okay so stay at full
- funding yeah any opposition other than and i'll soon i'll highlight them and say that
- we can ask andy in case we come back to okay uh plan parenthood
- yeah i randomize all time you can't full fund everyone guys
- yeah well i mean i mean yeah it's true but then but now we're in the situation where we didn't
- fully fund people who got higher scores i gave them 5000 again just because i did fully fund most
- requests i think but like you said i feel like we're holistically looking at things like through
- the conversation to kind of yes yes yes so it doesn't have to be yes all always full fund i
- guess yes yes the looking at priorities
- oh my gosh it's hard to find the word plan should have looked for another word um
- here we go looking at priorities uh they priority one is 5000 priority two is 1000
- and then priority three is 750 and then priority four and five are 500 and 250
- it's just again it's hard because it's like women's health and sexual reproductive health are being
- there yeah he funded across the board so it feels like context
- i'm gonna get full funding for him yeah my problem is i can't have our new context on almost all of
- them and i'm not saying yeah i want to give that's that was why i did fully fund most because i was
- like we need to give as many if you feel help as we can so that's where i'm okay so you want to
- pay them a full fund and then come back to them if you get to yeah yeah this was this was a
- particularly compelling match right okay indiana recovery alliance
- i would say that they've made a very strong argument time and time again on the return of
- investor of the money that we've given them and so one friend i had here i don't think there was
- any
- if i'm not mistaken don't think that they broke this down in a way that
- no because i think it was for the grant it was all just for the grant writer
- i gave them 75 ish percent
- although i strongly support
- what they do i think i think i confused courage to change it
- so they want a grant writer the grant manager i mean the the argument in terms of return of
- investment of taxpayer funds is that if they get a grant writer that the likelihood they're able to
- get more funding is is higher in less impact on the network here and and they have they have
- told us throughout they they you know it's show last year the person they asked for funding for
- the person they were able to fully fund that person by the end of the year the year before that
- they
- did the same and so they they have a track record of doing that which you know it's not really
- captured in our rubric i get bonus points for that but anyone anyone opposed to taking them
- at full funding that we can come back that's good to me okay any against
- um exos refugee
- 75 funding that gave this was my other bonus point one similar to it being a population crisis
- and emergency services
- if we did 75 percent as sorry i lied yeah yeah because i gave him 1010 if we do 75 percent of
- right about where you were on our average and our average is 79 let's do that yes i think we're
- gonna have to have more discretion about not fully funding yeah i i recommend it so um half of that
- i'd like to hear a little more about your thoughts on that yeah because i'm thinking
- that it's going to be supporting them in some ways but at the same time they can't be like relying
- on
- this funding there must be pulling um seeking sources from other places probably as many people
- as they can um but the but the issue i mean the issue with with them right now one they're they
- need 150 000 um and there's zero federal funds and there we're talking about funds for you know
- talk about emergency is people in the community that may face all types of other issues if if not
- supported yeah when i saw it as something where you're supporting them in a way um but not at the
- detriment of somebody else that might be needing funding also yeah so it was either give them some
- but not give them all and i came to the half yeah but what but how do like the taking it at half
- i don't i'm not i mean i
- okay so how about okay let's um it's how about we currently because we'll we'll go back through all
- the people that we highlight so so let's currently we'll leave it at the 75 because it seems like
- there's more of us wanting 35 that we can come back and and see what the right amount is because
- they to your point they didn't say you know they don't have a particular breaking point here or
- they're just asking for as much money as possible at 150 000 um okay casa
- i think we're 5 000 that's sort of that did you find did you write that i mean that's right at we
- our collective is is 77 percent which is 4,000 and 100 and change so um let's let's see there
- uh 5,400 would fund their would fund their fully fund their first priority
- this was a very high one for me yeah 5,400 i know we can't fully fund everybody so
- i'm fine with giving them something but um you know nationally i think casa was
- defunded um but mineral county seems to be okay from what i've read so but that was before
- i scored the rubric but i still scored a few high but afterwards yeah i mean we're looking at at
- risk
- services for used again and it's volunteer on a volunteer basis like causes like
- so this is the more i felt really crappy doing the rubric because i didn't
- uh you know the question you know sorry project location of liberal county so
- they lost a little bit because of the number counted on the but it's our kids you know so yeah
- all right so how about we pay them it's 5,400 keeping with the the way that we've we've been
- approaching you so far and we'll come back a little higher than our average but um that we
- requested for them but um okay uh cooperative living
- hey isaac what is the total for exodus it looks like it's 112 000 that's almost missing there
- thank you oh yeah it's because it says bad doing
- there we go
- squat good living was one of the ones that i gave bonus points for for dps out outside the box when
- it comes to housing for um for bloomington um i recommended fully funding just so that way
- i'll see there but it's hard though they're there so their their overall
- their overall request was 15 367 but then they broke down their priorities as the full
- project cost a 41 233 the the top priority was the tempstar system which is
- the upstairs system sorry this is all for for those the upstairs system is 14 593
- so i would recommend we fund 14 593 or 13 320 so we fund one of the full systems
- i'm good with it which one the lower number or the higher number you said fully fund so
- yeah so i'm on the high end but i'm okay with the lower end uh that's the one
- okay i'll move the higher and then we'll come back okay uh stone belt
- uh collaborative business yes collaborative uh i marked them high and i gave them 5 000
- and
- yeah
- yeah i agree 5 000 well so that would be taking that would be funding everything
- but um participation incentives potentially so that's that would fund their top six um their top
- six um priorities okay do we need to uh do we need to take a break yes okay let's take a quick
- break
- then um for those five minutes okay okay we need breaks
- okay
- [ Pause ]
- Sorry, should have brought food, you're right.
- [ Laughter ]
- [ Inaudible ]
- There are like 13, 13 left.
- [ Inaudible ]
- What's the total so far?
- $390,000.
- We have about $100,000 left.
- Based on how we've allocated it.
- Did we eliminate?
- Let's talk about it in a second when everybody's here.
- [ Laughter ]
- You know where I'm going.
- I don't.
- [ Laughter ]
- All right, Courtney.
- Come back, Courtney, come back.
- We're going to spend the rest of Santa's money.
- [ Laughter ]
- Okay.
- So we have just about 13 more to go.
- And then we'll have a time of public comment.
- Then we can go back to looking at each of these again.
- The ones that you've highlighted.
- We are on Big Brother's Big Sisters.
- Oh, did I leave the room and everybody was like, let's take a break?
- Yes.
- Thank you.
- I was making it all about me.
- Okay, so Big Brother's Big Sisters.
- So I only funded the personal cost for this.
- Yes, I gave $17,000.
- It was my distribution.
- No, that sounds reasonable.
- That's $17,000.
- That's about the average.
- Yeah, just a little above what we averaged here.
- Okay.
- Eddie, you can leave now again.
- Or just go sit in the corner and something.
- Don't say anything.
- Okay. So, so scap.
- So I gave a full funding, but I could be, you know,
- I was only like, I had lefty blank and just it was so much, it was, it was throwing.
- I gave a hundred thousand.
- Did you?
- Well, they're well established.
- They have a history of really good work.
- And they say this is essential and I had the question.
- I gave them $55,000.
- Oh, actually, I did give them money.
- I gave them $92,701.
- Well, because I told you how I did mine.
- I said all of my very highs got fully funded.
- My highs got 90%.
- My next level guy, you know, 70% or whatever.
- Yeah.
- And they don't, they didn't give us any, you know.
- And I wish we'd actually invited them for an interview at this point, because they didn't say what
- partial funding.
- Nor do you.
- How did you get that number?
- Multiple numbers in like, okay.
- Because I had the 57.
- So you were funding something particularly with that amount?
- No, no, I just, I was doing percentages because I thought so.
- And in terms of my first round of it, I was just taking it to, you know, just just roughly seeing,
- you know, where, where things went out if I, because I mean against me.
- There there's a there's a little bit of a challenge here because the so this here is the first
- example where what was asked for isn't captured in our rubric like we didn't actually look at like
- return on investment or like impact of, you know, dollars spent or something like that.
- Like, we tried to capture that with like people sort of. Right. And but that relation isn't isn't
- exactly there in the sense of, you know, some of these groups are asking for $6,000 and certain 500
- people.
- And, and here they're asking for $120,000. And how many people did they say they serve to serve 4,239
- people. So, you know, roughly speaking.
- What's the critical critical angle out of the institution.
- What's the like they would have them get in funding from other sources, very high. Exactly, which
- is why I came to them and have lots of cuts, right.
- Right. And that's that's the thing.
- Spent grants that they have to write and then they weren't asking for money to fulfill their cuts
- they're asking for money for which, and now, on the other hand, there's this flip argument where I'm
- like, that is what we said are the priorities of the grant,
- which is like one time capital expenditures.
- Right, Cameron, where are you on this.
- Um, I didn't, I didn't allow any funding.
- But it's just because it was so big that I really just like, I'm nothing 55192 120.
- We're all over the place.
- Well, well we're not we're not all over the place there's this just that the zero zero is going to
- skew the average amount Jerry highly.
- I guess what was your rubric right though.
- Where'd you where'd you bring them for it's like, I ran to them before me.
- So penalizing them for asking for a lot of money. Well, no, it was more like thinking about like,
- very well established organization that probably has not probably that doesn't very well
- established fundraising weighing.
- I know they're going to be federal cuts but also if we're looking at physical improvements there
- are usually other grant opportunities at the state level exists for that.
- We are one of those which is a good argument for it but like, it was mostly just like, because
- there was no partial funding option, and the budget in terms of items that are needed was not
- broken down into anything specific.
- I like that either. And so, but I'm also not saying that's what I believe in that like I need to
- get nothing I'm just telling you that I
- would we be averse to, you know, our average is about 68.
- Could that work for most people. Well we're actually, yeah, we had a sports or wise. The only thing
- I'm worried about with this one is that's a lot of money for a large project that has to be
- completed within what six months.
- And if they don't have the rest of the funding. Yeah.
- I feel like they can get the rest of the funding. Yeah, like, not.
- But what if they don't and so so installation and six within six months.
- And we didn't we didn't interview them.
- Yeah. Well, but we're giving them majority and funding and well established. You can make a plea.
- Okay, on the flip side.
- To that argument, if you if you, for example, fully fund, and, and then, and they don't, they're
- not able to spend money that does reverse to to the general fund and we have the past years, then
- said, okay, you know, we'd like that to be added.
- Which this year did we did we ask if what what the leftover was from last year and they said, you
- know,
- I have to check on that.
- We didn't ask we didn't ask.
- I was like, you might two student committees, both had scout on the table.
- Irrelevant irrelevant if we write them high, the funding should go hand in hand with high with a
- high ranking. And I mean they're but they're not okay so let's see who rank them well.
- Well so interesting I mean but Dave you rank them, you and Courtney okay so Courtney you rank them
- as a three. Why, why, what they would they not score limit in, they were not emergency services.
- I know. Well, okay, maybe I was a little unfair I put minimal lasting contribution.
- Because, yeah, it's a lasting contribution to the building, but they serve. I mean the amount of
- people that they have.
- That's true. It's like, but maybe okay so maybe that's the maybe that's the rub, which is the
- theory of change here, like, are we do we actually believe that, you know, a deteriorating building
- hinders their ability to serve these people.
- And I mean maybe that's the core question on the table here because if the answer. I mean, in your
- case if the answer is yes, then it's, it's a lasting direct, you know, contribution.
- And then then that would that would lead you to raise your score, which would, which would put a
- higher on a list and we would have considered earlier we would have thought of near fully funding.
- I disagree, or I disagree, and
- together or is the or is the or effect that you might disagree, are you saying, I do.
- So it's a question whether or not the phone fully or not.
- I might be swayed in the opposite direction though as well as to say, I mean maybe maybe you're
- right, which is, which is that actually this isn't, this isn't direct and lasting.
- And in which case we all rank them too high on the rubric. My argument is this is not, and they
- provide emergency services. Yes, this is not an emergency.
- And I feel that we have a lot of emergencies up there. So that was why I, for the most part, didn't
- fully funding anyone. Yeah, I actually read them know for the service, the emergency services as
- well, but they still got high.
- I'm pretty sure if I remember correctly what I did was there were two.
- That I left blank. When I was allocating money.
- And then I went back and I played around with numbers to try to fund those two that I left blank.
- And to find them as generously as I could. I mean, I don't disagree with with you know I mean and
- with Cameron I mean in the sense that, in the sense that okay, and I think that's such a strong
- point which is separate.
- There's what the agency does right and and the amount of people they serve. And then there's a
- question of what the project they're asking to do is.
- And, and now, the tension for me here is that what they're asking to do is what we say we
- prioritize in addition to emergency services and what we've never discussed is whether, and we
- tried to do this with the rubric is whether you know is emergency service more important
- than capital investment, where it's like and and pilots and you know the type of things that we say
- that that are that are crucial to this fund.
- And, and, but, but I agree with you that one, it's like if they do this this year or five years in
- many ways.
- Well, and for a project like this too, because I think that there is a tension with capital
- improvements that this is over a fifth of the funding we have available to give out, and I think
- that it would be nice to see more sources of income that
- that we're being leveraged into this project versus just saying we want Jack Hopkins to fund all of
- this because I at the end of the day I actually really don't think it's our job to do that with
- this like pool of funding.
- I mean, I'm getting really convinced by this conversation. I have a modest proposal.
- I don't really Chris Preston Hill refuge that I read it low.
- We funded partially some back one therapy. If we were to eliminate Preston Hill and scout, then you
- can probably go to everybody.
- However, I will say I one thing I'd like to caution us about is I don't think I can we can penalize,
- we should I don't think we should penalize them for asking for a lot right I think we need to view
- it through the lens of what it is.
- But that's what I'm saying like, like, I don't think that should tip us to say to say I mean, I
- think the core of the conversation is what is what is what we're all saying is like, does this
- investment, but you were convincing me of is the fact that maybe they could live with
- it exciting for now, right, they don't need another emergency services, a lot of the things here
- are services really important. Yes, which right now, which, yeah. And so that's ways me if it's, it's
- really a matter of like, if we're going to fund it 55 or 60 and they don't get the rest
- of the funding and then we get into this.
- I mean, what's the point may as well, I think.
- I also feel like if it was $128,000 is the final gap in this bigger campaign they've been doing for
- their renovations, it would be more compelling.
- Yeah, it doesn't say it's a renovation, it says the building is an immediate need repair, or I'm
- assuming risk of much longer term impacted damage to the actual structure. And, and I'm not saying
- there wasn't a need for this program to morph.
- It was the fund was originally like the first year I think it just went to one agency, it actually
- prohibited, giving it for any operational expenses, or anything. It was a purely capital investment
- one time, one time investment.
- But that is still that is still in our, that is still clearly in our priorities that then and we
- talked earlier about how we wanted to, we talked about a couple of things that we that we left on
- the table right.
- One of them was that we wanted to do whether we wanted to incentivize like put a portion of the
- extra funds for high right for the high value things we talked about that right and we just couldn't
- quite figure out what that would look like.
- Yeah, right.
- Go ahead, go ahead.
- Okay, but just going back when we had a conversation about and this house much smaller ask and the
- building was specifically serving citizens, the building that we're talking about for Scott is an
- agency building specifically for administrative services it's not even housing.
- So housing funding and we bring them a so high, but I mean to that to that point and then we so so
- the question to that that I asked earlier, can they do their services remotely.
- I think, to, to an extent the answer is no, because a lot of the people who they serve need to
- physically come into their building to get served some of them don't have access to internet, some
- of them don't have it and so on and so forth so so so they do.
- It's not just a office space that could be a we work right like they could they couldn't be
- operating out of the mill just you know like with with floating desk like they need space.
- No, but then to your point Andy, what I didn't see in the application and I think this goes to what
- Cameron was saying earlier, I didn't see in the application a strong like our building about to
- fall down or like this is an immediate need.
- That was this what we use the money for. Right, so so that that to me is the tension and I think
- that if, if that was described to your, I would, I would be totally swayed by what you said, if
- that was the situation and I mean and keep in mind I mean, I did write them highly
- I want to give them near full funding. So did, but but thinking through this, it's like, you know,
- it isn't an emergency need and I think that what we're coming up with is that yes we want capital
- investment but emergency means Trump that.
- The one line they have that I think that they're on either side of the argument is, is it is by
- reducing the need to apply agents and funds to building maintenance for agency resources can be
- applied directly to client services.
- I think that this can support either side of our argument but I do think it's worth noting that
- that is like, but then they didn't they didn't outline what those are.
- And so, so it's not, is it. I mean, okay, so we know. We know about the agency, but it's part of
- the proportionate and in comparing that to the other things that we're looking at here at the
- bottom of our list.
- I just also personally feel like it's not it's concerning me with timing as well whenever the
- expenses are not unless I miss them or just not throw them down.
- Yeah, more specifics.
- This specific quote either. I think if we wade into this very, it's not an actual emergency
- services investment works. This is so slow because like amethyst house.
- And the painting and the interior restoration and furniture I mean lots of things that we are these
- other applications aren't emergency services they're just investments in the space.
- Fair and that's why I marked amethyst house low, as hard as that was for me, because I really
- support what they do. But I did mark, you know, like the, the furniture in the waiting room and the
- interrogation rooms not exam.
- Hi, because I was much closer to the emergency. So you're right. It is a tough line to where does
- it become an emergency. So I feel like that's a really good thing to delve into deeper to for next
- year because I think that yes.
- We, we said we prioritize capital improvements, but I think that it can be a capital improvement
- that is also an emergency service and it need but how can they tell that story better because I
- think that's what's making it hard is like okay.
- So with beacon, and the medical services, you know, we didn't even have questions about that. And
- that's like the technical capital and business space you know adding on to the space, but it's just
- like science.
- It's.
- Yeah, it's it will it's hard to because we just have associations with oh I'm citing my house right
- and that's not fair that we're bringing in some associations from like, you know,
- I mean I'm not, I'm not going to die on this hill.
- Well, this is I mean, I mean, yeah, no one should ever downhills but the, but it's like the
- way to me it seems like our decision on this is kind of president said, a little bit like that and
- then you are making a super court decision is a big ask on a capital prudent.
- It's a big hill.
- Well it's it's also I mean this this is a, at this point, you know, going back to, you know, all of
- the other going going basically we find this at any level close to what we're suggesting that's it,
- we're done.
- Yeah.
- But on the other hand, this is everything below this is low scoring. I mean so
- what if
- doesn't work. All right. What was your suggestion. Well I was going to say, like I had said when I
- was doing my personal rubric anything that scored below a media.
- Just funded, so I can say what if we go through and see what that knocks out and then fund all the
- others and see what we come back to with.
- Well, then we have left but then so so so even if you look at. So if you look at our average. What's
- left over. Okay, just on our average suggested amounts.
- We're talking about $208,000. We are currently at 411.
- So we have about 90,000 left.
- So again we could fund all the other agencies on the pretty close to the average.
- Otherwise, you're right. I mean, if we if we were to give 60,000 to a scout and say, well,
- hopefully you can find the other half.
- To complete the project within six months. I mean, there's nothing if we we could we can still we
- you know this whatever we decide today is not final we have the, we actually have the meeting where
- we make this final right so.
- You know, we could schedule a, because we're realizing that like I have a lot of questions now that
- I that I didn't get answered right like about what would they do a $67,000.
- So we could invite them to do something we could maybe we should do that.
- I'd like to see because he's in these, you know, point well taken good capital investment agency
- that serves a lot of people, but isn't an immediate Neil, like to know is an emergency.
- You know, just out of curiosity, what's the precedent for that and calling people back in after the
- presentation as it hasn't been done but we I mean the way that we use interviews this year is that
- we only brought people we had questions for.
- I mean, and so, you know, I mean it's it's our own.
- It's our own failure right but we didn't notice these questions until talking through it.
- So I don't know if we should disadvantage someone for that.
- I mean, but but then we, I mean, I'm still on the fence on I think both of these arguments way.
- You know I find merit in both of them.
- Is there anyone else we want to invite other remaining agencies.
- So far we haven't had there's no more of the ones above there was nothing you know contested so far
- for us right.
- When it comes back I'd like to ask about the. I don't think Preston Hill. Okay. Okay. Because, you
- know, I mean, if I were Santa, and I had a million dollars in this budget, I would.
- I think it would be wonderful. But, you know, we have whatever $970,000 okay let's let's let's do
- this then I mean but, you know, keep in mind that this is the last one is ranked as a four.
- And, you know, as we look through how we ranked it.
- You know,
- it feels like I think I'm, I, I could be persuaded to lower my score, based on based on the
- discussion I think that Courtney could be persuaded to raise her score so so it's so it might
- change sort of where this ends up fitting relatively to others.
- I still feel like we have all the information we need, because if I knew that they could move
- forward to partial funding and the a lot of time I could probably change my opinion on it.
- Yeah, that's exactly where I'm at.
- Go that way.
- Okay.
- So, okay so then so then, may I suggest that what we do is.
- Well, in a second we'll call it back in. We can, we can talk through the others to see if we if we
- still have any further questions for any of the others.
- And then, and then perhaps send it back out and we discuss and then if that's what we really want
- to do is is have another interview can look at see when we're available and ask them for that now,
- there's some challenge with this.
- One is that
- we have to do a lot of coordination, but I think that's the, that's a minor point.
- The big point to me, twofold. One is in the application we told them when the interviews were going
- to be. So this is us holding an interview outside of the time that that we said they would be so
- they may not be available.
- We can just offer a written, you know, ask questions in a written form. Okay, just, you know, we
- don't necessarily have them on.
- That's pretty smart. Yeah, because our question is pretty straightforward.
- I mean, yeah. Okay. Okay. Okay. So, so are we okay with that we call Eddie back, talk about the
- others and then we can ask them to leave and we can sync our calendars for everyone.
- No, we don't need to sync our calendars. We said, so we'll format the question. So let's format the
- question now then.
- So, what is the, what is the question that we'd like to. Well, there are two questions I think one
- is, in terms of an immediate need.
- Could you elaborate on the immediate need.
- Could you break down that maybe if there are three questions could you break down the hundred 23,000
- or whatever they're asking.
- I just found that is in the proposal there was a full, but it's, it's in sort of contractor fashion
- and sort of says, all these things.
- Okay, scrap that.
- And we're back to Cameron's question, you know, quick, you know, funding a partial funding. Yeah,
- so so I think it telling us how immediate, what is the probability that this would
- be utilized to leverage more of the total cost is it is it is it somewhat of a.
- No, I mean, okay.
- Yeah.
- So, so expressing, I didn't mean to put words in your mouth, you know, well, I mean, I just want to
- know if they can still move forward with personal funding.
- Within the six within the six months time period within that time period. Well, and to them, like,
- what happened can they with full funding can they were full funding to the project and signals.
- Yeah.
- It's like the building integrity is at risk in after six months or something I mean, you know, in a
- significant way.
- Again, yeah.
- With full funding or partial funding would they be able to move forward with the project within the
- time period of the grant.
- But I think that also kind of speaks to like getting their priorities spelled out for partial
- funding to.
- I think that's a very important question moving forward to make sure that's established within the
- criteria itself.
- It will partial or full funding to facilitate completed up whatever they want.
- They're asking for to be done within the time frame.
- I don't think that's question was that wasn't a question that was pretty good, but that seems to be
- a very significant.
- Every, every.
- Everybody comes back where it was not really comes down.
- And then that just makes it really bad because there's things that wasn't funded in that time.
- Well, also, by the way, this will give us a chance to ask the question of if there's any remaining
- funds from last year to because if this happened last year because then that that also help us and
- evaluate it because I think we feel quite comfortable with.
- With lines, where are we at, you know, sort of lunch 28 and above I think we're fairly comfortable
- there with some some that we can revisit just to see you know, within $1,000 or something like that
- but you know.
- But I think that would help us you know if there's an additional $17,000 or something like that I
- think last year we had an additional.
- Was it like 10 right we went 10 over. Yeah.
- Okay. Okay, so we're are we happy with those questions there are you happy to send those Lisa. Yes.
- Yeah, thank you. Okay, let's call it back then.
- Let's come around.
- Okay.
- Lantern support services.
- They provided two options and there was a huge difference between the two but I recommended the
- reduced
- option they provided.
- What was that number 16 560.
- I recommended 50%. That's what I did. Yeah.
- It's 30% but I'm fine with smaller number.
- He said 9200.
- And then just noting that all these folks now are all under force.
- And then a rubric say is that low or medium.
- If there are three minutes there should be medium.
- Medium low is 2.5 so anything under 2.5 is a little low.
- Just noticing actually that we actually didn't have a week missed a whole number of which is three,
- threes and three point five so mediums but three point five and above, we didn't say what it is.
- Under force, anyways.
- Okay, sorry, sorry, let's not lose steam we got this guys.
- So,
- what was the suggestion sorry I'm finding half I think is half was what some people so members.
- And then, and he thought, full, but what did they say they can do with that.
- With half because it looks to me like they said.
- So, it looks like they're choosing between funding a pay family coordinator with a master's in
- social worker and equivalent degree already or paying one that has an MSW in progress, and this
- smaller number 16 by 60 is the one in progress, 20,400 is for the one that degree already.
- The way the synopsis reads. It seems like they could do as much of those things, support group
- therapy meals mentoring as as the funding was available.
- Right. Yeah, but so that that's why my, my, I think I think that we want to pay it to.
- If we're going to fund them.
- I mean, giving, giving them $9,000 would sound like it, I mean not helpful in the six month period
- necessarily.
- So my argument would be 15 six. If we can't fully fund
- use the amount for the person.
- Lower amounts of the person. Yeah.
- Or don't fund at all. I mean, I'm also, I wouldn't.
- I think they took the box for innovative project. Yeah, and because really there is another
- community that's not served up them.
- Intention of care is something that people use to the state tries to use to save money.
- So yeah, so.
- So 15 360. Yes.
- The spaceship.
- I did not fund them. They ranked medium low.
- Yeah.
- I have partially funded for the classroom furniture and the developmental and educational resources.
- So that was 30,624.
- I think I've given them 4.5.
- Hi.
- So the, the class, the classroom top priority is 14624.
- And their next one is 11376.
- So, if you.
- So, so whatever thoughts.
- I get somewhere someone.
- A bunch of the six.
- If we funded top two priorities that would put us.
- 25, yeah, it's 26 exactly for top two. Yes. And then our average is 26,724.
- And then our average change we already discussed. We'll come back to if we need to, which we will
- need to.
- Every minute 10,000 because their partial funding is just a reduction in service and they don't
- really hit the markers in terms of emergency services.
- I recommend it's 60% funding as a list for it for me so they might not receive funding from me.
- The rules.
- 35.
- I'm persuaded by not emergency.
- So like for $10,000 I know it wasn't their top personal expenses was it was their top priority but
- program materials and supplies and then their scholarships which I thought was like, you know,
- really a huge that was at 10,000.
- And they, they can, who wouldn't say we're funding the scholarships yeah okay 10,000 but I mean
- their overall project costs $1.5 million.
- So, you know, I mean, I feel like they just sent us to the organization.
- Yeah.
- And I'm sort of just just to restate my position from here down I'm happy to not find any of them.
- I'm not happy to I'm not happy that anybody would not be funded it's not what I mean but well it's
- contingent of them.
- I mean I would like to talk about Crested Hill again.
- Is this something that people feel after going through this is
- first funding, we've funded to make when you're on a service I do not.
- And, or counseling.
- Funding partially.
- I didn't want to.
- I didn't want to fund it.
- Well, let's let's let's let's finish with girls like them. What are we, what are we saying. Well,
- what are we up to right now we are talking about.
- We're just like we are 55, 455 girls like we're talking about men and we're supposed to be fun
- because we have about five and three.
- So the question.
- I knew either way, I'm virtually funding them or one of the problems.
- The moment I mean this is a placeholder for us to.
- The argument of what was the materials also scholarships is 10.
- But that in for a placeholder right now.
- Okay.
- No families.
- Yeah, it was huge.
- Karen did you score 5.5 or 3.5.
- 5.5.
- I mean, this felt like a climate equity moment.
- For me personally.
- Sorry, no, I'm not trying to pick up.
- No, I would have agreed with you, but they already have two other counties.
- So this did not feel pressing to me right now since they already got two others.
- As a former preschool teacher, I absolutely understood their argument. I'm like, yeah, 100%.
- But because they already have two, I felt we need that money elsewhere right now.
- That was my...
- That makes sense. I missed that they have two already.
- So, zero?
- Yeah.
- Then
- zero everything below?
- What are the last three?
- So we have Wonder Lab, Crested Hills, Special Olympics, and Boys and Girls Club.
- Special Olympics one, I wanted to fund.
- Me too, me too.
- It's a population that's not reflected in the other nations.
- Wait, are we talking about Special Olympics or Boys and Girls Club?
- I was talking about Special Olympics.
- Yeah, me too.
- Wait, sorry. Let's do, okay, Wonder Lab.
- I think that was a note for me.
- No.
- Okay.
- That was a note for me.
- I think, I think it's a similar situation where, you know, breaking it down to any amount that it
- seemed.
- And also one of the lowest ranked, yeah.
- Wait.
- No, but I kind of wanted to go back to Wonder Lab.
- Yep.
- Even though I feel like everyone kind of do.
- Well, not everyone actually.
- I mean, it's this so Courtney had them low 2.5 and already had them low.
- The rest of us all had them at force or above.
- And we want to go back to the Boys and Girls Club.
- That's right.
- So we just haven't gotten there yet.
- We'll get, yeah.
- We didn't skip them.
- So yeah, Courtney, why.
- That was what.
- Wonder lab.
- I love wonder lab. My, my kids grew up there.
- They just ranked low on my rubric.
- I think I just think of them with wonder lab.
- It's more of a situation where the privilege mortgage,
- the advantage,
- because even if there's organization that get these say free tickets to
- take kids, how much of them actually do.
- No, no. Okay.
- So, so I'm a big sister and I can't tell you how much time my little one,
- I've spent at wonder lab because it is free and I don't have the extra
- income to take her.
- To a lot of places that cost money. And so I feel like that service has been
- a game changer for me and for her.
- And so like, I know it's personal bias, but like, that's one of the reasons.
- I feel like I've seen that.
- Would it be that grant specifically?
- That would have contributed to you being able to go.
- Yeah. Yeah.
- So, so it's specifically.
- Funding.
- Admission passes for social service organizations and then social service
- organizations in title and school group visits, which I also think that
- education.
- Like public education also being under type right now is like high priority.
- And so like this resources is like a huge, I think it's a huge deal.
- I think it's a huge deal.
- And some retrospects, but I feel like the, the people who would need.
- That kind of advantage. Don't.
- Get the opportunity to even take advantage of that.
- You know, like being in a big, how many kids actually.
- Get in to being chosen.
- You know, there's a lot of waiting lists and whatever.
- And it does have a lot to do with people's economical status.
- And where they are, if they're in shelters, if kids are in shelters, are
- they, are the kids in shelters being able to.
- Get opportunities to go to the wonder lab.
- I didn't find wonder lab, but I will say that headstart is one of the
- organizations that probably benefit from.
- I mean, they list, they list camp town compass early learning center,
- girls in harmony school, headstart middle way.
- New hope for families and youth services bureau.
- We didn't list them much.
- So Cameron, did you fund it fully or did you.
- Fund it fully, but.
- That.
- You know.
- It was based on my.
- Note here that I mean.
- It would have been higher on your list.
- Coordinating with the question about partnerships.
- Because you have them at 2.5.
- It should have been a 3.5.
- Maybe we would have discussed them earlier.
- Yeah.
- That's.
- Quite possible.
- Yeah.
- And.
- You know, and so.
- I mean.
- Look, just looking across the.
- You know, just, just in terms of majority.
- The majority of us want to fund them.
- Yeah. And I'm not.
- I'm not opposed to it.
- And they don't put limitations like.
- The ones you get free admission, you can go anytime.
- As many times as we want.
- Like.
- You know, the thing, the thing that.
- For me.
- Here is that.
- It's one of what two places that you can take.
- You know, kids in the non bad weather times.
- And then, and then for them to then use this money to target.
- You know, at risk, low, low serve, low income, et cetera.
- And then, and then for them to then use this money to target.
- I'm fine with giving a partial to them.
- To serve this specific population that they're saying that this money
- would serve.
- No problem.
- But then the question already brings up, I think it's, you know,
- uptake.
- Of that.
- How many people did they say they'd serve?
- How many kids did they take there?
- How much, you know,
- the big I can see in a, in a lot of ways,
- because if the people who tend to be big, so people are, you know,
- And educated or like, you know, students who wants to, um,
- Support that kind. So they're,
- they're already privileged in some way as to the direct focus of
- certain kids that they're going to add soup.
- But I was living in the other ways and there was no such thing.
- And if it was existing, it was in a drawer somewhere.
- It wasn't something where the kids was taken from there to,
- I'll say, let's do a trip to, okay, parents.
- We have these tickets for you to take your kids to, you know,
- that wasn't, so it's not like it's, it's on paper,
- but is it something that you can say? Yes.
- It's something that they can say, yes, we can see based off of the amount of,
- of tickets we receive.
- These are how many families took advantage of those opportunities.
- I mean,
- the compromise too is that their title one group is it's like their
- primary one is like half of the funding and that is specifically taking
- school children to wonder lab as well. So it's like, you know,
- it's less ambiguous than like a middle way house situation.
- Yeah,
- but I still want to know the statistics of how many kids really get to take
- advantage of this.
- They're saying 4,400.
- I know you're saying that,
- but I know that if you ask them for statistics,
- they have them because of partnerships I've done with them before.
- And I've been able to get those numbers, but I, but that has,
- I don't know if they.
- Yeah.
- Because that's a great thing if it's being utilized in the right way,
- it's going to be open to those.
- I have a.
- A concern that I'm just thinking about about this sending questions.
- It means that we're going to have to meet again to deliberate.
- Before making.
- Well, I guess we could have Lisa, what do you, what do you think we can,
- we can amend our agenda for the allocation.
- That we have next to include.
- Last point on today's agenda.
- As our first point of action.
- An agenda hasn't been created for the next.
- So there's, there's nothing that keeps us from continuing to deliberate.
- No.
- Okay.
- So in which case.
- Would to continue this discussion.
- Let's ask, let's ask for statistics on people served with a particular.
- Yeah.
- So a particular emphasis on, on the,
- how that's been shared amongst the many partners.
- And what do you mean by how that's.
- The number of.
- Children associated with middle way house.
- Or.
- Yeah, I think it was the uptake.
- Right? Like how often.
- I think they keep records of how often people from different,
- like I have to show.
- A card every time I'm going.
- And so.
- Yeah.
- Okay. So, so I'll take them for now.
- For our deliberations, continued deliberation. You said, what was it?
- Was that the, is that what they'd said was the alternate for them?
- One of their.
- Yeah.
- I did not fund them.
- I did give them partial funding because I didn't want to punish them for.
- And to me, it actually wasn't the.
- Here. I will actually, it wasn't about the amount. It was.
- And as we saw with the other larger quest, it was.
- It was the design of the thing. So, I mean, there, there were.
- I liked the idea of.
- Against this capital improvement, buying the thing.
- Then long term service and so on.
- It was unclear to me how that.
- Isn't in the individual benefit of the individual.
- Person who runs it.
- My argument.
- In on your side. Yeah.
- Is that it's.
- You already have an organization that does this.
- Yes.
- So are we.
- You know, are we.
- Trying to reinvent the wheel here for a lot of money when we don't
- need to.
- Was my argument.
- Their argument was that there was demand.
- Well, and then, yeah.
- And then I have to argue again.
- To my counter argument that, well, we have, you know,
- We have a community kitchen and we have, you know, we need all of them.
- It also felt like they were asking us to build their organization from
- the ground up though.
- It was like, what was five board members and payers staff.
- With this huge amount of money.
- So I was like, it was less established.
- Yeah.
- But we said that we would benefit that we would.
- You know,
- Give people that that advantage if you're less established and you
- couldn't go to other places and.
- But I feel like this was an organization that it was all or nothing.
- It's partial would not be.
- Yeah. Yeah.
- Because then we would go back to the point of,
- would they be able to create with what they get?
- Something.
- Yeah.
- The idea.
- I mean, I would have awarded them less than 25%.
- But I'm not.
- Yeah.
- Well,
- And their top priority is going towards the mortgage.
- That was, that's what that's where I was.
- Yeah.
- That's not.
- I don't know.
- I don't know what the range that they're going to live on.
- They've been going to use for this purpose.
- So, so like.
- I'm thinking you're saying that that may, but I also.
- That's interesting.
- Either way, I still like.
- The top priority is just that we can't really, especially with such a little rain.
- Yeah.
- I would suggest.
- Me too.
- I agree with that.
- Special Olympics.
- How did they rank.
- So low.
- Emergency service for sure.
- Yeah.
- And the last time you should.
- Cause it's, you know, it's rain. So.
- So a lot of reasons why they would.
- Where do you rank them? 2.5.
- But I didn't give them $1,500.
- And they were medium low.
- So.
- I, I think.
- Population that hasn't, isn't reflected in other requests.
- So I.
- I mean.
- 3.5 doesn't look very high, but it is for me.
- Yeah.
- They ask us small and I think that's a, I don't know.
- I gave her zero.
- You're getting zero.
- I will say of, you know, of what they're asking for.
- I ranked them.
- My.
- A bit higher, but the.
- What they're asking for is jerseys.
- Yeah.
- Last thing that they said they can use over time as opposed to one thing.
- I don't know.
- I feel like last year they asked for like equipment that they could reuse.
- Yeah.
- I think one of the priorities on there was there's two different things.
- And I think.
- The jerseys.
- Yeah.
- Something.
- They said something about one of them, like it could be.
- Yeah.
- So it wasn't like a one time thing for a one year,
- like so they can use it the next year for the next.
- Event.
- I think one of them was identified as that.
- I don't know which one was, which is, I think that one.
- Attached to.
- $1,500.
- I've already said my position was, you know,
- a little bit above the zero everybody out. So, so just, I mean that.
- We will go with the, with the will of the body.
- So.
- Their rubric scores that well, I'm, I'm okay with it.
- Do not.
- Give me money.
- If we're at the point where, where there's no money left over.
- Yeah. Okay.
- I'm convinced.
- I'm not convinced.
- Okay.
- So I think the things that they want, I mean,
- they say that their uniforms that they currently have are really
- outdated. I think we're looking at.
- They talk about mental and physical stimulation.
- And I feel like we're looking at.
- Another.
- Like Dave said, a population that's not represented here,
- but also something that might not feel like a big deal to us in terms
- of a bigger deal to participants and special Olympics.
- And I think that.
- I don't think they're replacing their jerseys super frequently.
- They also said that their clients or athletes have increased 30% just
- within the last year.
- And so they need more uniforms for them as well.
- And then on top of it being like a relatively small ask.
- Like that's my argument.
- Did you have an open to how much are just the jerseys?
- The 60 jersey jerseys are 1560.
- My number.
- Perfect.
- I mean, do we want to talk about doing just the jerseys?
- That's less than what I recommended for them.
- 1560.
- Okay.
- And the last one, boys and girls club.
- I gave them 50%.
- I did too.
- Well,
- So hungry.
- We're almost done.
- In terms of their, in terms of their breakdown.
- Okay. So.
- I mean, they have 11 different priorities here.
- They're all in six months.
- Okay.
- So if you've bunched, if you've found their top priority,
- that's $7,570.
- Where is that introductory to the amount of money we have?
- Okay.
- And then pending the questions that we want to ask before we have
- spent for our.
- And some draft form allocated for 74, 377.
- So we can give them 200.
- Okay.
- Because I said, sir.
- You had, you had a justification.
- It's came from somewhere in there.
- Yeah.
- So I don't see, I don't see anything on their brother for 1200.
- There's a 1,000.
- One thing, but together.
- It's a number.
- This is a lot of data to go through.
- I know, I know.
- Number.
- Our, our, our, our, what we've recommended as 10.
- So why don't, why don't we say what our average?
- It would, I mean, either we say zero or.
- We'll be so happy.
- I don't know.
- About 23.
- Without boys and girls club.
- Without the answers to the questions that we asked,
- which might change what we want to do with our eyes.
- Yeah.
- I think it's too ambiguous for me.
- I mean, maybe we hold this and just come back to it when,
- after we have an answer to the.
- Yeah.
- To the question that we want to send out.
- Yeah.
- Sure.
- That's what, that's what we'll do right now.
- Okay. So.
- Let's let's open up for public comment.
- And then thousand.
- Oh, you said 1200.
- I did say.
- Yeah.
- Yes. Well, this will help.
- Okay.
- We can discuss again. Okay. But now.
- Let's open up for public comment.
- If there's anybody at our line or in the room that would like to
- give public comment at this time, we are happy to take it.
- Okay.
- So what we're, what we're, well,
- so what we're going to do is send the question to the two agencies.
- And then when we reconvene.
- We'll first meet without Eddie and then.
- And then.
- Hopefully you'd be able to finish our, our recommendations then.
- Yeah.
- When is our meeting?
- Oh, it's a Friday night.
- My son has a.
- We got it. We got off.
- Friday the 16th.
- Yeah.
- That might be okay.
- I think it's, it might be a six, actually.
- A 16.
- That's usually really fast.
- Is it.
- Yeah.
- Well, now we have to discuss the big question.
- Cause I have, I have Jack Hopkins.
- Slide it for four to six.
- Doesn't matter. It doesn't matter.
- Yeah.
- Okay. So, yeah. And I mean, worst case scenario that you've discussed
- and then leave as we formalize the things. Yeah.
- Well, the only thing is my only thought though.
- For that meeting, but just before we all leave, sorry for that meeting.
- No, I think usually you have like a.
- And so we won't be able to do that at that meeting at this point, because,
- because we have not finalized.
- So should we.
- And we like adjourn and then read.
- You know, can we like end it and then restart.
- Yeah, so, so, so we could we do it one of two ways. In my mind, one is that we could have, we could
- have drafts of everything else because everything else is barely fixed at this point.
- And just with it, we have a decision point about everything below that line.
- We can go to that at that meeting to allow the set night to for finalize the thing outside of
- committee, then, like, based on the recommendation.
- Yeah, we've granted that power before. Yeah, and then we can format their thing to put out the
- council agenda.
- So in terms of the date for the responses. What would you buy I would say Thursday.
- All right. Yeah, 1515. That works. That works. Or let's know because then they might send it to
- Thursday and then let's just just say, you know, the 14th so that we have Thursday, you can send it
- to us on Thursday.
- Actually with with Tuesday the 13th. Yes, I mean that gives us a week. Exactly. Yeah. Thank you all.
- Thank you. BS adjourned.
- [BLANK_AUDIO]