WEBVTT

00:00:00.258 --> 00:00:07.639
- Thank you all for being here. Welcome to the inaugural for 2026, Jack Hopkins Social Service Funding

00:00:07.639 --> 00:00:14.947
- Committee. I'm Courtney Daly, Council Member Courtney Daly. I am the chairperson for our committee.

00:00:14.947 --> 00:00:22.839
- I think to start things off, should we just go around and do roll? Have everybody on the committee announce

00:00:22.839 --> 00:00:25.470
- their name and we'll do that first.

00:00:25.666 --> 00:00:34.402
- First, I want to welcome our newest member. We have one new member this year, Catherine and Tia Moa.

00:00:34.402 --> 00:00:43.139
- Hi, welcome. Thanks for joining us. Thanks for having me. Everybody else's old hat at this. So we'll

00:00:43.139 --> 00:00:53.086
- introduce ourselves as we do roll call. So Courtney Daly. Hello. I'm Eddie, I'm an assessor in the Action Program.

00:00:53.250 --> 00:01:02.342
- And I work at them. It's something to go over there. So obviously, we do. Yeah, we can go right over

00:01:02.342 --> 00:01:11.614
- to say, you know, any incentive and information technology services partner. You're near us each other

00:01:11.614 --> 00:01:21.246
- application areas. I'm worried that I'm a researcher for campus. I'm sorry. Lisa Lainer, council attorney.

00:01:21.666 --> 00:01:48.862
- Thank you all very much. So

00:01:49.314 --> 00:01:57.097
- To give a little bit of background on the Jack Hopkins committee, or anybody who's not terribly familiar

00:01:57.097 --> 00:02:04.732
- with it, this agency committee was created by former council member Jack Hopkins in collaboration with

00:02:04.732 --> 00:02:12.145
- the council and community colleagues back in 1993. So this marks the committee's 34th year. And the

00:02:12.145 --> 00:02:17.630
- purpose of today's meeting is to begin planning the 2026 funding program.

00:02:19.106 --> 00:02:27.086
- So a little bit about 2026 funding. This year we have $500,000 in budgeted funds for our distribution.

00:02:27.086 --> 00:02:35.066
- That's the same amount that we had last year, which was doubled from the previous year. So it has gone

00:02:35.066 --> 00:02:42.891
- up as we've also noticed need has gone up. But this, this amount is subject to confirmation from the

00:02:42.891 --> 00:02:48.702
- office of the controller regarding the available funds, which will explain

00:02:48.866 --> 00:02:55.897
- in just a minute. As I said, this is the same budget that we've worked with in 2025. Unused funds from

00:02:55.897 --> 00:03:02.927
- previous years might be available at the end upon request for additional appropriations, but the final

00:03:02.927 --> 00:03:09.821
- amount for that won't be known until the 2025 final claims are received, because we're still closing

00:03:09.821 --> 00:03:16.715
- those out from last year. And then we need to receive confirmation from the Office of the Controller

00:03:16.715 --> 00:03:18.558
- regarding how much we have

00:03:19.010 --> 00:03:28.390
- So for example, I know last year, which actually I'll talk about in a minute, we did go over by about

00:03:28.390 --> 00:03:37.862
- 10,000. Correct. Yeah. So to review the 2025 program and a little bit of a preview for 2026. To review

00:03:37.862 --> 00:03:47.243
- 2025, the committee received 38 applications last year. Six of those were collaborative projects with

00:03:47.243 --> 00:03:48.990
- requests for funds

00:03:49.698 --> 00:04:00.846
- totaling $965,372.77. So we basically had twice as much in requests as we did per copy, which makes

00:04:00.846 --> 00:04:12.886
- this a hard job sometimes. So the committee allocated $510,377.27 in funds to 35 social agencies, including

00:04:12.886 --> 00:04:18.014
- all six collaborative projects. So there were

00:04:18.306 --> 00:04:27.731
- 38 requests, we found 35. So some agencies have already completed their projects from 2025. Others are

00:04:27.731 --> 00:04:37.064
- wrapping up during this first quarter of 2026. So Lisa is going to provide some brief context on some

00:04:37.064 --> 00:04:47.038
- of the program challenges experienced in 2025. Some of the big takeaways from last year in my communications

00:04:47.426 --> 00:04:54.768
- with applicants at different meetings and phone calls, and then with committee members. And then my

00:04:54.768 --> 00:05:02.477
- own experience just in administering the program, it seemed like there were a lot of different documents

00:05:02.477 --> 00:05:10.334
- involved. There was an application. There was an application summary. There was a solicitation, a criteria

00:05:10.334 --> 00:05:14.078
- of eligibility, any number of different documents.

00:05:14.626 --> 00:05:23.958
- And I heard feedback that it seemed duplicative. Sometimes it was confusing to compare different statements

00:05:23.958 --> 00:05:32.771
- and the different documents. On top of that, it seemed like there were a high number of pages. We had

00:05:32.771 --> 00:05:41.326
- one packet that was about 1,000 pages in length. And by the time you compiled all of the different

00:05:41.326 --> 00:05:44.350
- applications and each application,

00:05:44.482 --> 00:05:52.843
- was multiple pages and all of the attachments that went with it. It was really bulky and I could understand

00:05:52.843 --> 00:06:00.895
- if it was really time consuming and difficult for committee members to sift through all of those pages.

00:06:00.895 --> 00:06:09.024
- On top of that, there were a high number of emails going back and forth between applicants and council's

00:06:09.024 --> 00:06:14.366
- office staff. I think we estimated that we sent out about a thousand

00:06:14.658 --> 00:06:24.561
- emails, we received hundreds of emails and then would go back and respond to those. So a large chunk

00:06:24.561 --> 00:06:34.563
- of those emails arose simply by distributing the application itself. So it seemed like there would be

00:06:34.563 --> 00:06:43.486
- an easier way to manage all of this. And the vehicle for doing that or kind of the impetus

00:06:43.746 --> 00:06:57.140
- for doing that and one reason why ITS is here is accessibility. In April of this year, local governments

00:06:57.140 --> 00:07:10.023
- must make all web material and digital content compliant with new heightened standards. All of those

00:07:10.023 --> 00:07:12.702
- standards is to make

00:07:12.834 --> 00:07:21.978
- websites and documents more accessible to people with disabilities. That triggers any number of different

00:07:21.978 --> 00:07:30.863
- effects, but I think we've tried to view it as an opportunity to make the program leaner, smarter, and

00:07:30.863 --> 00:07:40.266
- more efficient. As a result of that, over the last several months, we've completely reworked the application

00:07:40.266 --> 00:07:42.078
- so that it's online,

00:07:42.530 --> 00:07:51.291
- We've reduced the number of pages. Cameron sat down with us several months ago and gave us some feedback

00:07:51.291 --> 00:08:00.052
- on what she thought would make sense from the perspective of a committee member. And you'll see portions

00:08:00.052 --> 00:08:08.729
- of the application tonight as a result of that. We've reworked the documents. There are very few. There

00:08:08.729 --> 00:08:10.398
- are no attachments.

00:08:10.722 --> 00:08:18.356
- to the application for accessibility reasons, we had to go in that direction. And actually, it seems

00:08:18.356 --> 00:08:25.914
- to make more sense. I think it'll be easier for applicants to complete. I think it'll be easier for

00:08:25.914 --> 00:08:32.867
- you to read, but we'll see. We'll be anxious to hear feedback from you after you use these.

00:08:32.867 --> 00:08:39.518
- And then finally, we're working to reduce the number of emails and electronic exchanges

00:08:39.810 --> 00:08:48.910
- with applicants. So we will be kind of kicking off the program and making the application available

00:08:48.910 --> 00:08:58.557
- without reach through coordinating with the Office of the Mayor, using different volunteer organizations,

00:08:58.557 --> 00:09:07.748
- and really cutting down on the emails going out to applicants. So please let us know as you're going

00:09:07.748 --> 00:09:09.022
- through this.

00:09:09.538 --> 00:09:17.024
- what you think about it, and if you have any ideas on how to improve it going forward. Thank you. And

00:09:17.024 --> 00:09:24.584
- there'll be different points tonight with Kari. Kari's put a lot of time into these materials, as well

00:09:24.584 --> 00:09:31.997
- as has ITS. Greg and Jeremy have been indispensable for us. We really thank you guys for all of your

00:09:31.997 --> 00:09:38.750
- work over the last several months. This has been in process for quite some time. Wonderful.

00:09:38.882 --> 00:09:47.225
- Thank you so much. Okay, so a little bit about our 2026 program eligibility guidelines and application

00:09:47.225 --> 00:09:55.731
- instructions. So there is a bit of a change from last year. Capital improvements funding will be limited

00:09:55.731 --> 00:10:04.236
- for 2026 only to projects located directly in Wilmington city limits. So that change was made on January

00:10:04.236 --> 00:10:05.694
- 7th of this year.

00:10:05.794 --> 00:10:12.136
- the common council adopted a resolution to update the Jack Hopkins program funding. So the resolution

00:10:12.136 --> 00:10:18.603
- states, the committee shall prioritize funding for programs and projects that serve city of Bloomington

00:10:18.603 --> 00:10:24.821
- residents and are delivered within the city limits. Programs or services delivered outside the city

00:10:24.821 --> 00:10:31.599
- limits may also be considered when the committee finds that they provide a direct measurable and substantial

00:10:31.599 --> 00:10:33.278
- benefit to city residents.

00:10:33.634 --> 00:10:41.506
- Capital improvements, however, may only be funded when the real property to be improved is located within

00:10:41.506 --> 00:10:49.230
- the city limits of Bloomington. So I remember, I think it was last year, we did fund the Electoral Boys

00:10:49.230 --> 00:10:56.805
- and Girls Club. We gave them some funding and we had a discussion about, did we feel that that served

00:10:56.805 --> 00:11:02.078
- the population of Bloomington, did we feel that it served our mission?

00:11:02.274 --> 00:11:10.224
- decided that at that time, but it did. So they'll be looking at things maybe a little bit differently

00:11:10.224 --> 00:11:18.018
- through slightly different terms this year. Those were given lower priority. You know, if they were

00:11:18.018 --> 00:11:25.969
- capital improvements, I don't think the LSW was the most focused capital improvement. Do you remember

00:11:25.969 --> 00:11:32.126
- what we funded for that one? Was it the doors project or was that really cool?

00:11:33.314 --> 00:11:42.434
- I think that was the Lincoln, yeah. Well, anyway, so that's a change for this year. So we have a new

00:11:42.434 --> 00:11:51.826
- application process this year, as was alluded to, using CiviForm. So I know Kari has been working there

00:11:51.826 --> 00:12:01.488
- with all of that. And the ITS department are going to provide us an overview of the application submission

00:12:01.488 --> 00:12:03.294
- and review process.

00:12:03.714 --> 00:12:10.734
- and they're here to answer our questions. So, shall I turn the floor over to you? All right, so the

00:12:10.734 --> 00:12:17.754
- platform we're using is called Civiform, C-I-V-I-F-O-R-M. They started out a project with Google in

00:12:17.754 --> 00:12:24.844
- the city of Seattle, where the city was like, we have all these application programs for assistance,

00:12:24.844 --> 00:12:31.934
- and it's a mess trying to coordinate it, so they went, they, so Google has an arm called google.org,

00:12:32.098 --> 00:12:38.715
- and they do philanthropy projects where Google employees can take six month fellowships, leave their

00:12:38.715 --> 00:12:45.398
- current jobs, still get paid, but work on these kinds of projects that aren't for common good. And so

00:12:45.398 --> 00:12:52.015
- it's a great opportunity for us. We're the second city to adopt civil reform. So we got to meet with

00:12:52.015 --> 00:12:58.764
- Google. They gave us 15 highly skilled engineers, project managers, communications people. It was just

00:12:58.764 --> 00:12:59.550
- astounding.

00:12:59.938 --> 00:13:06.782
- and they built our first set of forms in one day, actually on-site here meeting with us to build them

00:13:06.782 --> 00:13:13.492
- dynamically as we talk to them. And so we started with three programs and now we've expanded out to

00:13:13.492 --> 00:13:20.336
- about 20 or so programs. The 5.1 is really great that Google's for open source, so we get to share it

00:13:20.336 --> 00:13:27.315
- with other cities and we coordinate with all these other entities, the state of Arkansas, Seattle, city

00:13:27.315 --> 00:13:28.254
- of Charlotte,

00:13:28.546 --> 00:13:35.582
- Miami-Dade County, and we all share experiences and practice skills and keep continuing with the pilot.

00:13:35.582 --> 00:13:42.348
- It's also very easy to see the federal application center, and so that's a large benefit. It's also

00:13:42.348 --> 00:13:49.249
- very secure and meets all of the federal accessibility requirements on the interface, and it costs us

00:13:49.249 --> 00:13:56.014
- nothing to use, except for our staff time that we devote to maintaining the data. And so that's the

00:13:56.014 --> 00:13:56.894
- basis of it.

00:13:57.218 --> 00:14:03.864
- This is the first time we've done an application with size. This is, I think, the largest one that we've

00:14:03.864 --> 00:14:10.193
- done in terms of information gathered. And we're really excited to see how it works out. Jeremy, do

00:14:10.193 --> 00:14:15.953
- you have anything you want to add? Yeah. So the platform really began for, like, taking in

00:14:15.953 --> 00:14:22.282
- benefit information, like getting people with watering benefits to pool water their parks. And then

00:14:22.282 --> 00:14:26.270
- we expanded it with the ESD department to take in more grants.

00:14:26.658 --> 00:14:33.542
- and different kind of business law, not wellness, just race. And the platform school, we have it linked

00:14:33.542 --> 00:14:40.492
- up in Access Indiana. If you don't know what Access Indiana is, it is what you use if you're registering

00:14:40.492 --> 00:14:47.376
- your vote or doing any other kind of state service, except it would be in the, some reason they haven't

00:14:47.376 --> 00:14:54.327
- evaluated it. But we, so folks don't need to have them log in just for civil bondage when you use Access

00:14:54.327 --> 00:14:55.518
- Indiana for them.

00:14:56.194 --> 00:15:05.831
- So while CIVA form would be new for the Jack Hopkins application process, the great thing is we as a

00:15:05.831 --> 00:15:15.372
- city have a lot of experience using it and all of these other cities plus all of these smart Google

00:15:15.372 --> 00:15:22.814
- people have been working on this for a while too. So we feel like it's a safe

00:15:23.010 --> 00:15:32.074
- transition for us to make. And so I want to do maybe just a little bit of show and tell. The way that

00:15:32.074 --> 00:15:41.050
- we started this was Jeremy and I sat down and looked at the existing application form and started to

00:15:41.050 --> 00:15:50.025
- translate it into what would it look like for an online form instead. And once Jeremy had put all of

00:15:50.025 --> 00:15:51.358
- that together,

00:15:51.458 --> 00:15:59.180
- He put it into a test environment so that we can see what would this experience be like for an applicant?

00:15:59.180 --> 00:16:06.465
- How are they going to go through the process of reading the instructions and navigating through the

00:16:06.465 --> 00:16:13.969
- process? Then at the end of that, when you hit submit, I could put on a different hat and pretend that

00:16:13.969 --> 00:16:19.870
- I was a committee member and see what I was going to be reviewing at that point.

00:16:20.002 --> 00:16:32.317
- I'm going to, hopefully, share my screen. We'll just do this, but I'm going to try to do it different.

00:16:32.317 --> 00:16:43.198
- My Zoom is not playing around with me. Yes, there we go. Maybe that'll work. Or maybe not.

00:16:58.242 --> 00:17:05.687
- There we go. So this is the test environment. The link is provided in the agenda. If anybody wants to

00:17:05.687 --> 00:17:13.206
- go in and navigate around, I'm not going to fill out an application in front of you because that would

00:17:13.206 --> 00:17:20.943
- not be much fun for anybody to take a look at. But when people go in to apply, it will look very similar.

00:17:20.943 --> 00:17:22.622
- It will start out with

00:17:22.786 --> 00:17:28.812
- you know, start your application through some background information. You can create an account. People

00:17:28.812 --> 00:17:34.781
- don't have to. And if they already have an Access Indiana account, they don't need to do that. I would

00:17:34.781 --> 00:17:40.749
- imagine that some of these organizations may have an Access Indiana account already, which should make

00:17:40.749 --> 00:17:45.790
- it easy. If they create an account, they can save work along the way, come back to it.

00:17:45.890 --> 00:17:55.888
- which you can't do if you don't create an account. So we think that people probably do that. But what

00:17:55.888 --> 00:18:06.083
- was previously provided as instructions on the form will now just be in this form and people will start

00:18:06.083 --> 00:18:12.062
- their application and work their way through the process. So

00:18:12.194 --> 00:18:21.193
- I'm gonna switch now and show you, actually I'm gonna say just a couple of things about the application

00:18:21.193 --> 00:18:30.019
- itself. So the application questions are really largely the same as last year. We didn't see the need

00:18:30.019 --> 00:18:38.846
- to change those completely. It seemed to work to get the right information out. So an example of some

00:18:38.846 --> 00:18:41.182
- things that we did change,

00:18:41.282 --> 00:18:51.182
- Rather than asking for documents for people to submit, for example, the other IRS determination letter

00:18:51.182 --> 00:19:00.794
- for 501c3 status, we are instead, this year, going to ask them two pieces of information. One, what

00:19:00.794 --> 00:19:03.582
- is their tax ID number? Two,

00:19:04.002 --> 00:19:10.777
- What is the date of their determination letter from the IRS? Those are both pieces of information that

00:19:10.777 --> 00:19:17.552
- then we can use to verify that they're in good standing, that they have an active status with the IRS.

00:19:17.552 --> 00:19:24.524
- And we think that that will be a more streamlined way of doing it and avoid having to receive information

00:19:24.524 --> 00:19:31.102
- that is inherently not accessible because some of these organizations have been around for a while.

00:19:31.234 --> 00:19:38.959
- and they have old typed letters from the IRS. So we're hoping that that makes it a little bit easier

00:19:38.959 --> 00:19:47.067
- for all of us. Similarly, for financial statements, rather than asking them to submit however many number

00:19:47.067 --> 00:19:54.869
- of years of financial statements, we are instead going to have them do a project budget that is going

00:19:54.869 --> 00:19:55.710
- to give us

00:19:55.842 --> 00:20:08.095
- the key financial information that we really need for the organizations to know how they're planning

00:20:08.095 --> 00:20:21.076
- on making this project work overall. So just quickly what the output will look like for committee members.

00:20:21.076 --> 00:20:24.958
- If the committee were to accept

00:20:25.794 --> 00:20:36.485
- attachments like old exemption letters, et cetera, we would have to remediate those and make them accessible

00:20:36.485 --> 00:20:46.489
- in order to like make them part of the website or needing materials, et cetera. So it kind of removes

00:20:46.489 --> 00:20:49.726
- that aspect of the work to this.

00:20:50.178 --> 00:20:58.728
- My dogs decided to use the test environment to apply for a grant. And then it came to me to take a look

00:20:58.728 --> 00:21:07.031
- at. The nice thing about Subiform is once the application comes in, it can actually be downloaded in

00:21:07.031 --> 00:21:15.499
- a variety of ways. The easiest way to look at it at a glance is to just turn it into a PDF. And so you

00:21:15.499 --> 00:21:19.198
- can see here just an example of it gives the

00:21:19.394 --> 00:21:29.993
- You know, the questions or the information that is to be filled in the, and then it will provide the

00:21:29.993 --> 00:21:35.870
- applicants responses all the way through and, you know,

00:21:35.970 --> 00:21:42.107
- If somebody were to instead say, boy, I'd love to have this, you know, downloaded into a spreadsheet

00:21:42.107 --> 00:21:48.304
- or something else like that, we can do that as well. But we think this is probably the easiest way to

00:21:48.304 --> 00:21:51.646
- show, you know, for most people to be able to view it.

00:21:51.714 --> 00:21:59.765
- The one thing that we were also able to do is rather than having, you know, separate attachments with

00:21:59.765 --> 00:22:07.422
- financial information, we built into this a Google Sheet, which is that's their form of an Excel

00:22:07.554 --> 00:22:15.056
- spreadsheet, and it will allow them to download it and get all of their financial information. So this

00:22:15.056 --> 00:22:22.849
- will be where they tell us what their program budget is going to be, how much they think that this project

00:22:22.849 --> 00:22:30.279
- is going to cost, and then also what are their sources of funding, including what they would be using

00:22:30.279 --> 00:22:32.318
- besides Jack Hopkins funds.

00:22:32.418 --> 00:22:41.271
- It will also allow them to prioritize their projects. That was something that was a separate form last

00:22:41.271 --> 00:22:49.694
- year. And this year will just be pulled in to the application process. And then lastly, providing

00:22:49.794 --> 00:22:56.873
- any estimates that they got for any of the particular items that they're requesting funding for.

00:22:56.873 --> 00:23:04.170
- In the past, we had asked for quotes, once again, not wanting to necessarily cause people to submit

00:23:04.170 --> 00:23:11.614
- materials that won't be accessible. This is a way for them to provide that information and then it at

00:23:11.614 --> 00:23:19.422
- last comes back in that way. All right, that's a high level overview. And I think this is a great time for

00:23:19.554 --> 00:23:30.064
- questions, comments, reactions. Yes, that's number seven. Maybe a question to ideas. What type of outputs

00:23:30.064 --> 00:23:40.475
- can we export from the form? Should be CSV and JSON. Any other questions? I have one. So we talked about

00:23:40.475 --> 00:23:46.622
- putting this all on a PDF form, and that was how we would get

00:23:46.978 --> 00:23:54.537
- the results last year, all of the applications that we would look through in one really large PDF, which

00:23:54.537 --> 00:24:01.952
- is great because it's all in one spot, but would it be all one big PDF or one individual PDFs for each

00:24:01.952 --> 00:24:09.223
- application? Are you thinking? Yet to be determined, and I think that that's something that if there

00:24:09.223 --> 00:24:16.926
- was committee preference, we would love to hear that because I think it's possible to do it in either way.

00:24:17.154 --> 00:24:25.448
- One thing I completely forgot to say earlier is the application output for this, it's going to have

00:24:25.448 --> 00:24:33.826
- all the same information as committee members received last year. But I figured out that the maximum

00:24:33.826 --> 00:24:42.369
- length of application this year would be nine pages. And that's compared to, I think it was an average

00:24:42.369 --> 00:24:45.438
- of 25 pages per applicant last year.

00:24:45.570 --> 00:24:52.565
- It's cutting it by, I think, about 60% and a lot of it is just compressed in a better way. I don't know

00:24:52.565 --> 00:24:59.290
- that that necessarily means that there will be less reading. I just think it will be more efficient

00:24:59.290 --> 00:25:06.016
- reading. Is there any way we could do a shared folder with folders of each applicant so that way we

00:25:06.016 --> 00:25:11.262
- can easily jump from one folder to another rather than one big document? Yes.

00:25:11.842 --> 00:25:17.375
- Or is there, like, what's the interface like on the, like the review side? So do we have to export it

00:25:17.375 --> 00:25:23.126
- to review it? Or can we view it within Civilform? Yes. We can do it within Civilform? That's even better.

00:25:23.126 --> 00:25:28.605
- You're not going to download it at all. We can go, and is it all sort of, is it all rolled together?

00:25:28.605 --> 00:25:34.301
- Can you do like a control F on the whole purpose or? Yeah. That's cool. Oh, sweet. Yeah. My only request

00:25:34.301 --> 00:25:39.997
- was going to be if we did one large PDF, which I don't mind if we would just get it bookmarked for each.

00:25:39.997 --> 00:25:40.702
- I would say.

00:25:41.154 --> 00:25:49.227
- Again, I'm not, I'm just here to be advisor. Try to avoid PDF export. We can talk about this later.

00:25:49.227 --> 00:25:57.542
- It could be because what you see in the back end is going to be the same as we export them all as CSV.

00:25:57.542 --> 00:26:05.696
- It might be for the public better to provide me a CSV instead of a thousand page gigantic version of

00:26:05.696 --> 00:26:10.782
- PDF. That's awesome. That's a possibility. How can you provide

00:26:11.362 --> 00:26:19.266
- Feedback or review on the document as you're, you have to like leave comments, if there's a separate

00:26:19.266 --> 00:26:27.247
- document or even leave comments or questions. I think that would have to be done on an individual. Is

00:26:27.247 --> 00:26:35.386
- there a way we can send a form to create like a project that we can talk about potential like in either

00:26:35.386 --> 00:26:37.342
- the current application.

00:26:37.442 --> 00:26:43.833
- Maybe also could be per application per person. So each of us would have our own experience there. No.

00:26:43.833 --> 00:26:50.348
- So if you change the score for one application, all the other reviewers would see that change. But could

00:26:50.348 --> 00:26:56.614
- we have multiple scores? Like could you have, it would just be one score? Yeah, correct. So we could

00:26:56.614 --> 00:27:02.881
- use that for reporting generally, but we could have used that ourselves for marking on the document.

00:27:02.881 --> 00:27:07.038
- Yeah, right. Every vendor probably has like a spreadsheet with all

00:27:07.138 --> 00:27:15.672
- then have columns for each reviewer to store. Great. That's what the arts commission was done. So when

00:27:15.672 --> 00:27:24.039
- their committee members have gone in, they have a rubric, a Google Sheet, that's provided by ESXSET.

00:27:24.039 --> 00:27:32.325
- And that doesn't break any accessibility or open-vote months? You may. I already have an accessible

00:27:32.325 --> 00:27:35.390
- rubric, yes. Thank you. Sounds good.

00:27:37.538 --> 00:27:47.170
- Any other questions about the SIDF applications? All right. Should we take a vote on this part right

00:27:47.170 --> 00:27:57.088
- now? Ready for that part? Yes. At some point, you'll need to vote on the application. We haven't talked

00:27:57.088 --> 00:28:06.910
- about the program eligibility guidelines yet, right? Right. But you could vote on the application. OK.

00:28:07.618 --> 00:28:19.027
- Well, do I have a motion to approve this new application be a citizen? I'll make a motion. Second.

00:28:19.027 --> 00:28:30.550
- Thank you. All right. So I guess we'll do, well, we have to do a roll call vote. Yep. Oh, I do. Oh,

00:28:30.550 --> 00:28:34.238
- the power. Thank you. Isa. Yes.

00:28:35.618 --> 00:28:47.790
- Should I have someone by my side? Yes. Yes, if I vote. Andy? Yes. Eddie? Yes. Cameron? Yes. Catherine?

00:28:47.790 --> 00:28:59.726
- Yes. Dave? Yes. And I vote yes. It is passed unanimously. Thank you. So did we want to do the rubric

00:28:59.726 --> 00:29:03.390
- or the eligibility guidelines?

00:29:03.554 --> 00:29:14.174
- I think the eligibility guidelines. Did I skip over that? Or was there something that you guys had to share?

00:29:14.978 --> 00:29:24.337
- Program eligibility requirements were in the packet materials for the meeting and those are sort of

00:29:24.337 --> 00:29:34.444
- similar to the application. There aren't a lot of changes to them with the exception of the new restriction

00:29:34.444 --> 00:29:44.926
- on funding, the location for funding per capital project, improvement projects that Courtney just talked about.

00:29:45.538 --> 00:29:53.879
- Those are largely the same, but to address that issue that Lisa talked about, there's a lot of documents

00:29:53.879 --> 00:30:01.903
- and sometimes it's hard to decide. One document says it one way, another document says it a slightly

00:30:01.903 --> 00:30:10.165
- different way and how are we supposed to understand what it is. We instead consolidated everything into

00:30:10.165 --> 00:30:11.198
- one document

00:30:11.586 --> 00:30:19.888
- Um, that what we would propose to do is post that as a web page, um, you know, from, uh, the Jack Hawkins

00:30:19.888 --> 00:30:27.877
- committee landing page, posted as a webpage that then would have the link to some form for people to,

00:30:27.877 --> 00:30:33.438
- um, start to work on their applications. Um, so, um, you know, we can.

00:30:33.762 --> 00:30:41.426
- certainly walk through those guidelines now if everyone would like to do that. If there are particular

00:30:41.426 --> 00:30:48.942
- items that people would like to talk about, we can focus in on those as well. Or if it looks good to

00:30:48.942 --> 00:30:57.052
- everybody, that's the case too. But that's really an overview of what we did with the eligibility guidelines

00:30:57.052 --> 00:31:02.782
- this year. Did anybody have any questions about any of that or any concerns?

00:31:05.058 --> 00:31:11.937
- Would anybody not have a discussion on those or? Yeah. Any funding, less than $1,000. I think there

00:31:11.937 --> 00:31:19.161
- were just a couple last year. Yeah. I think we should raise the minimum because last year was a feedback

00:31:19.161 --> 00:31:25.696
- we gave to a bunch of folks that why didn't you apply for more? And I think that we inherently

00:31:25.696 --> 00:31:32.851
- set expectations lower. So I do think in terms of our sort of what the tool means, if we set it higher,

00:31:32.851 --> 00:31:34.846
- maybe we encourage people to

00:31:35.170 --> 00:31:41.955
- ask for things that are actually going to get the needs, like the transformative needs. And then I guess

00:31:41.955 --> 00:31:48.481
- we did have a handful of, like, the Special Olympics, I think, it won't be ever asked for. Yeah, and

00:31:48.481 --> 00:31:55.266
- I was in his army, and she was, like, started running from so... Right, yeah, good point. But she didn't

00:31:55.266 --> 00:32:02.245
- need that crazy money, she was just a kid. Yeah. Yeah, I don't know that we want to set, raise the minimum.

00:32:02.245 --> 00:32:04.830
- Thank you very much. Thank you. Thanks.

00:32:05.058 --> 00:32:11.735
- But I think maybe we can just try to be explicit, like, make it clear that, you know, in the past, when

00:32:11.735 --> 00:32:18.348
- people have asked for larger sums than were prepared to grant them, that doesn't mean they'll lose out

00:32:18.348 --> 00:32:25.025
- totally. That's why we asked them to break it down because we have in the past then looked at what they

00:32:25.025 --> 00:32:31.574
- prioritize and said, well, we can fund this part of their project, but not this one. So I think maybe

00:32:31.574 --> 00:32:34.142
- if we're just maybe clear on messaging,

00:32:34.498 --> 00:32:43.263
- that that's how we can do it. That might encourage people to shoot for the moon and stuff. And we're

00:32:43.263 --> 00:32:52.115
- not looking at putting a ceiling, right? We're just kind of leaving that open. We did talk last year,

00:32:52.115 --> 00:33:00.446
- Kam, remind me if we could, I think this was your idea, like the idea of having like a targeted

00:33:00.802 --> 00:33:06.744
- um, uh, expected, uh, awards and type of type of language, you know, like when you apply for stuff from

00:33:06.744 --> 00:33:12.515
- anywhere else, it says, you know, the pot is this, we expect to give this sort of give some sense to

00:33:12.515 --> 00:33:18.515
- people of, of where you're hoping that they apply. And then you, then that balances the limit, the lower

00:33:18.515 --> 00:33:24.229
- limit language, right? You're like, yeah, like we could give somebody a thousand dollars, but like,

00:33:24.229 --> 00:33:25.886
- we expect to give, you know,

00:33:26.466 --> 00:33:32.704
- 20 awards at 500,000 because people could sense it roughly where we're thinking. We're transparency

00:33:32.704 --> 00:33:39.068
- in our typical average award amount or number. I think that was true. I think last year the issue was

00:33:39.068 --> 00:33:45.306
- with the spectrum of awards or the requests we got in terms of low to high, which is really hard to

00:33:45.306 --> 00:33:48.862
- manage in our conversations. So I think if we're able to

00:33:49.026 --> 00:33:56.951
- transparent would be like, we want you to shoot for the moon. In all reality, our average award is typically

00:33:56.951 --> 00:34:04.221
- $32,000. And that might be a way to balance it. Yeah. And there was one request that was almost 50%

00:34:04.221 --> 00:34:11.782
- of what our budget was. And so that was really hard to wrap our brains around. Because, yeah, we wanted

00:34:11.782 --> 00:34:17.598
- them to shoot big. It's hard to then say in the other breath, but not that big.

00:34:17.730 --> 00:34:25.535
- Not too bad. Yeah, yeah. We did also talk about splitting the fund, right? So that you have a sort of

00:34:25.535 --> 00:34:33.341
- moonshot part of it. So then we were like, we want to give two big awards and then a bunch of average

00:34:33.341 --> 00:34:40.993
- awards or something like that. I mean, I think to your point, like how we ended up then evaluating,

00:34:40.993 --> 00:34:45.278
- I'm sorry, how we ended up evaluating, it's almost like

00:34:45.762 --> 00:34:51.905
- it does benefit you to apply for like $3,000 because if somebody applies for a hundred thousand, you're

00:34:51.905 --> 00:34:57.812
- out of pounds, $3,000. We'll deal with that one first, right? And so even though we might've ranked

00:34:57.812 --> 00:35:03.719
- some higher, we ended up fully funding some lowly, low ranked ones just because they didn't ask for

00:35:03.719 --> 00:35:09.685
- that much. And then, and it didn't fully fund some of our higher ranked ones. Like, so, I mean, that

00:35:09.685 --> 00:35:14.174
- does create a little bit of like attention to our rubric and our, you know,

00:35:16.610 --> 00:35:22.321
- Yeah, I mean, that's, that's tricky because we really use the rubric as more of a bad line, right? It's

00:35:22.321 --> 00:35:27.758
- to help us get things started and then we shift things from there. But partially that was because,

00:35:27.758 --> 00:35:33.305
- I mean, that, that happened in part because we had two people not able to fill it out and those were

00:35:33.305 --> 00:35:38.962
- very, you know, things outside of their hands, right? I mean, things happened, right? But, and so that

00:35:38.962 --> 00:35:44.728
- forced us to not take the rubric because of the way it threw everything off, right? Because it was like,

00:35:44.728 --> 00:35:46.046
- we got all these zeros.

00:35:46.498 --> 00:35:52.108
- You know, and so then people are doing, I would have given that a, right. So, so, so I just, I don't

00:35:52.108 --> 00:35:57.162
- know if I mean, I don't know if we have to adopt a rubric again or not, but. Well, in part

00:35:57.162 --> 00:36:02.772
- of the conversation, I wanted to have to, this is, this is, we're getting off track. No, no, no, no,

00:36:02.772 --> 00:36:08.382
- no. Cause I'm going down that path too. But I wanted to talk about making sure that we're all on the

00:36:08.382 --> 00:36:13.214
- same page when we get to the rubric conversation or what exactly we mean with certain.

00:36:13.410 --> 00:36:21.490
- because we all had different interpretations last year. We ramped this scene really poorly. We're all

00:36:21.490 --> 00:36:29.728
- just in a row. Okay. So as far as the eligibility guidelines goes, and I think, are we all saying we're

00:36:29.728 --> 00:36:37.967
- all doing pretty, why don't we, do I have a motion? So the motion that you got in your mind. What about

00:36:37.967 --> 00:36:42.878
- the eligibility guidelines as outlined in the map? I'm sorry.

00:36:43.170 --> 00:36:52.605
- to adopt the eligibility guidelines as outlined. I heard half of that, to adopt the eligibility guidelines

00:36:52.605 --> 00:37:01.423
- as outlined in our packet. Okay, thank you. Yeah, sorry. No, no problem. Okay, so we have a motion,

00:37:01.423 --> 00:37:10.328
- do I have a second? Second. Thank you. All right, let's take a vote. We're gonna start online. Dave?

00:37:10.328 --> 00:37:13.150
- Yes. Esau? Yes. Catherine? Yes.

00:37:13.506 --> 00:37:20.694
- Eddie? Andy? Yes. And I vote yes. Love has passed unanimously. Thank you. All right. So I believe now

00:37:20.694 --> 00:37:27.811
- actually is the portion. This is the part of the show where we talk about the rubric. So the scoring

00:37:27.811 --> 00:37:34.999
- rubric. So I think we all agreed because the first year we were all on this together. We did not have

00:37:34.999 --> 00:37:42.750
- our rubric. And that was really kind of like we were all flying by the seat of our pants. Just we had our own

00:37:43.202 --> 00:37:49.425
- We did really well, like all kind of coming together and figuring out what we wanted to do. We all were

00:37:49.425 --> 00:37:55.408
- ultimately on the same page, but when we adopted the rubric last year, that got us mentioned on the

00:37:55.408 --> 00:38:01.810
- same page. And I feel like it was, we all agreed by the end we had a bit better guidance. So if I remember

00:38:01.810 --> 00:38:08.332
- correctly, we all agreed that we wanted to continue doing a rubric for this year. Did anybody feel otherwise

00:38:08.332 --> 00:38:10.366
- or have problems with the rubric?

00:38:16.930 --> 00:38:23.647
- I haven't pulled up the rubric. I forgot. Would this be, for our next meeting, would we discuss more

00:38:23.647 --> 00:38:30.297
- in depth about the rubric? Okay, so we don't need to. This is just a general overview. Okay. Super.

00:38:30.297 --> 00:38:37.147
- Okay. So then I guess we're all on the same page. We want to do a rubric again and we can discuss what

00:38:37.147 --> 00:38:43.798
- exactly that looks like. But I think this gave us a really good foundation over the last years. You

00:38:43.798 --> 00:38:44.862
- did the rubric.

00:38:45.282 --> 00:38:53.001
- That was awesome. I have a question about the re-break. Is that section the same as the re-breakbook

00:38:53.001 --> 00:39:01.408
- separate? So there's a separate file for the re-break that we should send you. It incorporates the priorities

00:39:01.408 --> 00:39:09.280
- and the unlinkable requirements in the re-breakbook, but it's in the form of a spreadsheet. One of the

00:39:09.280 --> 00:39:12.414
- things that we did talk to ITS about was

00:39:12.674 --> 00:39:22.651
- making sure that we could both as it concerns use of the rubric in real time in the meeting, but then

00:39:22.651 --> 00:39:32.727
- also posting after the meeting for the public to see having that in a format that would be accessible.

00:39:32.727 --> 00:39:41.726
- And while I can't remember all of the details, I know that there were different things that

00:39:42.050 --> 00:39:49.481
- that Jeremy and Greg said that we could do that would make accessibility work with that. So I took that

00:39:49.481 --> 00:39:57.269
- as good news and something that they would have to help us with. Fantastic. All right. So any last questions

00:39:57.269 --> 00:40:04.557
- about incorporating the rubric or concerns? I have one question. I wanted to ask you. Is the goal for

00:40:04.557 --> 00:40:11.774
- getting these grants, is it for people to be weaned off or for people to apply as much as they want?

00:40:12.002 --> 00:40:19.273
- that they're serving. With that particular item that they're applying for. So there's a question on

00:40:19.273 --> 00:40:27.125
- there about, I forget exactly how it's phrased, but it does ask, moving forward in future years, especially

00:40:27.125 --> 00:40:34.687
- sometimes they're applying for a position, they're creating a new position that they don't have funded.

00:40:34.687 --> 00:40:38.686
- So the question becomes then, are you going to rely on

00:40:39.266 --> 00:40:46.305
- this grant funding year after year to keep funding this, which is not what we want. We want to help

00:40:46.305 --> 00:40:53.344
- get them started, but we don't want somebody relying 100% on funding from us to keep somebody's job

00:40:53.344 --> 00:41:00.383
- growing, for example. I have one thought about, can we have breaks between the homework of everyone

00:41:00.383 --> 00:41:07.422
- making comments on the rubric that we bring to the next meeting? That's a good idea. Yeah, so maybe

00:41:07.422 --> 00:41:08.830
- it'll make the year

00:41:09.378 --> 00:41:17.274
- So we're, we're ready. We're not thinking of things. Yeah. Cause I wanted to go back and look through

00:41:17.274 --> 00:41:25.247
- the rubric to, to jog my memory. You're like, Oh, what was the part that I questioned? The scoring was

00:41:25.247 --> 00:41:33.066
- constricted. The scoring was hard because like the way that we were scoring things made it difficult

00:41:33.066 --> 00:41:37.246
- to make decisions on some of the parts of the rubric.

00:41:37.506 --> 00:41:43.717
- I think a lot of that was actually just the point system that we used because it didn't actually give

00:41:43.717 --> 00:41:49.868
- you any variability, right? It was like, get it or don't get it. So then we all started trying to do

00:41:49.868 --> 00:41:56.018
- like 0.5 things, right? Where I think a lot of the issues would just be solved by us turning it to a

00:41:56.018 --> 00:42:02.229
- 10-pointer scale, because then you can, everything, you just say, yeah, yes, I like this, but I don't

00:42:02.229 --> 00:42:05.822
- like it as much as the other thing or something like that.

00:42:06.434 --> 00:42:12.797
- Yeah, and some of the scoring blocks were just very straightforward, where it was like, well,

00:42:12.797 --> 00:42:20.040
- they automatically get these points. It automatically raises them. Exactly. Even if we personally disagree

00:42:20.040 --> 00:42:27.283
- with that score. Right. So there was that conversation of, well, the river gave them this, but I disagree.

00:42:27.283 --> 00:42:34.188
- Right. So. Hey, Courtney, can I ask a question? Yes. Yes. I guess I got to shut out. Just in terms of

00:42:34.188 --> 00:42:36.286
- clarification for eligibility,

00:42:36.450 --> 00:42:44.558
- I mean, clearly we're interested in proposals that are, um, filling a need for in the community and

00:42:44.558 --> 00:42:52.747
- also, um, you know, obviously have a high potential for success and also, um, it might take a couple

00:42:52.747 --> 00:43:00.774
- of years to take off. So it doesn't necessarily disqualify them if they come back. In other words,

00:43:00.774 --> 00:43:04.990
- you know, if they're trying something new and it's,

00:43:05.858 --> 00:43:13.325
- you know, there's a chance of a very, you know, high output. Um, maybe they need to help in successive

00:43:13.325 --> 00:43:20.865
- years, but maybe not as much. I mean, is that, I mean, that's my consideration, at least, that I'd like

00:43:20.865 --> 00:43:28.405
- to give people a bit of slack in terms of they may reapply in successive years. It's just that we don't

00:43:28.405 --> 00:43:35.582
- want, what you were saying, I believe, I don't mean to put words in your mouth, but you, you were,

00:43:35.714 --> 00:43:43.938
- sort of pointing to that we don't want a dependency of a program necessarily year after year, because

00:43:43.938 --> 00:43:52.162
- we've got a lot of applicants. We want to make sure that they reach out elsewhere. Yeah, I think they

00:43:52.162 --> 00:44:00.224
- want to see their expectation of dependency. We want to set that expectation that they are going to

00:44:00.224 --> 00:44:04.094
- ultimately be able to fund this some other way.

00:44:05.474 --> 00:44:11.524
- But yeah, I think that can be a case-by-case basis for each of us as we're grading, too, to evaluate.

00:44:11.524 --> 00:44:17.455
- Maybe they're coming back to fund the same thing, but look at the strides they've made. And they're

00:44:17.455 --> 00:44:23.682
- asking for less, because this is how they're also getting funding to supply this. So I don't think it's,

00:44:23.682 --> 00:44:29.613
- for some people, it might be an automatic no. For others, it might be, well, no, no, no, let's have

00:44:29.613 --> 00:44:35.070
- a conversation about this. I think that's fair. OK, we're on the same page. Thank you. Yep.

00:44:36.098 --> 00:44:43.768
- Yes. I think, I think to that point it's, uh, like I was, uh, I are, I are, uh, Indiana. They're a really

00:44:43.768 --> 00:44:51.437
- great example. They've come, they've shown that we give them funding and then they're able to incorporate

00:44:51.437 --> 00:44:58.673
- whatever it is that we funded into their stream. And then they come and ask for something else like

00:44:58.673 --> 00:45:04.606
- to Dave's point. Yeah, absolutely. I think that's what we want to see. All right.

00:45:06.434 --> 00:45:15.204
- Should we think about on the rubric, approving using the rubric? Well, I don't know. I can't remember

00:45:15.204 --> 00:45:23.802
- what Isak was suggesting more about, just an overall temp on skin. I feel like I remember that year

00:45:23.802 --> 00:45:32.401
- with the rubric. Maybe I'm misremembering it, but having trouble. Because some rubric categories or

00:45:32.401 --> 00:45:35.582
- some rubric scoring points were just

00:45:36.354 --> 00:45:41.778
- the category or that aspect was much more significant or important in my view than another score that

00:45:41.778 --> 00:45:47.201
- each gained points. Yeah, equally weighted. Yeah, I felt like that was a problem for me. Yeah, that's

00:45:47.201 --> 00:45:52.518
- a great point. Well, I think that's what we ran into last year when we were building it, is like we

00:45:52.518 --> 00:45:57.835
- didn't have a lot of free work time. We kind of collaborated and put the rubric together, so it was

00:45:57.835 --> 00:46:03.259
- kind of like room spaghetti at the wall. And I feel like now that we have this cycle in there, I felt

00:46:03.259 --> 00:46:05.758
- it would be easier to really refine it to make

00:46:06.146 --> 00:46:16.381
- the things we care about, like the values of each of us here, very much here. And it was color coded,

00:46:16.381 --> 00:46:26.515
- because as you entered your answers for certain things, it automatically colored coded, so you get a

00:46:26.515 --> 00:46:33.438
- pretty good overview just by going by colors, reading red or yellow.

00:46:33.954 --> 00:46:43.485
- Is the vote to adopt the rubric or to use a rubric? To use a rubric. Okay, then so moved. Second.

00:46:43.485 --> 00:46:53.599
- Thank you. All right. Andy? Yes. Eddie? Yes. Cameron? Yes. Catherine? Yes. Esau? Absolutely. Dave? Yes.

00:46:53.599 --> 00:47:03.518
- And I vote yes. Past unanimously again. Look at us go. All right. I think that's everything for that.

00:47:04.546 --> 00:47:15.338
- Now we're gonna talk about the process and the schedule. Okay, so do you want me to talk about the grant

00:47:15.338 --> 00:47:25.822
- marketing and promotion? Sure. Sure. Okay. Or we can, I mean we can buy. Well, you guys probably know

00:47:25.822 --> 00:47:32.606
- a little more than I do. Yeah, do you want me to jump in on this?

00:47:34.498 --> 00:47:43.188
- Lisa mentioned that last year we sent out a whole bunch of emails to a list that I think had been compiled

00:47:43.188 --> 00:47:51.554
- over a period of time and I call it a Frankenstein list. You're probably all familiar with those that,

00:47:51.554 --> 00:47:58.782
- you know, half of them bounce back because that person is no longer in the organization.

00:47:59.106 --> 00:48:05.279
- And what we really found also was in the surveys that we're getting back from applicants, that email

00:48:05.279 --> 00:48:11.513
- wasn't the primary way that they were actually hearing about the program anyway. So rather than doing

00:48:11.513 --> 00:48:14.814
- that big old email, what we talked about this year is

00:48:15.074 --> 00:48:22.723
- doing some of the other things that we've always done, which is issue a press release, put it on the

00:48:22.723 --> 00:48:30.600
- page, do, you know, a little bit of outreach but we're going to enhance that. First of all, the mayor's

00:48:30.600 --> 00:48:32.190
- office has agreed to

00:48:32.994 --> 00:48:40.430
- Send out from their distribution list for press releases our press release and then also posted on the

00:48:40.430 --> 00:48:47.794
- website for the city, they would do some social media for us, which is fantastic because they're much

00:48:47.794 --> 00:48:49.310
- better at that than.

00:48:49.666 --> 00:48:57.271
- than we are and that we would also do some coordinated outreach with the Bloomington Volunteer Network

00:48:57.271 --> 00:49:04.950
- that is, that lives with NCFRD and some of the other local organizations that are really linked in with

00:49:04.950 --> 00:49:13.072
- the not-for-profit communities. So, you know, we'll especially once we know here shortly what the application

00:49:13.072 --> 00:49:17.502
- window is going to be, we would kick all of that into here.

00:49:18.242 --> 00:49:25.406
- And if anybody has suggestions for additional things, bring them up now, or feel free to send us an

00:49:25.406 --> 00:49:33.072
- email. The reality, most of these organizations have this on their radar already. And in fact, I'm getting

00:49:33.072 --> 00:49:40.738
- some telephone messages, hey, when is Jack Hoffman's going to start? When will be the technical assistance

00:49:40.738 --> 00:49:47.902
- meeting, that type of thing. So people are looking for this too. Yeah. We mostly, we want, we want,

00:49:48.418 --> 00:49:58.729
- Newer organizations sure. Yeah. And that's, and that's why we're incorporating some of these volunteer

00:49:58.729 --> 00:50:08.840
- organizations to help spread the word about this too, so that there could be new applicants as well.

00:50:08.840 --> 00:50:17.950
- I'd be excited. Okay. So, speaking of when the applications are going to be available. So,

00:50:18.242 --> 00:50:25.443
- the recommendation for opening that application window is next Tuesday, so a week from today,

00:50:25.443 --> 00:50:33.257
- February 17th, and then closing it on March 10th. So giving a full solid three weeks for the agencies

00:50:33.257 --> 00:50:41.148
- to get their applications in. And at some point during that time, staff is going to host the technical

00:50:41.148 --> 00:50:47.966
- assistance meeting for applicants. So anybody who needs some help can come and get that.

00:50:48.578 --> 00:50:56.410
- Any questions about any of that? How do you guys feel about that window? Three weeks, those dates, that

00:50:56.410 --> 00:51:03.941
- sounds good. That was going to be one of the things I want to make sure that we have a conversation

00:51:03.941 --> 00:51:11.472
- about ahead of time because that happened the past two years and we always kind of struggle with it

00:51:11.472 --> 00:51:18.174
- afterwards. Even though it says no late applications, we then had a discussion about it.

00:51:18.786 --> 00:51:25.503
- after it happens. So I think we should set right now. And also in the messaging that we send out, whatever

00:51:25.503 --> 00:51:31.342
- we're going to do. I know in the messaging in the past years, it has said we will not accept

00:51:31.342 --> 00:51:37.808
- late applications. And I think I went over that in the technical assistance meeting last year as well.

00:51:37.808 --> 00:51:40.382
- This new application process can be set.

00:51:40.706 --> 00:51:46.402
- If you do not want to accept applications after a date, we can set it up so that you can't

00:51:46.402 --> 00:51:52.660
- submit applications. I remember one year somebody submitted maybe like eight minutes. That was last

00:51:52.660 --> 00:51:58.919
- year. Was it last year? Yeah. And then I think the year before, I don't remember, was it maybe just

00:51:58.919 --> 00:52:05.366
- like a few hours? Wasn't someone able to prove some kind of technical difficulty at one time for their

00:52:05.366 --> 00:52:10.686
- late submission? I don't know. Last year was my only year working with Jack Hopkins.

00:52:11.874 --> 00:52:18.822
- That wasn't the case last year, but I wasn't involved in a prior year, so it may happen. Why don't we

00:52:18.822 --> 00:52:25.839
- say something like Monday, like the actual deadline is Monday at 8 a.m., but obviously we're not going

00:52:25.839 --> 00:52:33.127
- to be available to check things between Friday and Monday, so we recommend that you get it done by Friday,

00:52:33.127 --> 00:52:40.007
- like as an example, right? So if there are technical issues, people can fly again, et cetera. Right,

00:52:40.007 --> 00:52:41.438
- so we're looking at,

00:52:41.634 --> 00:52:47.891
- the deadline of on a Tuesday. So do you think we should do it from a Monday to a Monday? Are you saying?

00:52:47.891 --> 00:52:53.970
- I was just thinking, I was just thinking that intellectually for, I mean, psychologically give people

00:52:53.970 --> 00:53:00.108
- Tuesday, they might start it on Friday. So if you tell them that it's Monday, then they do it over the

00:53:00.108 --> 00:53:06.425
- weekend. And I'm just thinking like, you don't get, yeah, I don't know. It just seems like a more natural

00:53:06.425 --> 00:53:09.822
- time than a Friday or a Monday. Yeah. Well, that's true.

00:53:10.882 --> 00:53:18.286
- or that just natural rhythm of the deadlines. But how do we feel about late application? Do we want

00:53:18.286 --> 00:53:25.839
- to consider them? Do we want to have a race period? Does anybody have any? I don't see any purpose in

00:53:25.839 --> 00:53:33.318
- like, like our purpose here is to get money into the hands of organizations. Number one, that should

00:53:33.318 --> 00:53:40.574
- be like our main goal. I get the like, it's like fair and stuff. I get all that, right? But like,

00:53:41.346 --> 00:53:47.846
- If those are in contrast, then which one do you choose? I just don't see the reason for us being bureaucrats

00:53:47.846 --> 00:53:53.988
- about at the end of the day, the goal here is not to make it difficult for people to get funding. It's

00:53:53.988 --> 00:53:59.952
- actually quite the opposite. We want to give people money, and they need to give us the opportunity

00:53:59.952 --> 00:54:02.814
- to do so. I just feel like it makes more sense.

00:54:02.946 --> 00:54:10.012
- But I mean, I also take the argument that it's like, if we leave it up to us and then we have one who

00:54:10.012 --> 00:54:17.008
- is 20 hours late and we accept and another who's 20 hours and 10 minutes, we go, ah, that was just a

00:54:17.008 --> 00:54:24.074
- little too long. You know, I would. If we do that, then it might give some people an unfair, maybe an

00:54:24.074 --> 00:54:31.902
- unfair advantage if they had no time to do that. Yeah, it's true. We have a three week window and it's not like,

00:54:32.706 --> 00:54:39.004
- he don't get enough application. Yeah, that's true. So, I mean, I sympathize, but at the same time,

00:54:39.004 --> 00:54:45.365
- other folks have deadlines. Yeah, that's true. And we have, you know, our time to review stuff, too.

00:54:45.365 --> 00:54:51.663
- Things keep getting added, things like that. That's our time, too. What's the turnover between when

00:54:51.663 --> 00:54:58.276
- you get the application and when you all, or us, start reviewing them? So, can you just push it, I mean,

00:54:58.276 --> 00:55:02.622
- like, make it the compromise, or just push it up a little very last?

00:55:02.850 --> 00:55:08.044
- of minute before we actually read it or we already did that. Easier would be easier, right? Could you

00:55:08.044 --> 00:55:13.186
- give an example of what you mean? I'm not sure. Yeah, like sometimes there'll be deadlines, okay, or

00:55:13.186 --> 00:55:18.736
- if we ask for something on a Monday, but we're not actually moving that into the next Wednesday or something

00:55:18.736 --> 00:55:24.286
- like that. I don't know what it looks like for you all internally, but it's like, can we just push it versus

00:55:24.482 --> 00:55:30.791
- getting like a bigger window of time between when they submit it and when we actually need it and just

00:55:30.791 --> 00:55:37.223
- like push it up to the last minute. So basically you're saying that we started doing applications today.

00:55:37.223 --> 00:55:42.920
- Yeah. Yeah. I mean, like essentially there could be some flexibility there because then it's

00:55:42.920 --> 00:55:49.168
- less bureaucratic and more like we're doing it. We're doing the work right now. So we need, you know,

00:55:49.168 --> 00:55:52.414
- so we can't accept anymore. So that's, I don't know.

00:55:53.922 --> 00:56:01.616
- And there may be more opportunity to do that now with this type of application and the responses in

00:56:01.616 --> 00:56:10.003
- the prior years. We think of them that the application closes out on this date. I mean, that means something

00:56:10.003 --> 00:56:18.005
- to people, like, you know, when you go into your taxes and then you have to get them done by the night.

00:56:18.005 --> 00:56:22.622
- Well, and if the application actually is inaccessible after

00:56:23.170 --> 00:56:30.836
- as a very specific date and time, and we can make that clear ahead of time that this link will not be

00:56:30.836 --> 00:56:38.577
- active after. Sarah, wait, like if someone's working on an application and we close it out and there's

00:56:38.577 --> 00:56:46.168
- an open application, that person has time to finish that application. I don't know. We can ask ideas

00:56:46.168 --> 00:56:47.070
- about that.

00:56:47.714 --> 00:56:55.524
- Just my two cents, I want to say I agree with Eddie. I think that three weeks is adequate. I think a

00:56:55.524 --> 00:57:03.256
- lot of these agencies or these groups are anticipating applying anyway, so they have an idea of how

00:57:03.256 --> 00:57:11.297
- to package it and what to do. I think it gives an unfair advantage to those that drop it in late. Well,

00:57:11.297 --> 00:57:14.622
- I think the fact that we're not asking for

00:57:14.818 --> 00:57:21.249
- you know, two or three years of financial records helps. I think that's probably, oftentimes they'll

00:57:21.249 --> 00:57:28.063
- hold up. So that will make it easier for them to get in on time. Let's look at the advantage of submitting

00:57:28.063 --> 00:57:34.495
- an application late. And then if someone submits an application on time and there's errors, is there

00:57:34.495 --> 00:57:40.926
- time for them to correct or amend? And you know, you can bring an equal sign to do that in the past.

00:57:41.282 --> 00:57:47.411
- Or is it just if it's wrong, it's incomplete, and then it's out? I mean, the forms need to be settled

00:57:47.411 --> 00:57:53.660
- in. Yeah. That's going to be a big problem. We have to ask them to submit documents they didn't submit.

00:57:53.660 --> 00:57:59.729
- That's something that I'm pretty much. I'm giving an extra hour to submit an application. I'm pretty

00:57:59.729 --> 00:58:05.738
- much. There's not a thing. Look, they were there scribbling. Yeah. Like, so I'm really going to get

00:58:05.738 --> 00:58:08.382
- it at 1 AM. Which happens. Yeah. All right.

00:58:08.578 --> 00:58:15.970
- Am I understanding then that we're all in agreement that we do now? Does anybody hear me? What I'm hearing

00:58:15.970 --> 00:58:23.087
- is a majority saying we do not want to accept late applications. Is there any disagreement? I know you

00:58:23.087 --> 00:58:30.134
- feel, but do you have any strong feelings or any disagreement across the board that you want to fight

00:58:30.134 --> 00:58:36.766
- for? No, no, no, no. It's fine. So we're going to be strict about the deadline is the deadline.

00:58:37.058 --> 00:58:43.062
- It just hit a natural deadline because like, you know, Tuesday at 12 or something, it's like a really

00:58:43.062 --> 00:58:49.007
- random deadline. Yeah. Would it work then instead of doing that Tuesday to Tuesday to make it Monday

00:58:49.007 --> 00:58:55.306
- the 16th to Monday the 9th? Is that going to be a burden on? I don't think so. I think it would be Tuesday

00:58:55.306 --> 00:59:01.310
- to Tuesday because if it's Monday, if you're someone who's filling out something from an application,

00:59:01.602 --> 00:59:14.080
- on during the weekend, then there's an issue on Monday. Good point. Good point. Good point. Good point.

00:59:14.080 --> 00:59:25.598
- Good point. Good point. Good point. Good point. Good point. Good point. Good point. Good point.

00:59:25.598 --> 00:59:28.478
- Good point. Good point.

00:59:29.314 --> 00:59:36.842
- The Tuesday to Tuesday. Yeah. Could you wrote on that topic of no late applications? And then we'll

00:59:36.842 --> 00:59:44.520
- use that as a basis for working with ITS to set that up. Awesome. Yeah. So who's going to, so then we

00:59:44.520 --> 00:59:52.199
- want to make a motion on the no late application rules. Oh, we'll make a motion. Thank you. Can I get

00:59:52.199 --> 00:59:57.694
- a second? Thank you. All right. I'll do roll call starting with Cameron.

00:59:59.202 --> 01:00:09.004
- Catherine. Yes. Isaac. No, just to be fun. I mean, so can't have everything be, you know. Our little

01:00:09.004 --> 01:00:19.097
- contrarian. Dave. Yes. I'll vote yes. Andy. Yes. Eddie. Yes. And I vote yes. If this happens and you're

01:00:19.097 --> 01:00:25.502
- all like all softies, I'm going to be like, remember I fucked up.

01:00:25.698 --> 01:00:35.703
- We will not allow late applications, so we will set the application to close at the specified time.

01:00:35.703 --> 01:00:46.109
- Yeah. If there's something on the city side, things go down. Do you want to amend your motion? I don't.

01:00:46.109 --> 01:00:54.814
- Some plus one, at less. Should we take that into consideration if something goes down?

01:00:55.010 --> 01:01:04.165
- Yes. I would like to amend the motion and offer if there's technical issues on the city of Wilmington

01:01:04.165 --> 01:01:13.320
- side, then we will. Yeah. So we don't accept late things unless it's our fault. Yes. Yes. We'll offer

01:01:13.320 --> 01:01:18.526
- a grace period for ourselves. We're thinking demonstrate.

01:01:18.658 --> 01:01:31.233
- something on their side. I suspect we'd be able to tell that from from SIPA form that ITS to help us

01:01:31.233 --> 01:01:45.054
- identify that and then we want to add an addendum to that motion or it's already been voted on. Right. I mean,

01:01:45.442 --> 01:01:54.008
- It has to be a new motion, right? It has to be a new motion. Yeah. That's what I meant. Okay. Do we

01:01:54.008 --> 01:02:02.659
- want to make a new motion to allow late applications only when it's a city error? Is that the motion

01:02:02.659 --> 01:02:11.396
- I'm looking for? Or it can be for them, that it's not an issue on their own. Do you still move? I do.

01:02:11.396 --> 01:02:15.422
- I move. If someone could restate that, please.

01:02:15.522 --> 01:02:27.034
- The reason to allow the applications if there is a city and then if there's a city error or the applicant

01:02:27.034 --> 01:02:38.111
- can prove there was a technical error on their end. Or if somebody can prove that their cat would get

01:02:38.111 --> 01:02:42.238
- off their lap. That's happened to me.

01:02:42.722 --> 01:02:51.427
- Their dog was talking to their people to put up their grant. Okay, so we have the motion. Can I get

01:02:51.427 --> 01:03:00.567
- a second? I'll second. Thank you. Uh, Dave? Yes. Andy? Yes. Eddie? Yes. Catherine? Yes. Sorry, I skipped

01:03:00.567 --> 01:03:07.966
- you, Cameron. He saw you. And I vote yes. We have another unanimous vote. Thank you.

01:03:08.098 --> 01:03:14.723
- And one other question, in the previous book, there was a name. That's correct. I mean, I'm almost,

01:03:14.723 --> 01:03:21.678
- I was almost offended when she was like, let me know how did that say? Did I say it was unanimous? Yeah,

01:03:21.678 --> 01:03:28.303
- it didn't feel seen. I totally apologize. I will not do that to you again. Oh, thanks. Okay, super.

01:03:28.303 --> 01:03:34.994
- So now we need to talk about our schedules moving forward. Now that we have all that settled, do we,

01:03:34.994 --> 01:03:37.246
- I'm so sorry, do we need to take,

01:03:37.954 --> 01:03:44.034
- Make a motion about the dates for the application window, or is that just something we can set? We did

01:03:44.034 --> 01:03:50.291
- that already. We did not. We talked about and debated it, but we decided to keep it that Tuesday. Tuesday

01:03:50.291 --> 01:03:56.253
- to Tuesday, right? Yeah, the 17th through the 10th. I think let's go with that. That doesn't have to

01:03:56.253 --> 01:04:01.566
- be in a more timely manner. I mean, you can. Oh, that's why I was asking, did we need to?

01:04:01.986 --> 01:04:09.507
- I don't know that you have to, but we don't have to. We love voting. All right. So for the application

01:04:09.507 --> 01:04:17.027
- review, we're going to then, after they're due on March 10, there's a lot of magic that happens behind

01:04:17.027 --> 01:04:24.548
- the scenes. A lot of really hard work before we then touch them. So then the committee meets to review

01:04:24.548 --> 01:04:30.462
- and discuss all of those applications, to talk about our questions that we have.

01:04:31.426 --> 01:04:38.624
- And then that's where we figure out which agencies we want to invite into question. So in most years

01:04:38.624 --> 01:04:45.964
- past, we had a night where every agency who applied came in for a small presentation. I think they had

01:04:45.964 --> 01:04:53.233
- like five minutes and then we could ask them questions. And it was a very long night. So last year we

01:04:53.233 --> 01:04:55.870
- changed it up and we only brought in

01:04:56.098 --> 01:05:02.872
- Agencies that we had questions specific questions for that. We wanted a little more information about

01:05:02.872 --> 01:05:09.513
- their applications Still turned out to be a majority of yeah But there was some there was a healthy

01:05:09.513 --> 01:05:16.419
- handful that we didn't it was a much shorter time. There's a lot that we brought in Or do we still want

01:05:16.419 --> 01:05:19.806
- to do it that way this year just the agencies that

01:05:19.938 --> 01:05:27.075
- I like that. They leave us questioning. We saved like three hours doing that. And more importantly,

01:05:27.075 --> 01:05:34.356
- the agency saved that time. So it's like, we shouldn't bring them through for a horse and buggy thing

01:05:34.356 --> 01:05:41.707
- if their time is so limited. I've received positive feedback from applicants about that. True. We make

01:05:41.707 --> 01:05:49.630
- a policy that if they give them the option, in other words, we're satisfied with what we've received from you.

01:05:49.858 --> 01:05:57.819
- is one possibility. Another possibility is, we are reserving some time. If you want to come in and talk

01:05:57.819 --> 01:06:05.857
- for five minutes, we're happy, but we don't need that. I think it's only fair to open it up to the other

01:06:05.857 --> 01:06:13.742
- agencies to give equal time. Here's a comment that I heard from somebody because I asked that question

01:06:13.742 --> 01:06:16.574
- and a couple of the applicants said,

01:06:17.122 --> 01:06:24.143
- If you offer that, then everybody will accept it out of fear that they'll be punished for not correct.

01:06:24.143 --> 01:06:31.095
- Exactly. That's a good point. Did we have any good faith that it did not influence our decision? Yes.

01:06:31.095 --> 01:06:38.048
- I actually think that we had, that we ended up ranking the people who we didn't, basically the people

01:06:38.048 --> 01:06:39.070
- we didn't ask.

01:06:39.682 --> 01:06:45.856
- Sorry. I'm going to say no. I'm going to say that I actually have the opposite effect, though, than

01:06:45.856 --> 01:06:52.092
- I would have theorized, right? That the people we didn't ask, we sort of already ranked high is sort

01:06:52.092 --> 01:06:58.389
- of the way I think we ended up choosing who we were voting for. I don't think we invited anybody that

01:06:58.389 --> 01:07:04.625
- we were like, oh my gosh, yeah, this is the home run. It's clarifications on projects and some other

01:07:04.625 --> 01:07:09.502
- things. Yeah. So it's more like technical stuff when Joe and Frank pitched up.

01:07:10.050 --> 01:07:17.308
- Which is like, is there a way we can do whatever email or have them explain something in a recording

01:07:17.308 --> 01:07:20.542
- if we have a question. I honestly don't like

01:07:21.154 --> 01:07:26.980
- Yeah. The optics even of them approaching our decision-making table and it feels like they're making

01:07:26.980 --> 01:07:32.921
- a case and it feels like that's how they're approaching it and the questions that were like it creates

01:07:32.921 --> 01:07:38.747
- this power dynamic that makes me feel more uncomfortable even though we did it last year. Yeah. Am I

01:07:38.747 --> 01:07:44.918
- remembering correctly, did we last year just send a couple of email questions to a couple of the agencies?

01:07:44.918 --> 01:07:50.398
- Yes. It was more than that. Yeah. Sam and I took notes during the meeting and then afterwards,

01:07:50.914 --> 01:07:58.405
- contacted multiple agencies with a list of questions. And in some cases, there were only two questions.

01:07:58.405 --> 01:08:05.896
- In other cases, there were more in-depth questions. And so it varied. And some of our questions because

01:08:05.896 --> 01:08:13.315
- the nature of the packet last year was so long. And so some of the questions I also noticed was we had

01:08:13.315 --> 01:08:19.582
- some snarky responses of, if you would have seen this in my answer on page X, Y, or Z,

01:08:19.682 --> 01:08:27.259
- which we didn't because there were so many pages. So maybe this system would, you know, maybe the system

01:08:27.259 --> 01:08:34.548
- that we have now would make things clearer, but I also think we could easily not ask them to come in

01:08:34.548 --> 01:08:42.125
- when they want to speak to us. So essentially to email questions out and request email responses. That's

01:08:42.125 --> 01:08:49.342
- how I feel about it. Can I add something? Sorry, I didn't mean to interrupt. Go ahead. Just to say,

01:08:50.114 --> 01:08:57.127
- You know, I brought this up last year and that is, and I'm perfectly fine with what the proposal is,

01:08:57.127 --> 01:09:04.070
- which as I understand it, that we only invite in if we have questions. But there was a time when we

01:09:04.070 --> 01:09:11.013
- would invite everybody to do a presentation. And the utility of that was that it would be broadcast

01:09:11.013 --> 01:09:17.470
- to the community and people would learn about what these social service agencies were doing.

01:09:18.370 --> 01:09:24.885
- And even if we couldn't fund them or fund them fully, you know, the word got out and people would contribute.

01:09:24.885 --> 01:09:30.986
- So it was sort of their chance to sort of, you know, be on cats and make a case for what they're doing

01:09:30.986 --> 01:09:37.027
- and why they needed funding. I realized things have changed. I realized there are far more applicants

01:09:37.027 --> 01:09:43.009
- now. It would just be ungainly probably to open. This is when we had maybe 20 applicants in the past

01:09:43.009 --> 01:09:43.838
- or something.

01:09:44.738 --> 01:09:51.056
- But it did have that utility. And I just wanted to say that for the record, that it was, I thought it

01:09:51.056 --> 01:09:57.312
- was a good system while it lasted. So that's all. Thanks. Yeah, thank you. And I understand a lot of

01:09:57.312 --> 01:10:03.568
- this is about, we're trying to get to the heart of equity for all of these groups. So that's tragic.

01:10:03.568 --> 01:10:09.824
- Yes. Something we might think about, I probably have not enough time to do now, but with the new way

01:10:09.824 --> 01:10:13.726
- that we're using our forums, that you actually could have them

01:10:14.050 --> 01:10:19.718
- basically give a little video type of thing of themselves that you could then post on a, like we should

01:10:19.718 --> 01:10:25.223
- think a little bit more about how we, not again, not for this year, but just something for us all to

01:10:25.223 --> 01:10:30.728
- think about is like, how do we make a loop of like stuff coming in and that actually results in data

01:10:30.728 --> 01:10:36.505
- going out, right? Like where we're like, here are all the applicants this year and here are the projects.

01:10:36.505 --> 01:10:40.702
- And, you know, like, you know, instead of it just being this very dry, like,

01:10:41.186 --> 01:10:46.646
- They do it. We review it. We put it out that there is just a sort of like community of Jack Hopkins,

01:10:46.646 --> 01:10:52.052
- you know, that, that we're promoting things that are happening in the city. Um, but I don't, again,

01:10:52.052 --> 01:10:57.621
- like, you know, the time that we did the full interviews here, I don't know if it was all the terrible

01:10:57.621 --> 01:11:03.243
- thing was most of the people came and sat through all of them. And I would, and I just felt so bad for,

01:11:03.243 --> 01:11:08.703
- you know, for the folks who came at eight and they didn't get to talk until 1130 or whatever. It was

01:11:08.703 --> 01:11:10.974
- just like, it was, it was really painful.

01:11:11.554 --> 01:11:22.515
- Yeah, I'll chime in on what Dave said, because I was around for all through all that, not even before.

01:11:22.515 --> 01:11:33.370
- So what we found, as I recall, was that that benefit that Dave was talking about mainly was something

01:11:33.370 --> 01:11:40.606
- that was articulated by the city, by us as an opportunity. And when

01:11:40.866 --> 01:11:47.154
- the agencies actually had a chance to respond or weigh in on that. They're like, no, it's not,

01:11:47.154 --> 01:11:53.772
- that's not, we're not looking for that. That's not our, we don't really see it as an opportunity to

01:11:53.772 --> 01:12:00.589
- market ourselves, right? And we are sitting through this and getting ungodly wrong. We have these two.

01:12:00.589 --> 01:12:07.274
- To get rejected by funding, you know, make a little bit. That's what I recall. So Dave is right that

01:12:07.274 --> 01:12:10.782
- we did want to provide that, right? But as I recall,

01:12:11.170 --> 01:12:18.130
- When they got a chance to get feedback, you don't need to do that for us. I have a slightly different

01:12:18.130 --> 01:12:25.567
- view on why we do interviews for the people that we have questions for, which is not wanting to disadvantage

01:12:25.567 --> 01:12:28.638
- somebody because they're a bad bread writer.

01:12:29.762 --> 01:12:34.794
- Right, because some of the organizations are well skilled. And I mean, a lot of people who brought in

01:12:34.794 --> 01:12:39.874
- were first time people, their application was like, yeah, you think you said that, that's not what you

01:12:39.874 --> 01:12:45.153
- said on page 17, right? Like the question, you know, I agree there are some times, some of the interviews,

01:12:45.153 --> 01:12:50.085
- like where we did the interview on that they had applied twice and were like, which of these do you

01:12:50.085 --> 01:12:55.068
- want funded? Because you can't do both. I mean, that could have been an email, but I think with some

01:12:55.068 --> 01:12:58.718
- of them, it was just, you know, it was like, whatever you described here,

01:12:59.778 --> 01:13:05.579
- we really didn't, I didn't get until you explained it. And I'm like, oh, okay, I see, I see what you're

01:13:05.579 --> 01:13:11.492
- doing. That's, yeah. And then I was thinking of there was one applicant last year that very specifically,

01:13:11.492 --> 01:13:17.237
- I remember being like, I don't get who you are and what you're looking for. And I had to hear her. The

01:13:17.237 --> 01:13:22.592
- Hendricks County person or whatever. Yes, yes. They had a funny name and we were all like, why,

01:13:22.592 --> 01:13:29.118
- why is this? Any point of the application made it clear that this was like things happening in Bloomington and, and,

01:13:29.474 --> 01:13:36.964
- you know, we're like, you say you're in Hendricks County and you're like, oh, that's just how our name

01:13:36.964 --> 01:13:44.745
- is. It never came out until we talked or, oh, okay, no more questions. Yeah. So I'm torn. I'm torn because

01:13:44.745 --> 01:13:52.016
- I certainly, you know, feel very strongly that getting just a handful of our applicants in front of

01:13:52.016 --> 01:13:57.470
- us to make the case might feel fairly unweighted or unfairly weighted. Um,

01:13:57.602 --> 01:14:04.754
- Most of it can be done via email, but I also hear you that some of it just can't be sussed out unless

01:14:04.754 --> 01:14:12.047
- it's verbal. Now, before we even get to that point, we do weed out some of the applications that's out,

01:14:12.047 --> 01:14:19.129
- where we say, we know right away we're not going to fund wheeze at all. That's what we figure out in

01:14:19.129 --> 01:14:25.790
- that meeting, too, where we're debating, who are we going to ask further questions of? Did we,

01:14:28.194 --> 01:14:35.803
- Last year, was there anybody that we invited? Does anybody remember? Anybody that we invited to present

01:14:35.803 --> 01:14:43.193
- that we didn't fund at all? Yes, of course. As I was asking the question, that's what I thought. OK.

01:14:43.193 --> 01:14:50.657
- The problem that I have is that we don't stick with the question that we identified. And we end up on

01:14:50.657 --> 01:14:56.510
- this other level of interrogation that I feel we're really uncomfortable about.

01:14:57.474 --> 01:15:03.662
- scrutinizing them in ways we don't scrutinize the ones we don't call in. And I noticed that specifically

01:15:03.662 --> 01:15:09.732
- with the Latino education project from last year, there were lots of questions about the value of that

01:15:09.732 --> 01:15:15.625
- project that came up, but I was like, they're requesting $3,000. We had this one technical question

01:15:15.625 --> 01:15:21.047
- and it felt like it evolved into like a much bigger thing. And so that's my issue was like,

01:15:21.047 --> 01:15:27.294
- if we do it, that would be great if we could identify our questions, stick with it and not keep poking at

01:15:27.970 --> 01:15:34.291
- things as they come up, it doesn't feel right. I'm leaning toward, just my personal opinion, and I'd

01:15:34.291 --> 01:15:40.799
- love to hear anybody else's input on this, I'm leaning toward doing the email questions web, but having

01:15:40.799 --> 01:15:47.183
- a really thorough discussion about how we're framing the questions, what questions we're asking them,

01:15:47.183 --> 01:15:53.754
- who we're asking them. So I like the email, but I think you, Safiya, had mentioned something about maybe

01:15:53.754 --> 01:15:56.382
- some, instead of people coming in person,

01:15:56.994 --> 01:16:03.662
- do a three minute video describing the project and then offer to everyone to submit a video. And then

01:16:03.662 --> 01:16:10.527
- we can watch them if we need to. Like the project's very straightforward. It's like, I want to buy books

01:16:10.527 --> 01:16:17.195
- for kids. That's easy to explain, but there's something that is too complex and you just can't get it

01:16:17.195 --> 01:16:24.256
- by reading it. But allowing people the opportunity and best to not necessarily go to town and get something

01:16:24.256 --> 01:16:25.694
- else and get a video.

01:16:27.138 --> 01:16:36.164
- Another thought is that don't we allow public comment during our deliberation part of the conversation?

01:16:36.164 --> 01:16:45.017
- At the application review part? Yeah, isn't there a public comment part? I don't remember there being

01:16:45.017 --> 01:16:54.043
- a public comment period. I'm already confusing it, but I feel like we have one. I don't know. For which

01:16:54.043 --> 01:16:55.518
- meeting is this?

01:16:56.610 --> 01:17:03.897
- I'm just wondering if, I'm wondering if there's a, if you can lean into, I mean, I'm just thinking like,

01:17:03.897 --> 01:17:10.906
- is there some way where while we're deliberating at the end, you have, we raised all these questions

01:17:10.906 --> 01:17:17.984
- and then they've chosen to watch they at public comment or like, Oh, I can answer that question. Like

01:17:17.984 --> 01:17:21.662
- is that like, is that a mechanism that we could use?

01:17:27.266 --> 01:17:35.451
- I mean, it gets back to you. It doesn't address your concern. Do they get that question beforehand?

01:17:35.451 --> 01:17:43.881
- Yeah, that's what we did last year. We said this is what we want to know. Could it be that females are

01:17:43.881 --> 01:17:52.065
- just reserved for verification and process questions and the in-person is reserved for high-risk or

01:17:52.065 --> 01:17:56.894
- really, really large grants that need further examination?

01:17:57.698 --> 01:18:05.134
- And maybe your first time applicants, which we did last year our conversation first time applicants

01:18:05.134 --> 01:18:13.090
- them having visibility with with community visibility as well. The first thing that we said, the technical

01:18:13.090 --> 01:18:20.749
- for me, they did the opportunity to do that. So this is a grant meeting that they get to the technical

01:18:20.749 --> 01:18:24.318
- assistance. Yeah, we're not part of that. Okay.

01:18:27.330 --> 01:18:35.013
- I think you're onto something maybe. I like that idea of the clarification emails, because there's always

01:18:35.013 --> 01:18:42.333
- clarification that we want, but we don't need to necessarily invite them in. And then we'll set, and

01:18:42.333 --> 01:18:49.580
- maybe we don't even need to do this tonight, right? Figure out our parameters for who we would want

01:18:49.580 --> 01:18:57.118
- to invite in. Like they have to meet specific standards, really big grant requests of X amount or more.

01:18:57.442 --> 01:19:15.329
- or first time applicants that we just don't know who they are. And maybe just even just the only those

01:19:15.329 --> 01:19:23.838
- two. Yeah. Yeah, that's right. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah.

01:19:25.794 --> 01:19:33.609
- Because I think our biggest questions with that too, or what can you do with less, you know? Yeah, but

01:19:33.609 --> 01:19:41.273
- they wrote up their big question for chat last year was, hey, if we didn't get any letters from you,

01:19:41.273 --> 01:19:49.089
- whatever. Yeah, because I know there's, one of the questions on the survey, on the application is, can

01:19:49.089 --> 01:19:55.614
- partial funding, can you still do something with partial funding? Which is important.

01:19:56.258 --> 01:20:04.782
- Yeah. Well, yeah, I mean, it's already even on my application. So if they said yes, then I think it's

01:20:04.782 --> 01:20:13.223
- safe to go ahead. And I don't think anybody's ever said no. You know, I love that motion to do that.

01:20:13.223 --> 01:20:22.165
- To do what? You know, a set of thresholds that we can discuss when we talk about rubric for for interviews

01:20:22.165 --> 01:20:25.758
- and yeah, and then do all the other paper.

01:20:26.370 --> 01:20:42.832
- And first time out. And first time African shirt. I will add that to my motion. Well worded, well worded

01:20:42.832 --> 01:20:56.158
- motions. Do I have a second? Isak. Oh, yes. I was like, what, what, what, what, yes.

01:20:56.418 --> 01:21:10.063
- Yes. And I vote yes. That one is unanimous. It passes. Thank you. All right. So that wasn't even planning

01:21:10.063 --> 01:21:24.222
- on getting that deep into the weeks there with that. But I'm glad we did. So with the applications being due,

01:21:26.178 --> 01:21:34.418
- March 10th, then we need to have our next meeting to start the review process about a month later. So

01:21:34.418 --> 01:21:42.740
- Lisa and Kari have recommended the week of April 6th through the 10th as meeting. So I think from this

01:21:42.740 --> 01:21:50.980
- point on, we're just kind of looking at our calendars and trying to get the rest scheduled so that we

01:21:50.980 --> 01:21:55.262
- can move forward. I'm gonna pull up my calendar too.

01:21:55.490 --> 01:22:03.982
- Are there any days of the week? Okay. So we're going to try to keep these evenings. Are there any nights

01:22:03.982 --> 01:22:12.151
- typically throughout the week that are a no-go? So I know, for example, ESOC is a hard no on Mondays

01:22:12.151 --> 01:22:20.319
- because you teach. Tuesdays are actually a hard no for me. I'm just sitting in. Okay. So Mondays and

01:22:20.319 --> 01:22:24.606
- Wednesdays are no good. I mean Mondays and Tuesdays.

01:22:26.242 --> 01:22:35.648
- This was a decaf, that's the problem. So a lot of these, Lisa and Kari were very smart to look at, weeks

01:22:35.648 --> 01:22:44.606
- we don't have city capsules. So Wednesdays should be good for those weeks. Is there anybody that is

01:22:44.606 --> 01:22:46.846
- a hard no on Wednesdays?

01:22:47.138 --> 01:22:55.656
- Or about what? I have a preference not to, but that's, I mean, don't worry about my preferences. Well,

01:22:55.656 --> 01:23:04.092
- next Thursdays and Fridays, do you talk about anybody have a hard conflict with Thursdays or Fridays?

01:23:04.092 --> 01:23:12.528
- Thursdays don't work for me, so I might as well do the class. Okay. So I'm going to be tough. Got it.

01:23:12.528 --> 01:23:14.430
- Unless you want me to.

01:23:14.594 --> 01:23:22.560
- We really need a city councilor or city health child care. Yeah. We should write that into law. Done.

01:23:22.560 --> 01:23:30.370
- All right. So that leaves Wednesdays are rather not. And Fridays are OK. Friday needs are difficult

01:23:30.370 --> 01:23:38.337
- for them to focus on this. OK. Wednesday it is. Sorry. It looks like a chilly Wednesday. Does it have

01:23:38.337 --> 01:23:42.398
- to be evenings? I mean, OK. I mean, happy mornings.

01:23:43.810 --> 01:23:53.276
- I could really only do mornings with early Tuesdays or Thursdays. I can do Thursday mornings. Well,

01:23:53.276 --> 01:24:02.932
- it depends on the day. You said the week of? The week of April 6th through the 10th. I'm going to say

01:24:02.932 --> 01:24:12.398
- April 8th. I am honored if I should throw it out now. I'll be in New York. OK. So I won't be on the

01:24:12.398 --> 01:24:13.534
- red screen.

01:24:14.114 --> 01:24:23.504
- I'll be driving back. No, I'll be back on the night. So Thursday. So are you available that Tuesday

01:24:23.504 --> 01:24:33.270
- morning? Who did an early one Tuesday morning? I would be available. I can make myself available. Okay.

01:24:33.270 --> 01:24:42.942
- So I'm looking at Tuesday, the seventh early morning, maybe. Well, a nine is just one. I can't really.

01:24:43.138 --> 01:24:50.643
- But Tuesdays and Thursdays, I work from home. So I sleep out. I've learned to go to public museums.

01:24:50.643 --> 01:24:58.374
- You can't. You can't do more than this. OK. Oh, I will say that's really difficult for me. OK. No, I'm

01:24:58.374 --> 01:25:06.254
- glad you're speaking up. Thank you. I mean, they're hard for me too. So when you say Friday, or multiple

01:25:06.254 --> 01:25:11.358
- days, are you saying one Friday evening, or are you saying multiple

01:25:11.682 --> 01:25:17.234
- Just for this week. Right now we're just looking at this week. What? This week? What are we talking

01:25:17.234 --> 01:25:22.786
- about? No, no, no, no. The week of April 6th. Oh, sorry. I was just asking in general, like, before

01:25:22.786 --> 01:25:28.504
- we go through each day of the week when people are like, so maybe for this, like, a one-off, we could,

01:25:28.504 --> 01:25:34.334
- the Quick Stop could probably be better. How many meetings do we have to do? I always forget. I actually

01:25:34.498 --> 01:25:40.575
- can't do that Friday night, because I have to be in New Jersey the next day. So I just realized I probably

01:25:40.575 --> 01:25:46.368
- should not book myself for that Friday night. So at least like Wednesdays are not preferred, but that

01:25:46.368 --> 01:25:52.218
- one Wednesday is okay. Yeah, I mean, like I said, don't worry about my preferences. I was just stating

01:25:52.218 --> 01:25:58.010
- them. I like to have every Wednesday kept free too, because there's no prayer and precious. It's nice

01:25:58.010 --> 01:26:02.270
- to see my family. I think Wednesday equals eight. It's one night for that.

01:26:04.322 --> 01:26:11.239
- I should join a little bit. You can join remotely as well. Yeah, but I'll be back for him.

01:26:11.239 --> 01:26:18.840
- So he'll be back. If it's in the morning, I can't do it. So I'll be getting my divorce done. Right,

01:26:18.840 --> 01:26:26.897
- no. So if we did like a 6 p.m. on Wednesday, April 8th, does that not work for anybody? Oh, no, Catherine

01:26:26.897 --> 01:26:33.054
- says it doesn't. Oh, no, no, no, it works for me. Are you sure? Yes. Okay. Okay.

01:26:33.890 --> 01:26:49.555
- You can do that. Dave, is that good for you? April 8 at 6 p.m. Yes. Sophia? Sophia? I'm sorry, is Wednesday

01:26:49.555 --> 01:26:57.822
- okay? Yes, Wednesday the 8th. Is that okay for you guys?

01:27:02.370 --> 01:27:12.622
- We can't. We can't come on April 8th. I'm sorry. We didn't realize. We have a big event. We work together

01:27:12.622 --> 01:27:21.423
- for Context. But on April 9th, it'll be very hard for us to do April 8th, I would imagine,

01:27:21.423 --> 01:27:32.158
- at least for me. Catherine has a bigger ability to be like, I'm not doing that. Why don't we look at the lead?

01:27:32.290 --> 01:27:40.200
- before then. But then we had a council meeting on Wednesday. I know. I'm saying maybe, oh, and then

01:27:40.200 --> 01:27:48.347
- that Tuesday state of the city. So we'd be looking at like April 2nd. Is this our review meeting? This

01:27:48.347 --> 01:27:56.336
- is the application review. Yes. This is our long meeting. It's a big meeting. Yeah. I can't, I mean,

01:27:56.336 --> 01:27:57.918
- okay. So, so I can,

01:27:58.594 --> 01:28:08.020
- Because I can make a Monday work, like a once-one-Monday work. Monday the 6th is? It's Easter.

01:28:08.020 --> 01:28:18.041
- Is that a... Oh, that's Easter? April 6th is Easter, yeah. It's not a city holiday, but it is. Yeah,

01:28:18.041 --> 01:28:28.062
- yeah, yeah. I would be okay with the 6th, unless it's totally everything's to Japan. So just, again,

01:28:28.770 --> 01:28:37.895
- We're free on the 6th. Council staff would be there on the 6th. Same for correct staff. Do you want

01:28:37.895 --> 01:28:47.386
- to do 6th? I can do the 6th. Is there anybody who cannot do the 6th? What time? 6th again? 6 p.m.? Does

01:28:47.386 --> 01:28:57.150
- that work for everybody? Yeah. Okay. This will be the long one, right? Auburn cookies. Okay, so April 6th.

01:28:58.754 --> 01:29:05.605
- This is harder than I thought. Sorry, I'm sorry to throw wrenches. Don't ever apologize. I'm always

01:29:05.605 --> 01:29:12.593
- the one with the hard schedule to fit in when people get mad at me all the time and I hate it. So I'm

01:29:12.593 --> 01:29:19.786
- not mad at anybody for their schedule. All right. Do we want to set a date for the... Well, yes, because

01:29:19.786 --> 01:29:26.843
- we did say we might have some agency presentations. So council staff has recommended the week of April

01:29:26.843 --> 01:29:28.350
- 27th through May 1st.

01:29:29.218 --> 01:29:40.179
- But that one, because again, there's no city council that week. That week, why does my calendar look

01:29:40.179 --> 01:29:51.141
- so empty? Because my kids' music books look better. Okay. Is there any, so looking at the calendars,

01:29:51.141 --> 01:29:58.846
- the week of April 27th through May 1st, are there any hard, hard no's?

01:29:59.650 --> 01:30:11.038
- Tuesday's partner. Okay. And we are still talking. Please. We are. Yes. I'm wide open that week. I could

01:30:11.038 --> 01:30:22.317
- do almost any time. Nobody wants to meet with me that week. That's nice. Best thing that ever happened.

01:30:22.317 --> 01:30:27.198
- Well, does the Wednesday work for everybody?

01:30:27.554 --> 01:30:38.194
- Is there anybody the Wednesday does not work for? It works. Yeah. Wednesday, April 29th at six. Yes.

01:30:38.194 --> 01:30:48.412
- Got a black belt. OK. I may have to be remote. I'm sorry? I may have to be remote. I'm not sure.

01:30:48.412 --> 01:30:56.734
- I could join, but I may be out of town. Oh, OK. For that whole week? Yeah. OK.

01:30:58.370 --> 01:31:07.983
- on the Wednesday. Okay. So then there's more, the pre-allocation meetings. So that's where we come in

01:31:07.983 --> 01:31:17.407
- with our rubrics having been done and the recommendations that we individually are making. And then

01:31:17.407 --> 01:31:27.774
- that's where we put all of our numbers together and do a really great big algebraic equation. It's great fun.

01:31:28.450 --> 01:31:35.265
- So that's not long after. So that is, we're looking at the week of May 11th. Am I remembering that?

01:31:35.265 --> 01:31:42.080
- Did I remember that correctly? Yeah, the week of May 11th. So that gives us a little more time than

01:31:42.080 --> 01:31:49.100
- we had last year. I think we only have one week in between the presentations and our rubrics being due

01:31:49.100 --> 01:31:55.983
- last year. This gives us two weeks, which is much better because I didn't have enough breathing room

01:31:55.983 --> 01:31:57.278
- last time, I know.

01:31:57.794 --> 01:32:04.075
- And I think the extra time will be helpless. So. We have a council meeting on the 13th? We do have a

01:32:04.075 --> 01:32:10.728
- council meeting on the 13th. Deliberation. It's a little pretty huge. Oh, let's just turn the deliberation

01:32:10.728 --> 01:32:17.258
- into. That's what I was going to say. Let's do that. Can we really? Why not? Is that legal? It disabuses

01:32:17.258 --> 01:32:23.600
- me. That is not legal? Well, I don't know that it wouldn't be legal. We could cancel the deliberation

01:32:23.600 --> 01:32:27.518
- session and set up Jack Hopkins. Set up general, all types of.

01:32:27.650 --> 01:32:38.172
- other committees. Council President, do we have permission to cancel the deliberation session? That's

01:32:38.172 --> 01:32:49.004
- not the thing we would do in this meeting. I'm asking for your commitment. No. Monday, is anybody? Yeah,

01:32:49.004 --> 01:32:57.566
- that's after a semester, right? Yeah, sure. I could do that Monday. Monday's good.

01:32:57.794 --> 01:33:10.085
- Isn't that an important day? Yes, it's my father-in-law's birthday. Well, that's the Monday after graduation.

01:33:10.085 --> 01:33:21.259
- I'm going to be a little tired. So Monday, May 11th at 6 PM. Does that work for everybody? Right. I

01:33:21.259 --> 01:33:26.846
- don't want to be there like 5.30. We can do 5.30.

01:33:27.298 --> 01:33:39.969
- Monday, May 11th at 6 p.m. Good. This is pre-allocation. That's pre-allocation. So that's another long

01:33:39.969 --> 01:33:52.763
- one. And then we have the actual allocation here and that one is usually pretty quick. So we're looking

01:33:52.763 --> 01:33:55.838
- at the week of May 26th.

01:33:57.154 --> 01:34:03.060
- I've always wondered though, what is the difference between those two meetings? Because nothing changes.

01:34:03.060 --> 01:34:08.966
- It's just that we have to get the documents ready and then come in and vote for them. Is that the reason

01:34:08.966 --> 01:34:14.591
- why we have two different meetings? That's the allocation meeting. Last year, there was still a lot

01:34:14.591 --> 01:34:20.385
- of discussion in the allocation meeting. Yeah, I remember that. So there was really a need for it. OK.

01:34:20.385 --> 01:34:25.729
- OK. So things can change between them. Right. The first year, we just came and they were like,

01:34:25.729 --> 01:34:26.910
- you like this? Yeah.

01:34:27.618 --> 01:34:36.392
- Oh my gosh. Okay. So there was no council meeting that week, but that Monday is Memorial Day. Um,

01:34:36.392 --> 01:34:45.613
- I see. That's why it says the 26 on the, yes. Okay. So, uh, you guys want to do that one on the Friday

01:34:45.613 --> 01:34:54.655
- so that we can go on vacation. Sorry. Theoretically North's graduation is Saturday. Okay. So you got

01:34:54.655 --> 01:34:55.998
- to do a party.

01:34:56.354 --> 01:35:06.134
- Well, I mean, I have a kid graduating. Hopefully, my parents are going to be in town. So Friday night

01:35:06.134 --> 01:35:15.051
- is bad, but I can do probably Tuesday, Wednesday, and Thursday. It's probably fine. Tuesday.

01:35:15.051 --> 01:35:25.598
- Anybody else? What's the date? The 26th. I think we'll be in town. OK. Are you in town? Any of the other two?

01:35:25.986 --> 01:35:40.108
- Thanks. So right now we're looking at the 27th or 28th. March, spring, break? March or May. Well, hey

01:35:40.108 --> 01:35:54.091
- everybody. But thank you for picking the breaks. That is available, but that has a better statement.

01:35:54.091 --> 01:35:55.614
- Thank you.

01:35:56.130 --> 01:36:05.529
- Um, does, is there anybody that has a really strong preference for Wednesday or Thursday? I'd rather

01:36:05.529 --> 01:36:14.463
- it be Thursday. Okay. Thursday it is. If everybody's okay with that. So Thursday, May 28th. Oh,

01:36:14.463 --> 01:36:24.048
- May 28th? Yeah. Oh, okay. At 6 PM. You guys don't mind if my parents come and I'll show you. Um, okay.

01:36:24.048 --> 01:36:25.630
- So that is good.

01:36:26.626 --> 01:36:35.538
- And we're almost done, guys. We're so close. And then we have our debriefing meeting. That's the following

01:36:35.538 --> 01:36:44.283
- week, week of June 1st. We do have council on the third, that Wednesday. So that leaves Monday, Tuesday,

01:36:44.283 --> 01:36:52.778
- Thursday, or Friday of that week. All of those are equal to me. I'm sorry, you said the first week of

01:36:52.778 --> 01:36:53.694
- June? Yes.

01:36:54.306 --> 01:37:00.033
- I may have accidentally said- When was our last council meeting? Was it the 10th? Is that the one that

01:37:00.033 --> 01:37:05.761
- works today? Yes. So we have two in a row that week so that then we don't- then we have- and does that

01:37:05.761 --> 01:37:10.987
- give us enough time to get the report? So could we also do the report on the- was that right?

01:37:10.987 --> 01:37:16.770
- Or the 10th? So the recommendation is for June 10th to be the 4th. The recommendation and then we also-

01:37:16.770 --> 01:37:21.886
- and then you'll give the report that day? On the 10th, yes. So just thinking like is there-

01:37:22.114 --> 01:37:29.306
- more time, it's more time useful. Should we do this earlier in the week than later for that?

01:37:29.306 --> 01:37:37.039
- I don't know. I'm asking you all. I don't understand. For the debriefing meeting, I don't know that

01:37:37.039 --> 01:37:45.081
- that matters that much. Yeah, I think the week of June 1st. I mean, earlier could be better, but. Cool.

01:37:45.081 --> 01:37:50.494
- On your preferences. Okay. I pretend to come together at these times.

01:37:52.386 --> 01:38:14.184
- Oh. All right. How does anybody feel about Tuesday, June 2nd for the debrief? Great. Yeah. So for everybody

01:38:14.184 --> 01:38:21.854
- at 6 PM. 1, 2, 3. Yes. OK. All right.

01:38:22.274 --> 01:38:33.426
- Okay, so those are all the ones that we need to schedule. I think that's everything. So just to reiterate,

01:38:33.426 --> 01:38:44.370
- we're looking at meetings on, these are all at 6 p.m., Monday, April 6th, Wednesday, April 29th, Monday,

01:38:44.370 --> 01:38:49.790
- May 5th, Thursday, May 28th, and Tuesday, June 7th.

01:38:52.578 --> 01:39:01.566
- and I get a motion to approve this. Wait, I had one is May 11th. Yes, Monday, May 11th. Okay. Reallocation

01:39:01.566 --> 01:39:10.134
- meeting. Okay. Yeah. And then I think that we need to... No? Did we make... What is this now? I think

01:39:10.134 --> 01:39:18.870
- it's fine with that. Well, there's all three to those days. Okay. Well, that was easy. And then we will

01:39:18.870 --> 01:39:21.054
- present our final numbers

01:39:21.666 --> 01:39:41.496
- City Council on June 10th. Hopefully get there before recess. All right. That was everything on my agenda.

01:39:41.496 --> 01:39:50.206
- Does anybody have any new business? Well, yes.

01:39:50.914 --> 01:39:59.957
- Just a plug for conflict of interest for the norms. Okay. What is a conflict of interest? It's a financial

01:39:59.957 --> 01:40:08.746
- interest in a contract, such as a grant award in this case, or driving a financial benefit of some form

01:40:08.746 --> 01:40:17.451
- from an award of a grant. So if you think that you may have some type of conflict of interest, contact

01:40:17.451 --> 01:40:19.902
- me and we can talk about it.

01:40:20.130 --> 01:40:29.871
- Disclosures would need to be made during one of our meetings here, and then a financial disclosure statement

01:40:29.871 --> 01:40:39.164
- would need to be completed and filed with the state. I can help, or our office can help complete those.

01:40:39.164 --> 01:40:48.190
- Thank you. Thank you. All right. And if there's no other testing matters, meeting adjourned. Hooray!