[00:00:01]
HAVE MET THE QUORUM.ALRIGHT, SO OUR FIRST ORDER OF BUSINESS IS TO APPROVE THE MINUTES FOR THE MAYORS SUBCOMMITTEE MEETING OF THE LAST MEETING WE HAD.
YOU'RE GONNA HAVE TO MAKE ALL MOTIONS TODAY.
I'LL MAKE EVERY LAST ONE OF THEM, BUT I, I DID HAVE A, UM, BEFORE I MAKE THE MOTION TO APPROVE THE MINUTES, I JUST HAD A QUESTION WHEN I READ THE MINUTES ON NUMBER SIX, JUST, IT, IT, UM, SO WHEN, UH, UNDER THE MINUTES IT SAYS THE MOTION WAS MADE TO REVIEW, IS THAT, THAT'S HOW IT IS.
IT'S WORDED, UM, TO DISCUSS AND APPROVE.
SO THE RECOMMENDATION TO US DISCUSS AND APPROVE THE MAYOR'S FUND APPLICATION REVIEW, THAT'S SAYING THAT WE, WE MOVED TO JUST DISCUSS THE APPLICATION.
WE DIDN'T APPROVE THE RIGHT, YEAH.
BUT WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE NOTES, IT DOES SAY THAT WE DIDN'T APPROVE RIGHT.
PATH APPLICATION, BUT THAT FIRST SENTENCE KIND OF THREW ME OFF.
SO I JUST WASN'T SURE IF THAT'S THE WAY THAT IT IS WRITTEN.
YEAH, WE'LL CHECK IN ON THAT TO SEE IF WE CAN MAYBE CHANGE THE RECOMMENDATION.
BUT I THINK IT HAS TO BE WHAT YOU INITIALLY POSTED.
WHICH WAS, THAT'S WHAT WE INITIALLY POSTED ON THE AGENDA THAT, TO, TO, TO REVIEW AND APPROVE.
AND IT WAS REVIEWED, BUT IT WAS DECLINED.
DECLINED, WHICH IS IN THE NOTES SECTION.
NO, THAT AS I WAS AT FIRST, I WAS LIKE, OH NO, WE DIDN'T APPROVE THAT.
AND THEN I READ THE NOTES AND SO I JUST WANTED TO JUST MAKE SURE THAT I WAS READING CORRECTLY, BUT OKAY.
YEAH, BECAUSE EVERYTHING ON THE MINUTES, LIKE FIRST SENTENCE IS WHAT'S ON THE AGENDA.
WELL, I, I MOVE THAT WE ACCEPT THE MINUTES AS PREPARED.
THE SECOND WELL THERE, I DON'T THINK WE NEED COMMENT ROLL CALL DO WE? NO PUBLIC COMMENT? NO.
UH, AND THE MAYOR'S FUND UPDATE, WHAT DO WE HAVE IN THAT? I DIDN'T PRINT IT, BUT I I IT UP HERE, CURRENTLY WITHIN THIS LAST MONTH, WE'VE ONLY RECEIVED 73, OR IN THE MONTH OF JULY WE ONLY RECEIVED $73 IN CONTRIBUTIONS.
SO THERE'S VERY LITTLE, UM, I DON'T THINK WE FINALIZED ANY PAYMENTS.
UH, BUT THIS IS WHO WE CURRENTLY HAVE, UM, ARE OUTSTANDING GRANTS.
SO WE STILL HAVE PRECIOUS LAMBS SINCE THEY'VE BEEN EXTENDED.
AND THEN URBAN COMMUNITY OUTREACH, UH, THEIR LAST DATE WAS 8 31 20 24.
UH, WE STILL OWE THEM $21 AND 31 CENTS.
I'VE REACHED OUT
UM, BUT OTHER THAN THAT WE JUST HAVE THE TWO AGENCIES THAT WE RECENTLY AWARDED.
WE'RE GONNA SPEND MORE THAN $21 PUTTING TOGETHER AN INVOICE.
THEY SAT ON THAT FOR OVER A YEAR, DIDN'T THEY? KINDA, BUT THE PROBLEM IS THAT THEY'RE ONLY DOING, UH, RENTAL, SO SECURITY DEPOSITS.
SO UNLESS THERE ARE PEOPLE GET HOUSED, THEN IT'S REALLY HARD FOR THEM TO SUBMIT AN INVOICE.
THEY'VE DRAWN DOWN SOME OF IT.
BUT WHAT, WHAT'S THE, IS VERY LIKELIHOOD OF THEM DRAWING DOWN THE REST? I MEAN, NOT THEN.
'CAUSE SO I THINK FOR THEIR LAST, UH, SECURITY DEPOSIT, IT WAS A LARGER FAMILY, SO IT WAS A LITTLE BIGGER.
BIGGER THAN WHAT I TYPICALLY PAY FOR SECURITY DEPOSIT.
UM, SO IT, THAT COULD PROBABLY DO THREE FOUR.
IT DEPENDS ON HOW QUICKLY PEOPLE ARE GETTING, UM, HOUSED.
NOW THESE ARE SECURITY DEPOSITS.
I DON'T REMEMBER THE THING THAT WELL, FOR WHAT? FOR FAMILIES THAT ATTEND, UH, RIGHT FROM FAMILY, THE PRESCHOOL.
[00:05:01]
WAS THEORETICALLY THEY'RE SUPPOSED TO USE IT BY THE END OF BY JANUARY, RIGHT? CORRECT.COULD THEY COME BACK TO US TO GET AN EXTENSION? THIS WAS ALREADY THEIR EXTENSION, SO THEY WERE GIVEN A SIX MONTH EXTENSION.
SO THEY MIGHT BE COMING BACK TO US FOR AN EXTENSION.
I DON'T THINK WE SHOULD ALLOW A, ANOTHER EXTENSION.
I THINK IF THE COMMITTEE, IF THEY WANT TO SUBMIT THAT TO THE COMMITTEE, WE COULD CERTAINLY CONSIDER IT.
AM I ALLOWED TO ASK A QUESTION? JOIN THE PUBLIC COMMENT.
UH, I, WHAT I WOULD SAY IS AT THAT POINT WE WOULD BE HITTING THE TWO YEAR MARK, UH, FOR I KNOW, I KNOW A GRANT AND I IT'S ALSO
I I SUPPOSE IT COULD BE UP TO THE COMMITTEE, BUT AS OF NOW WE'VE BEEN WORKING WITH A SIX MONTH EXTENSION FOR ANYBODY WHO'S REQUESTED IT.
TYPICALLY WE DO SEE PEOPLE, UH, SPEND DOWN WITH PRECIOUS LAMB.
IT COULD BE EXPECTED THAT THEY SPEND DOWN, IT COULD NOT BE, BUT THEY ARE FULLY AWARE THAT THEY HAVE BEEN AWARDED, UH, THE SIX MONTH EXTENSION AND THEY'RE WORKING TOWARDS IT.
I THINK IT WAS SUCH A GOOD CAUSE I HATE TO SEE 'EM NOT BE ABLE TO USE THE MONEY.
AND THERE'S OTHER THINGS THAT THEY CAN TAP INTO, LIKE FAMILIES CAN BE REFERRED OVER TO THE MSE AND GET HOME SECURED.
HOME SECURITY DEPOSIT PROGRAM ASSISTANCE.
ACTUALLY I THINK I DID SEE WE, SOMEBODY REFERRED THEM FROM PRECIOUS LAMB.
OVER TO, UM, YEAH, I REMEMBER THAT.
I MOVE THAT WE APPROVE THE, UH, MAYOR'S FUND UPDATE REPORT.
OUR CHURCH SUPPORTS PRECIOUS LAND, SO IT'S NOT A CONFLICT OF INTEREST THAT NO.
MAYORS FUND OPERATING PROCEDURES, WHICH WE, OH, I'M SORRY.
SO I HAVE PRESENTED THE, UH, JUST A DRAFT.
THIS IS VERY MUCH A DRAFT DOCUMENT, UM, FOR OUR, UM, APPLICATIONS, UH, OUR SOP, UM, I WANTED TO JUST EXPLAIN THE, UM, EVALUATION PORTION OF IT.
UM, THIS IS NOT SOMETHING THAT I CREATED.
I, ALTHOUGH WHEN I RECEIVED IT, IT WAS REALLY GREAT.
APPARENTLY, UM, PRIOR TO THE MAYOR'S FUND COMMITTEE, UM, BEING RESPONSIBLE AT ONE POINT IN THE, IN THE HISTORY, UM, THERE WAS ANOTHER COMMITTEE THAT WAS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE REVIEWING OF THE APPLICATIONS.
AND THIS ACTUAL CRITERIA WAS IN PLACE WITH THEM WHEN, UM, OH, WHAT'S HER NAME? MY FAVORITE PERSON.
AND SO JULIE, UM, PROVIDED ME WITH THIS INFORMATION.
SO I JUST SIMPLY PUT IT IN, IN HERE BECAUSE I THINK THAT THIS IS A GREAT CRITERIA.
AND, UM, PUT IT IN THE SOP AS A PART OF THE REVIEWING PROCESS FOR THE COMMITTEE.
SO SINCE, UM, I WASN'T, WHEN I CAME ONTO THE BOARD, I WASN'T INVOLVED IN THAT PORTION WITH JOLENE.
SO I DIDN'T KNOW ABOUT THE SCORING, BUT I THINK IN SEEING IT, I DIDN'T FEEL LIKE WE DON'T NEED TO REINVENT THE WHEEL, ALTHOUGH WE MAY WANNA LOOK AT THE CRITERIA AND MAKE SURE THAT IT IS, UM, YOU KNOW, WHAT WE WANNA SEE NOW IN 2024.
UM, BUT I DO BELIEVE IT IS SOMETHING THAT WE SHOULD BE DOING PARTICULARLY, UM, WHAT IT DOES IS IT JUST GIVES US A BASELINE BESIDES OUR OWN FEELINGS AND THOUGHTS.
IT GIVES US A, A, A THING TO LOOK AT.
AND I THINK WE SHOULD PROBABLY DECIDE IF A ORGANIZATION GETS A CERTAIN SCORE, THEN, FOR EXAMPLE, IN ORDER TO BE APPROVED, YOU NEED TO HAVE A SCORE OF AT LEAST A 70 OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
THAT'S NOT IN HERE, BUT I FIGURED IT'S SOMETHING WE COULD DISCUSS AND COME UP WITH.
UM, AND THAT ANY, ANY APPLICATIONS BELOW A 70 WOULD BE, UM, ONE THAT WE WOULD DECLINE.
SO, AND THAT'S, BUT WHAT YOU'RE SAYING COULD REALLY SIMPLIFY THE WHOLE PROCESS IF THIS WAS APPROVED PRIOR.
THE ONLY AS YOU WHY OF MY ISSUES THAT I DID WITH, BUT THAT IS DEALT WITH HERE BECAUSE, UH, 30% OF THE POINTS ARE FOR ORGANIZATIONAL
[00:10:01]
CAPACITY AND EXPERIENCE, WHICH IS SOMETHING I DON'T THINK WE ARE LOOKING AT CLOSELY ENOUGH.AND I THINK IF WE CAN STICK TO THAT AND SCORE ON THAT BASIS, I WOULD'VE NO OBJECTION TO THIS AT ALL.
I MEAN, AND THE, THE, THE, THE CRITERIA FOR ORGANIZATIONAL CAPACITY, EXPERIENCE, ABILITY TO EFFECTIVELY MANAGE THE PROJECT AND ADMINISTER FUNDS.
AND SO IF THAT CRITERIA IS DIFFERENT OR THE DEFINITION, THE CURRENT DEFINITION THAT'S HERE IS DIFFERENT THAN WHAT WE WANT, THEN WE CAN CHANGE IT.
I THINK RIGHT NOW IT LOOKS FINE ON HERE.
I THINK WHAT WE PROBABLY NEED TO DEFINE IS WHAT WE MEAN BY THAT.
AND, AND THAT COMES INTO THE DISCUSSION OF HOW WE LOOK AT THE APPLICATIONS AND WE HAVE PROPOSED THE PAST THAT WE LOOK AT THE APPLICATIONS FIRST BEFORE YOU EVEN DO THE WRITE UP.
IN OTHER WORDS, WE CAN MAKE THAT INITIAL AND WE WOULD BE LOOKING AT EXACTLY, THIS IS A PROJECT DESIGNED, DOES IT FIT WHAT THE GRANT IS FOR? YOU KNOW, IN OTHER WORDS, IS A GOOD PURPOSE THEN THE ORGANIZATIONAL CAPACITY AND EXPERIENCES LOOKING AT IF IT IS, YOU KNOW, EXACTLY WHAT IT SAYS, WHAT IS THAT CAPACITY? HAVE THEY EXPERIENCED IN THIS FIELD? UH, HAVE THEY SHOWN THE ABILITY TO DO THIS WORK? MM-HMM.
AND THAT'S I THINK WHAT WE HAVEN'T BEEN HITTING IN THE INITIAL REVIEW.
AND I THINK, YOU KNOW, I DON'T FIND FAULT WITH THAT.
I JUST THINK IT'S SOMETHING WE'VE MISSED ON THAT.
SO IF WE CAN AGREE THAT WE DO LOOK AT THE CAPACITY AND THE EXPERIENCES IS 30%, I'M VERY HAPPY.
AND MAYBE WE CAN, WELL LET ME, LET ME UM, GO BACK TO THE BEGINNING.
'CAUSE THAT WAS EXCITING TO ME TOO.
WHEN I SAW IT, I WAS LIKE, OH MY GOD, HERE'S THE WHOLE THING.
BUT, UM, AS TO, TO YOUR POINT, WHEN WE LOOK AT THE PROCESS, THE, THE PROCESS STARTS WITH THE STAFF RECEIVING, UM, THE APPLICATION AND ENSURING THAT IT MEETS THE THRESHOLD.
UM, SO IN OTHER WORDS, IF IT DOESN'T MEET THE THRESHOLD, WE'LL NEVER SEE IT.
THEY'RE, THEY'RE ALREADY STAFF IS ALREADY SAYING THIS ISN'T APPROPRIATE.
AND THEN THE SECOND THING WOULD BE ONCE STAFF IS LOOKING, HAVE DECIDED, YES, THIS IS, THIS IS MEETS OUR THRESHOLD, IT'S APPLICABLE, THEN THEY WOULD DISTRIBUTE IT.
AND I HAD SEVEN DAYS PRIOR TO THE MEETING, BUT I WASN'T SURE IF THAT WAS WHAT WE AGREED UPON OR DISCUSSED.
I THINK WE SIGNED, IS THAT RIGHT? WE WOULD, IS IT SEVEN DAYS? LIKE WE, WELL, WE COMMITTED TO YOU.
WE WILL SIGNED IT AS SOON AS WE'VE IDENTIFIED IT MEETS MINIMUM THRESHOLD.
OBVIOUSLY IF IT'S WITHIN LIKE THREE DAYS OF A MEETING, LIKE AT THAT POINT WE COULDN'T AGENDIZE IT IN TIME.
SO IS NO LESS THAN SEVEN DAYS.
IT DEPENDS ON WHEN IT FALLS TO BE PLACED ON THE AGENDA.
JUST BECAUSE WE HAVE TO SUBMIT OUR AGENDA.
IS IT FIVE, FIVE DAYS? FIVE DAYS BEFORE THE MEETING AND THEN WE HAVE TO POST 72 HOURS BEFORE.
SO THERE'S CERTAIN GUIDELINES THAT WE HAVE TO, SO MAYBE 72 HOURS.
I JUST WANT WHAT'S THE, WHAT'S THE EFFECTIVE NUMBER OR SHOULD WE PUT ON HERE? OR WORDING? MM.
I MEAN, I, I THINK WE CAN, AS LONG AS IT FIVE DAYS AT LEAST.
SO FOR THE MEETING DATE? YEAH.
SO IT CAN FALL ANYWHERE, ANY, WELL, 'CAUSE I, I WOULD THINK IF I HEAR ONE WEEK, THEN ACCORDING TO, YOU KNOW, FOLLOWING, THAT'S MONDAY.
THE MONDAY BEFORE, AND WE MAY NOT GET IT THE MONDAY BEFORE.
WE MIGHT, IT MAY NOT BE AVAILABLE AT MINIMUM YEAH.
SO THE MINIMUM WOULD BE THE 72 HOURS LIKE NO BEFORE THEN.
BUT IF YOU SUBMIT IT ON A FRIDAY, IT DOESN'T GET REVIEWED TO THE FIVE BUSINESS DAYS.
FIVE BUSINESS DAYS GIVE IT A LITTLE MORE REASONABLE TIME FOR THE PROCESS AND MAYBE EITHER SEVEN DAYS OR FIVE BUSINESS DAYS.
WHAT, WHAT IS PREFERRED? I MEAN THIS IS THE DRAFT.
SO FROM THE, I THINK IF YOU JUST SAY SEVEN DAYS, LIKE THEN IT'S PRETTY
THAT WOULD BE WE CREATING A, THAT WAY IT GIVES THE WEEKEND DOESN'T, I LIKE THE LAW.
SO SEVEN DAYS IS, IS IS REASONABLE.
SO IF YOU GET IT SEVEN DAYS BEFORE THEN, BUT WE STILL HAVEN'T RESOLVED THE ISSUE, CAN YOU SEND IT OUT TO US? THAT IS, THAT IS WHAT THIS IS SAYING.
THAT THAT'S WHAT THE, THE PROCESS IS SAYING THAT THEN THEY
[00:15:01]
WILL SEND IT OUT TO US.OUR INITIAL THRESHOLD REVIEW IS PRETTY, PRETTY QUICK AND STRAIGHTFORWARD.
IT'S NOT US READING FOR CONTENT AND WHETHER WE THINK IT'S WORTHY.
IT'S JUST LIKE, DOES THIS ALIGN AND IS THIS AN AGENCY THAT YOU KNOW IS SAYING THEY'RE IN LONG BEACH AND YEAH.
I MEAN WE MET WITH ONE AGENCY THAT EXPRESSED INTEREST AND IT'S LIKE, OH, THIS AGENCY ISN'T EVEN IN LONG BEACH.
AND HARD TO SAY THAT THEY'RE EVEN SERVING ANYBODY IN LONG BEACH.
SO WE REALLY HAVE EXACTLY WHAT WE WERE ASKING FOR.
SO THEN LET ME, THEY JUST, THEY JUST, AND THEN THEY'LL SEND IT TO US.
UM, BUT JIM, TO YOUR POINT, DO WE MAYBE WANT TO BREAK DOWN THE ORGANIZATIONAL CAPACITY AND EXPERIENCE AND BREAK THAT DOWN EVEN FURTHER? LIKE 10 POINTS FOR, I THINK THAT'S ALL HARD TO DO.
THOUGHT OF A SUBJECTIVE THING.
I THINK IT REALLY IN SOME WAYS IS UP TO, YOU KNOW, YOU'RE RIGHT BECAUSE IT CAN BE DIFFERENT AT DIFFERENT THINGS.
YOU KNOW, IF THIS IS A PERSON APPLYING FOR THEIR FIRST, THEY, THEY HAVEN'T HAD A BUSINESS, WE WOULD WANT 'EM TO SHOW SOME PERSONAL EXPERIENCE AND DOING THIS WORK.
UH, SO IT COULD BE DIFFERENT FROM AN EXISTING ORGANIZATION ASKING FOR THE MONEY.
'CAUSE THEN THEY WILL HAVE BEEN DOING THE WORK SHOWING US WORK.
SO WE WANT PER SO, 'CAUSE IN MY THINKING, SO LET'S SAY WE SAY PERSONAL EXPERIENCE YEAH.
IF THEY DON'T HAVE, SO WHAT WE ASK FOR IN OUR OVERALL RFPS IS WHO ARE YOUR MAIN PEOPLE AND CAN YOU SUBMIT LIKE A BACKGROUND FOR THOSE MAIN PEOPLE THAT WOULD BE IMPLEMENTING THE PROJECT.
SO MAYBE YOU'RE A NEW ORGANIZATION, BUT YOUR CEO HAS 20 YEARS EXPERIENCE, LIKE IN ANOTHER NONPROFIT DOING THIS WORK.
SO PERSONAL EXPERIENCE OF STAFF.
SO YOU KNOW WHAT I'M CONCERNED ABOUT US GETTING FACED WITH? AND I THINK WE'VE HAD A COUPLE EXAMPLES OF IT, OF VERY NICELY WRITTEN APPLICATIONS.
BUT WHEN YOU POKED INTO THEM, THE FAX DIDN'T CHECK OUT.
THE ONE THAT, THAT WE DID GO AWAY AND GIVE A LITTLE MONEY THAT DESCRIBED HER ORGANIZATIONAL LOCATION AS THE US POST OFFICE.
AND WE DIDN'T, THAT WAS AFTER WE CHECKED, FOUND OUT THE ADDRESS.
SHE, SHE DESCRIBED AS UNIT SUCH AND SUCH AND SUCH AND SUCH.
BUT WE CHECKED IT OUT AND FOUND OUT IT WAS A DESCRIPTOR OF POST OFFICE BLOCKS.
SO THOSE, THOSE ARE THE KIND OF THINGS WE HAVE TO BE DELVING INTO A LITTLE BIT DEEPER.
AND I KNOW I'M TALKING ABOUT STAFF TIME, UH, HOW MUCH CAN YOU SPEND ON THESE THINGS? AND, UH, BECAUSE I THINK, AND UNFORTUNATELY WHAT WE GOT INTO WAS BASICALLY YOU WERE SPENDING A LOT OF TIME WRITING MY REVIEW OF THE APPLICATION, BUT WE WEREN'T CHECKING NUMBERS OR FACTS.
AND I GUESS THAT'S WHAT I GO TO.
NUMBERS AND FACTS AND THINGS HAVE SHOWED UP.
YOU KNOW, MAYBE THAT'S SOMETHING WE, WE TRIED TO DESCRIBE, BUT WE NEED TO ACTUALLY ALSO, EVERYBODY IN THE COMMITTEE HAS TO DECIDE WHAT WE'RE GONNA LOOK AT TOO.
AND I THINK WE'D ALL AGREE THAT THINGS LIKE, MY SIMPLE FIRST THING I CHECK IS ARE THEY, IF THEY'RE A NON-PROFIT, ARE THEY FILING THEIR PROPER FORMS ANNUALLY? WHICH IS A VERY SIMPLE THING TO CHECK.
AND THOSE THINGS ARE IMPORTANT WHEN YOU THINK YOU'RE GIVING SOMEBODY MONEY.
SO UNDER THE REVIEW PROCESS WE HAVE THE SUBCOMMITTEE WILL INDEPENDENTLY REVIEW AND SCORE YEAH.
EACH APPLICATION BASED ON THE ESTABLISHED EVALUATION CRITERIA OUTLINED BELOW.
DO WE WANT TO INCLUDE, UM, CHECKING, UM, OF THOSE THINGS? BECAUSE IF THEY'RE NOT IN THE SOP, THEN THEY'RE NOT PART OF THE PROCESS.
SO WE WANT, WE WANT IT IN THE PROCESS THEN LESS, THEN WE NEED TO PUT IN HERE.
NOW I PERSONALLY DON'T CHECK THOSE THINGS, BUT IF WE FEEL THAT THAT'S IMPORTANT IN THE REVIEW, THEN WE'RE GONNA, LET'S PUT IT IN HERE.
I WOULD SAY, I THINK MAYBE IT, THERE SHOULD BE A DISCUSSION AS TO WHAT, SO IF YOU WANNA DO THE BREAKDOWN, 'CAUSE WE DID USE, WHEN I FIRST CAME ON, I PROVIDED THE GRADING CRITERIA.
BUT THE, OR THE COMMITTEE DIDN'T USE IT.
UM, AND THEY DIDN'T REALLY LIKE IT.
SO WE ENDED UP NOT MOVING FORWARD WITH IT.
[00:20:01]
WILD.SO I GUESS MY CONCERN IS THESE DOCUMENTS ARE AVAILABLE, BUT WHAT DO YOU WANNA SEE? 'CAUSE IT IS SUBJECTIVE, RIGHT? YEAH.
I THINK AT THE END OF THE DAY IT BECOMES, EVERYTHING BECOMES VERY SUBJECTIVE.
EVEN WHEN WE'RE LOOKING AT OUR OWN RFPS.
SO MAYBE IF WE PUT A LITTLE BIT MORE MEAT, IF YOU WANNA SEE WHO'S LEADING YOUR ORGANIZATION, ARE THERE SPECIFIC QUESTIONS THAT WE WOULD LIKE TO ASK THESE ORGANIZATIONS BEFORE WE MOVE FORWARD? OR WHILE WE'RE HAVING THAT DISCUSSION WITH THEM WHILE WE INVITE THEM IN AND YOU KNOW, WE'RE, WE'RE, WE'RE PREPARING THEM TO BE ABLE TO ANSWER.
TYPICALLY WHAT WE SEE IS OUR ORGANIZATIONS ARE APPLYING AND IT'S PRETTY BLAND.
AND THEN STAFF IS GOING IN AND ALREADY ASKING A BUNCH OF QUESTIONS TO TRY TO GET TO THAT STAFF ANALYSIS.
UM, ONE OF 'EM IS, DO YOU HAVE A MAILING ADDRESS? DO YOU HAVE A IN PERSON LIKE LOCATION? MM-HMM.
SO IF THERE'S SPECIFIC QUESTIONS THAT YOU WOULD LIKE TO SEE, I THINK MAYBE WE START THERE AND THEN START BUILDING THEM OUT.
BECAUSE THE GRAD, THE GRADING CRITERIA, IT'S HERE, IT'S AVAILABLE.
BUT ARE WE ALL GONNA BE ON THE SAME PAGE? WE DON'T HAVE TO BE BECAUSE IT'S GONNA BE A PART OF THIS IS THE, THIS IS THE, THIS IS THE ONLY WAY TO OPERATE.
LOOK, I THOUGHT I HAD DISCOVERED FIRE
FIRE'S ALREADY BEEN, THIS IS THE RUBRIC WE'VE USED ON MOST OF OUR RFPS THAT ARE LIKE LARGER IN NATURE.
SO THIS IS KIND OF ALIGNED TO WHAT WE HAVE UTILIZED IN THE PAST.
UM, THAT BEING SAID, LIKE ON A LARGER RFP, LIKE PROPOSED PROJECT DESIGN MIGHT HAVE SEVEN OR EIGHT DIFFERENT QUESTIONS WITHIN IT.
AND EACH ONE IS SCORING AS 2, 3, 4 POINTS.
UM, SO LIKE IT BREAKS DOWN AND LIKE THAT'S PROBABLY NOT THE REALITY FOR MAYOR'S FUND LIKE ASKING 30 DIFFERENT QUESTIONS THAN THE RFP TO ADD UP TO A HUNDRED POINTS.
NO, I THINK WE STILL AIN'T GONNA HAPPEN.
SO THEY'RE GONNA BE LARGER CHUNKS YEAH.
UM, AND I GUESS, YOU KNOW, WHICH COMES TO THE QUESTION OF LIKE, WHAT IS A REASONABLE AMOUNT OF QUESTIONS TO ASK TO BE ABLE TO GRADE ON THESE, BUT ALSO NOT BECOME OVERLY CUMBERSOME FOR 10 GRAND IF THAT'S WHAT PEOPLE ARE APPLYING TO.
UM, WHICH IS LIKE OUR MOST COMMON AMOUNT IS LIKE 10 GRAND.
SO YEAH, I THINK IN SOME WAYS WE MAY MISLEAD THE APPLICANTS, AND I DON'T HAVE IT IN FRONT OF ME, BUT ON THE INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE APPLICATION, IT IMPLIES THAT UNDER 10,000 WE'RE NOT GONNA ASK THAT MANY QUESTIONS THE WAY IT'S WORDED.
UH, BUT THAT'S WHAT IT HIT WITH ME.
THAT WHAT SAYS OVER 10,000, WE MAY ASK ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS BEYOND THE APPLICATION.
WELL THAT'S WHY WE'RE BEGINNING, THAT'S WHY THEY'RE HOLDING THEM DOWN TO 10,000 IS BECAUSE WE STATE THAT IT'S THAT BASICALLY WE'RE TELLING ALL THEY HAVE TO DO IS FILL OUT THAT FORM AND THAT'S ALL WE'RE GONNA REQUIRE.
AND I DON'T THINK THAT'S TRUE.
WELL, WHEN I THINK ABOUT WHAT YOU JUST SAID, PAUL, WHAT COMES UP FOR ME IS I THINK WHEN I'M THINKING USING THIS CRITERIA, I'M SCORING THE APPLICATION THAT I HAVE IN FRONT OF ME.
I THINK WE PUT A LOT OF ALREADY A TIME AND EFFORT INTO CREATING AN APPLICATION THAT KINDA GIVES US THE MAJORITY OF THE INFORMATION THAT WE NEED AND WANT.
AND I DON'T KNOW THAT WE NEED TO ADD ANY, DO YOU DON'T ADD ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS TO THE APPLICATION THAT'S ALREADY GOING FORWARD? UM, I MEAN I THINK WHAT'S WORTH CONSIDERING IS IF LIKE MOST PROPOSALS YOU GET IN, YOU'RE ASKING A FOLLOW UP QUESTION THAT IS PRETTY MUCH THE SAME QUESTION, THEN YOU SHOULD PROBABLY ADD THAT AS A QUESTION.
IF IT'S A QUESTION THAT COMES UP ON ONE PROPOSAL OUT OF 10, LIKE MM-HMM.
I THINK WHAT I'M THINK IT'S SAYING THOUGH, MAYBE WE JUST NEED TO TWEAK THAT APP, THE INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE APPLICATION AND JUST SAY, JUST SAY THAT NO MATTER WHAT THE AMOUNT IS, THERE MAY BE A ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS.
SO QUESTIONS LIKE, SO ARE YOU SAYING LIKE JIM'S QUESTION, DO YOU HAVE, HAVE YOU FILED YOUR NINE 90 OR HAVE YOU BE PUT INTO THE APPLICATION VERSUS IT, VERSUS IT BEING SOMETHING THAT WE DO IN THE PROCESS? LIKE WE ARE GOING IN, BUT WE CAN ADD IT AS A PART OF THE APPLICATION.
WELL I THINK WE SAY THAT SINCE WE DO SAY THAT.
'CAUSE I THINK SOMEWHERE IN THERE WE DO SAY IF YOU ARE A NONPROFIT, YOU MUST BE CURRENT ON ALL FILINGS.
IN OTHER WORDS, THEY MUST BE CURRENT ON THEIR TAX SITUATION IF THEY ARE A NONPROFIT.
[00:25:01]
THAT? WELL, SO JUST TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, THERE'S A SECTION THAT SAYS ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS INFORMATION MAY BE REQUESTED IF YOUR AGENCY IS REQUESTING MORE THAN A THOUSAND OR IF CLARIFICATION IS NEEDED AROUND YOUR PROPOSAL.BUT ALSO IF THERE'S ADDITIONAL CLARIFICATION NEEDED ON YOUR PROPOSAL, UM, WHY DID WE EVEN PUT IN AN AMOUNT THOUGH? YOU SAID A THOUSAND.
I'M SORRY, DID I SAY A THOUSAND? I MEAN 10.
I WAS LIKE, OH, EVERYBODY EXPECTED.
DO WE EVEN NEED AN AMOUNT? OH, WE JUST SAY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS MAY BE REQUIRED.
AS TO ME THAT COULD HAPPEN THEORETICALLY ON A $2,000 APPLICATION OR SOMETHING REALLY OUT OF LINE, WE WOULD BE ASKING QUESTIONS.
SO I THINK WE ALWAYS WITHHOLD THE RIGHT TO ASK ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS BEYOND THE APPLICATION.
NOT JUST OVER 10,000 IT SAYS, OR I THINK THE JUST THOUGHT WAS LIKE SOMEBODY PUTS IN SOMETHING FOR, I MEAN YOU CAN ALWAYS PICK A TARGET.
IT'S LIKE WHAT'S THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN, YOU KNOW, 11,000 AND 10,000? NOT A WHOLE LOT, BUT THERE IS A BIT OF A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A $25,000 ASK AND A $10,000 ASK.
SO, YOU KNOW, I THINK IT BECOMES SUBJECTIVE.
SO I MEAN, MAYBE WE JUST PUT ON LIKE MORE SIGNIFICANT ASKS MAY LEAD TO ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS ABOUT LIKE YOUR PROJECT OVERALL.
AND WE RESERVE THE RIGHT TO ASK CLARIFICATION QUESTIONS ON ANY PROPOSAL.
I FEEL LIKE MORE SIGNIFICANT ASK THE CENTER, I'M LIKE, WHAT'S MORE SIGNIFICANT IS THIS RIGHT? YEAH.
THAT'S, I THINK THAT'S WHY WE ENDED UP GOING WITH A NUMBER BECAUSE SAY THERE, IT OPENS IT UP TO ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS.
UM, YEAH, TO ME IT WOULD BE SIMPLE JUST TO SAY, YOU KNOW, DO YOUR APPLICATION, BUT WE MAY ASK ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS.
WELL, IT SAYS CAPITAL EXPENSES.
SO THAT ALSO CONSISTS OF, OH, THERE WAS ONE WITH CAPITAL, UH, CAPITAL WE SAID YOU NEED MORE THAN THREE BIT.
YOU, YOU MAY BE ASKED FOR MORE THAN THREE THREE BITS OF MORE.
WHICH IS MORE OF A CITY PROCUREMENT ISSUE YEAH.
AND WE DID HAVE ONE ISSUE WHERE LIKE SOMEBODY SUBMITTED A PROPOSAL WITH SOME CAPITAL ITEMS AND THEN UPON LOOKING AT THEIR CAPITAL ITEMS, IT'S LIKE, WAIT A SECOND.
THIS IS BENEFITING YOURSELVES WITHIN THAT.
AND NOT THE, SO LIKE THE THREE BITS IS REALLY ABOUT LIKE ENSURING THAT IT'S NOT JUST SOMEBODY GOING TO THEIR FRIEND.
WELL, OKAY, SO RIGHT NOW WE'RE HAVING TWO DISCUSSIONS.
BUT THE TWO DISCUSSIONS ARE CODEPENDENT OF EACH OTHER.
BECAUSE IF WE DO NOT PUT, FOR EXAMPLE, WE ARE TALKING JUST BACK TO JIM'S, THE REVIEWING OF CERTAIN DOCUMENTS THAT HAVE NOW COME YOUR STANDARD PROCEDURE WHEN YOU'RE LOOKING AT THEM.
IF WE DON'T PUT THEM HERE, THEY'RE NOT, THEY, THEY HAVE NO WEIGHT IN IN THE REVIEW.
AND IF WE WANT THEM TO HAVE THE WEIGHT IN THE REVIEW, WE'VE GOTTA PUT THEM SOMEWHERE.
SO I'M THINKING, I MEAN THE APPLICATION, IF THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE WANT, THEN THAT'S WHAT WE NEED TO SAY THAT WE WILL BE EITHER PROVIDED YEAH.
OR THAT WE WILL BE REVIEWING IT OR WE PUT IT IN OUR REVIEW PROCESS TO DO IT.
NOW LIKE I SAID, I PERSONALLY HAVEN'T, HAVEN'T DONE THAT.
I JUST TYPICALLY REVIEW THE APPLICATIONS AS WE RECEIVE THEM.
UM, BUT IF THAT IS SOMETHING THAT THE, THE COMMITTEE, UM, IN A, IN A SENSE I WOULD SAY THAT PERSONALLY I'M PROBABLY NOT CONFLICTED WHILE I UNDERSTAND IT, IS IT OVERKILL? IS IT DUE DILIGENCE? SOMETIMES IT FEELS LIKE OVERKILL, BUT WHAT IT FEELS LIKE AND WHAT IT IS ISN'T ALWAYS THE SAME THING.
WELL, I, I'LL USE THE LAST ONE THAT WE ACCRUED AS AN EXAMPLE.
UH, WHETHER ASKING WE HAD QUESTIONS ABOUT THE CONTINUING BUSINESS AND I WAS VERY SHAKY ON ATAL, HEARD THE PEOPLE SPEAK.
THEY, AND SOMETIMES PEOPLE'S EXPERIENCE IS HARD TO TRANSFER INTO THE, INTO WRITING, YOU KNOW, AND WHERE THEN YOU COULD TELL THE MAN HE KNEW WHAT HE WAS DOING AND THAT'S WHAT IMPRESSED ME.
SO I THINK A LOT OF WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT MAY BE WELL RESOLVED BY THE FACT THAT WE'RE TALKING TO THE PERSON RIGHT AWAY WITH THE APPLICATION.
SO FOR THE SCORING PIECE, SHOULD WE ADD IN, SORRY? SHOULD WE ADD IN A PIECE FOR, BECAUSE ESSENTIALLY WE WILL HAVE SCORED THIS BEFORE THEY ACTUALLY COME.
WE'RE GONNA BE SCORING IT WHEN WE RECEIVE IT.
[00:30:01]
WE WANNA ADD IN A SECTION OR, UM, FOR LIKE THE TOTAL ISN'T UNTIL OR PUT A UM, YEAH.I WOULDN'T FEEL COMFORTABLE GRADING IT UNTIL I REALLY TALK TO THE PEOPLE.
NOW I MIGHT DO AN INITIAL, WHEN I READ IT OKAY.
BUT ONCE WE SPEAK TO THE PEOPLE, THAT'S WHEN WE'RE GOING TO GRADE IT AND HOPEFUL WE APPROVE IT.
SO MAYBE, WE'LL, WHAT WE'LL PUT IN THE REVIEW PROCESS IS THAT THE SUBCOMMITTEE MEMBERS WILL INDEPENDENTLY REVIEW AND INITIALLY SCORE EACH APPLICATION BASED ON THE, UM, INITIALLY SCORED AND EACH APPLICATION BASED ON THE ESTABLISHED CRITERIA.
AND THEN FOLLOWING THE, UM, INTERVIEW, UM, INTERVIEW, APPLICATION INTERVIEW, WE WILL THEN, UM, SUBMIT FINAL SCORES.
BUT COMMITTEE WILL DO A, A SCORING AT THAT TIME TOGETHER.
THERE'S NOTHING LIKE DIRECT INFORMATION TO HELP.
SO WE ARE NOT, IT DOESN'T MAKE A LONG MEETING
SO WHATEVER WE WOULD CREATE SHOULD GO TO THE MAYOR'S OFFICE JUST TO MAKE SURE LIKE THEY'RE GOOD WITH IT AS WELL.
SO JUST WANT TO PUT THAT OUT THERE WITHIN THE PROCESS AS WELL.
MY, MY THOUGHT IS THAT WE WOULD CREATE, LIKE, CREATE THIS AND THEN SUBMIT IT FOR REVIEW AND THEN SUBMIT IT FOR, UH, FINAL OR AT LEAST WHAT'S THE, WHAT'S THE PROCESS? YEAH, I'LL SEND IT TO CONNOR AND THEN, AND THEN WE'LL BRING IT TO THE BODY.
ACTUALLY WHEN YOU CAN WRITE DOWN IT TECHNICALLY WHAT THE COMMITTEE'S ROLE IS, IS TO REVIEW IT AND THEN SO THEN PASS IT ON TO YOU PAUL FOR APPROVAL, RIGHT? YEAH.
AND I'LL REVIEW WITH THE MAYOR'S OFFICE TO MAKE SURE YEAH, IT'S OKAY.
SO THEN WE'RE SAYING FOLLOWING THE ORGANIZATION INTERVIEW, THE COMMITTEE WILL SCORE TOGETHER.
WILL, UM, I'LL SAY IT IN A NICE WAY.
AND MAYBE WHAT I'LL DO IS, IS UM, CREATE AN INITIAL SCORE SHEET TO GO ALONG WITH THE SOP YEAH.
AND THEN CREATE A, UM, SECONDARY SCORE SHEET THAT HAS WHAT OUR INITIAL NUMBERS ARE AND THEN INCLUDE SOMETHING FOR THE INTERVIEW.
BECAUSE I THINK THAT'S, THAT'S WHAT WE'RE DEALING WITH, IN FACT IS THAT PAUL IS A FINAL WORD ON IT PHONE.
LEMME JUST WRITE IT DOWN JUST TO GET IT OUTTA MY HEAD.
I THINK WE MIGHT HAVE IT
OH WAIT, NO, THAT'S GONNA BE ACTUALLY HERE.
THAT'S GONNA BE ACTUALLY DOWN SUBCOMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION.
AND THEN FOR CLARIFICATION, JUST BECAUSE THERE'S TWO DEADLINES THAT WE LOOK FOR.
SO IN ORDER TO GET ON THE AGENDA, WE HAVE TO POST EVERYTHING FIVE DAYS BEFOREHAND.
UM, BUT THEN THERE'S THE RELEASE OF THE ACTUAL APPLICATION.
THAT WOULD BE A SEPARATE EMAIL, BUT IT IS NOT PART OF THE AGENDA.
'CAUSE THEY, IT CAN HAPPEN AT DIFFERENT TIMES.
SO FOR EXAMPLE, LIKE LET'S SAY I HAVE TO GET THE AGENDA OVER TO THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE BY MONDAY, BUT I DON'T GET AN APPLICATION UNTIL TUESDAY.
AT THAT POINT WE CAN REVIEW AND THEN WE CAN RELEASE WITHIN SEVEN DAYS, BUT THAT'S NOT GONNA BE AGENDIZED FOR THIS UPCOMING MEETING.
DOES THAT MAKE SENSE? SAY IT AGAIN.
SO LIKE I HAVE TO, BEFORE WE SEND, BEFORE WE HAVE A SUBCOMMITTEE MEETING, WE HAVE TO SUBMIT THE SUBCOMMITTEE AGENDA TO THE CITY ATTORNEY FOR REVIEW FIVE DAYS PRIOR.
SO BY MONDAY I HAVE TO SEND OVER THE AGENDA.
BUT IF I GET AN APPLICATION THAT COMES IN ON TUESDAY OR WEDNESDAY OF THAT WEEK, WE CAN RELEASE THE ACTUAL, LIKE THE APPLICATION WITHIN THE SEVEN DAYS.
BUT THAT WILL NOT BE IZED FOR THE SUBCOMMITTEE MEETING UNTIL THE FOLLOWING SUBCOMMITTEE MEETING.
SO I JUST WANNA BRING CLARITY TO THAT 'CAUSE WE DO HAVE SITUATIONS WHERE THAT DOES HAPPEN.
[00:35:01]
WE WILL SEND IT OUT BUT WE WON'T BE ABLE TO DISCUSS IT.ACTUALLY DISCUSS IT UNTIL THE FOLLOWING.
SO STILL THE DELAYS IN ITSELF, BUT AT LEAST YOU CAN SIT WITH THAT AND THEN PREPARE YOUR QUESTIONS FOR THE PHONE.
BUT THIS WILL SPEED IT UP A LOT JUST BY ADOPTING WHAT WE'RE DOING HERE.
'CAUSE WE'RE DOING IT UP FRONT.
WE ALWAYS THOUGHT OF ONE STEP BEHIND GETTING IT, NOT NOT YOUR FAULT, BUT JUST THE WAY THE PROCESS WORKED.
SECOND
AND UM, AND IN AN AUTOMATIC INVITATION WILL BE EXTENDED.
CORRECT? WE WILL BE EXTENDING.
IS THAT, THAT'S WHAT WE, SO I WAS GONNA ASK YOU, WE DIDN'T ESTABLISH THAT THERE, BUT SO ARE WE SPEAKING TO AT THAT POINT? THAT MEANS WE WOULD HAVE TO HAVE ALL OUR QUESTIONS PUT TOGETHER THAT FIRST MEETING.
SO I KNOW WE SAID WE'LL DISCUSS IT THE FIRST PART OF THE MEETING.
THE SECOND PART OF THE MEETING IS WHEN WE WANNA, UH, BRING FORTH THE APPLICANT.
I THINK THAT'S WHAT WE'RE SAYING.
THAT WE WANT EVERY APPLICANT TO BE INVITED TO COME AND THAT PART OF THE PROCESS IS CREATING AS WE'RE REVIEWING, WE KNOW THAT WE HAVE TO HAVE OUR QUESTIONS READY FOR THE MEETING.
AND THAT WOULD HAPPEN AT THE SAME MEETING THEN WHATEVER MEETING THAT WE DISCUSSED.
THE SO, SO FOR EXAMPLE, IF WE GET A, THE, YOU KNOW, WE GET AN APPLICATION THAT'S LATE AND IT'S NOT GONNA BE ON THE MEETING, THEN THAT'S NOT ONE THAT WE WOULD BE ASKING QUESTIONS.
BUT WE WOULD HAVE OUR QUESTIONS READY FOR THE NEXT MEETING AND THEN, AND THEY'RE ON THE AGENDA.
I WASN'T SURE IF WE WERE GONNA HOLD IT OVER TO THE NEXT ONE.
SO WE DISCUSS IT AT ONE MEETING AND THEN WE INVITE THE APPLICANT FOR THE FOLLOWING MEETING.
BUT WE CAN HAVE IT AT THE SAME MEETING.
YEAH, I THINK THAT'S WHAT WE TALKED ABOUT KIND OF DISCUSSING HAVING OUR QUESTIONS OR A DISCUSSION RIGHT AT THE BEGINNING PORTION AND THEN INVITING, UM, OKAY.
UH, ORGANIZATIONS TO COME LIKE, LIKE LAST TIME THE THE LATER PART.
THE ONLY THING IS THOUGH, JIM, IF WE, SINCE WE ARE GOING TO ADDING IN THE NOW SCORING AS A GROUP, IT SHOULDN'T BE VERY HARD 'CAUSE WE'VE ALREADY DONE THE INITIAL SCORE AND EITHER WHATEVER THEY TELLING US IS GONNA, IT'S GONNA ADD OR YEAH.
IT'S NOT GONNA BUT OR CONFIRM.
SO, AND WITH THE PERSON THERE, WE CAN DIRECTLY GET ANSWERS.
QUE THE MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE CAN GET THEIR ANSWERS DIRECTLY.
SO I WILL REWRITE THIS FOR A SECOND.
UM, WITH THE ADDING IN THE REVIEWING OF IT AS A GROUP, I WILL CREATE AN ADDITIONAL, UH, SCORING SHEET.
AN INITIAL SCORING SHEET, WHICH IS BASICALLY THIS.
AND THEN WE'LL HAVE IT, UM, SO THAT IT'LL HAVE THAT FINAL SCORING ONCE WE DO IT AS A GROUP.
AND I'VE ALSO, ARE WE IN AGREEANCE THAT ORGANIZATIONS RECEIVE RECEIVING OR MUST RECEIVE A SCORE OF 70 OR MORE TO BE APPROVED? YEAH.
WE HAVEN'T NAMED A NUMBER OR WE DON'T HAVE TO.
I JUST THOUGHT THAT, I THINK THAT MAKES, I ALWAYS, I, I ALWAYS LIKE THINGS LIKE THAT.
YOU JUST LOOK AT THE NUMBERS SCORE AND WE DON'T, WE DON'T HAVE TO SAY THAT, BUT YEAH, WE DON'T, WOULD YOU PREFER NOT TO JUST SAY ANYTHING ABOUT A PARTICULAR STORE? STORE? NO, THAT'S FINE.
SO BASICALLY A CONSENSUS OF THE PEOPLE THAT ARE THERE.
ALRIGHT, WELL I GUESS I CAN, I WILL MAKE A MOTION TO, WHAT ARE WE DOING
AND THEN CAN WE JUST DO A VOTE? I'M
NOW THIS IS WHEN I WAS LOOKING, NO.
THE DRIVER UTILITIES BILL FLYER.
THIS WAS CAM WE HAD WAS SUPPOSED TO DRAFT THIS, COME UP WITH A DRAFT AT ONE POINT OF A FLYER.
KIMBERLY WAS SUPPOSED TO BE DRAFTING ONE UP.
WITH THE MEASUREMENTS THAT THEY PROVIDED US WITH.
UM, SHE DIDN'T SEND IT OVER THOUGH.
SO I'LL FOLLOW UP AGAIN WITH HER.
WE'LL HAVE TO TABLE, WE'LL WE'LL PASS ON THEM.
BUT WE WILL NEED IT SOON IN ORDER FOR US TO MAKE THAT NOVEMBER DEADLINE.
[00:40:01]
NOW THE THING THAT I AM CONCERNED ABOUT AND I JUST WANT TO GET A CLARIFICATION ON THAT, IS HOW ARE WE SET UP FOR THE UTILITY BILL? WHAT DO YOU MEAN? ARE WE GOING, ARE OUR ENVELOPES READY? ARE WE GOING TO GO INTO THE UTILITY BILL? SO IT WAS DECIDED THAT WE WANTED TO DO, YEAH.LIKE IT WASN'T A FLYER BUT IT WAS LIKE A LITTLE POSTCARD I SUPPOSE.
SO WE'RE NOT GONNA DO UTILITY ENVELOPES THIS TIME.
WE WERE GONNA DO A POSTCARD WITH THE QR CODE WITHIN THE YEAH, BUT WE'RE PUTTING THAT IN INSIDE THE UTILITY UTILITY BILL.
THAT'S WHY I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY.
SO THAT'S ON SCHEDULE THEN, RIGHT? NO, UH, WE DON'T HAVE THE POSTCARD.
'CAUSE THAT'S SUPPOSED TO BE NEXT MONTH.
CORRECT? WE WOULD NEED IT AS SOON AS POSSIBLE.
'CAUSE WE DO HAVE TO GIVE THEM 14 DAYS.
WELL ACTUALLY IT'S GONNA BE A LITTLE BIT LONGER 'CAUSE I HAVE TO GET IT APPROVED WITH UTILITIES.
SO WHATEVER GETS DRAFTED, I THEN SEND OVER TO THE UTILITY.
UM, IS HER MAN, SHE'S A MANAGER I SUPPOSE.
ONCE THEY APPROVE IT, THEN WE CAN SEND IT OUT TO UH, OUR PRINTERS SO THAT THEY COULD START PRINTING IT.
WHAT DO WE HAVE ON LAST YEAR'S BILL ENVELOPE? BECAUSE THE ONLY THING THAT'S GONNA BE DIFFERENT IS WE'RE GOING TO SAY WE'RE GONNA PUT THAT CODE ON IT.
THE CODE WAS ALREADY ON THE ONE FOR LAST YEAR.
WHAT, WHAT ELSE DO WE NEED ON THAT? WHATEVER ELSE YOU GUYS WOULD LIKE TO CHANGE.
THAT WAS PART OF WHAT THE DESIGN WAS GONNA BE.
WELL I THINK MAYBE WE'RE ALRIGHT.
ACTUALLY MY THOUGHT IS, GO AHEAD WITH THE WORDING.
THE DOWN BELOW THAT GO DOWN, DOWN THAT I CAN'T READ IT.
WHAT ELSE DO WE WANT TO PUT ON THERE? WE WANTED TO SAY SOME LITTLE BIT ABOUT WHAT THE MONEY IS BEING USED FOR.
RIGHT? I WOULD GO AGAINST BECAUSE WELL SEE AND YOU GUYS WOULD HAVE TO REDESIGN THIS.
BECAUSE IT CURRENTLY IS AN ENVELOPE.
BUT I WOULD SAY LESS WORDING BETTER DUE TO THE FACT THAT YOU DON'T WANNA OVERSTIMULATE WELL THAT THE PERSON YEAH.
BUT THIS ONE IS TALKING ABOUT THEY DON'T NEED TO USE THE ENVELOPE.
THAT'S THE INSTRUCTIONS FOR MAKING THE, THE CONTRIBUTION TO US WITHOUT THE ENVELOPE.
SO IF PEOPLE DID NOT WANNA USE THE ENVELOPE, THEY WOULD BE ABLE TO USE THE QR CODE.
WHAT ARE YOUR THOUGHTS, HOW WE CAN PUT THIS INTO SHAPE? SO WE TO MOVE, JUST TO MOVE FORWARD WITH WHAT, I'M SORRY.
I WAS DOING THIS TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THE DONATIONS.
IT'LL BE A TWO-SIDED PIECE OF PAPER.
I THINK IF WE END UP DOING A POSTCARD, YOU CAN INCLUDE MORE LANGUAGE, RIGHT? YOU CAN PUT MORE.
YEAH, I THINK WITH AN ENVELOPE WE'RE OBVIOUSLY LIMITED AS TO THE SPACE THAT WE HAVE.
SO LIKE IF, CAN YOU SCROLL TO THE TOP, JEN? WHAT, WHAT WOULD HAPPEN IF, UM, SO I KNOW WE'RE WAITING ON KIMBERLY, LIKE WHAT'S LIKE THE ABSOLUTE 'CAUSE IF ONCE SHE SUBMITS IT, DO WE HAVE TO REVIEW OR MEET AGAIN AS A DOES COMMITTEE? YES.
BUT IF WE'RE WITHIN A, I MEAN, YEAH, ACTUALLY WE SHOULD, I THINK WE SHOULD GET IT APPROVED WITH THE SUBCOMMITTEE COMMITTEE FIRST.
SO THAT'S NOW WE'RE MOVED INTO OCTOBER THE END OF THE MONTH.
WE COULD POSSIBLY, INSTEAD OF GOING NOVEMBER 1ST, GO A LITTLE DELAYED.
SO IT WOULD BE LIKE NOVEMBER 15TH OR NOVEMBER 16TH.
BECAUSE THEY BASICALLY ONLY DO THIS ONCE A YEAR.
AND WE'RE THE ONLY ONE THEY DO IT FOR? I THINK SO.
I'VE NEVER SEEN, AND WE HAVE BEEN LATE BEFORE.
I KNOW WE HAVE DONE IT IN NOVEMBER, SO MAYBE YOU'RE RIGHT.
IT'S LOOK TO NOVEMBER FOR THE SOLICITATION.
I, I'D LIKE TO TRY TO LIKE HAVE THIS AS OUR PLAN.
LIKE ABSOLUTE BE LIKE OUR, WE KNOW WE HAVE THIS.
AND IF WE DON'T HAVE ANYTHING TO DISCUSS OR REVIEW NEXT MONTH, THEN WE, WE MOVE FORWARD WITH THIS.
THIS IS OUR OBJECTIVE NEXT MONTH.
[00:45:02]
OKAY.WHAT DO YOU THINK? JUST TO YEAH, THAT UH, I GUESS SINCE WE HAVE TO REVIEW IT, JUST BASIC, A MOTION THAT NEXT'S MEETING WILL REVIEW AND APPROVE THE SOLICITATION.
TO, BEFORE WE PUT AGENDA ITEM FOR NEXT TIME, IF YOU AND THEN WILL WE HAVE TO, TO TAKE IT TO THE, TO THE BOARD.
BOARD? LIKE WE HAVE TO TAKE IT TO THE I THINK WE'RE OKAY WITH THAT.
NO, I THINK WE, WE HAVE THE AUTHORITY I THINK AS
SO, BUT IF WE DON'T, LIKE IF KIMBERLY ISN'T ABLE TO PRODUCE IT BY NEXT MONTH, UM, WHICH I'M SURE SHE WILL BE ABLE TO YEAH.
BUT IN, IN THE EVENT SOMETHING HAPPENS LIFE, LIFE IS ALWAYS GONNA BE LIFE, THEN WE DO HAVE A PLAN B RIGHT.
WE'D HAVE TO, WE'LL HAVE TO REDO THAT, WHATEVER THAT IS.
WELL, WE WOULDN'T HAVE TO, SO I GUESS THAT WOULD BE MY QUESTION.
AND I KNOW YOU SAID SOMETHING ABOUT ADDING NUMBERS, JEN.
SO JEN, IF YOU COULD SCROLL DOWN.
IS THERE ANYTHING, UH, THERE THAT WE WANNA CHANGE? ANY LANGUAGE THERE? WELL, OF COURSE THAT SOUNDS LIKE I, AND I WILL SAY THERE'S, THAT'S A LITTLE CONFUSING TO ME.
MAKE YOUR TAX GO TO LONG BEACH COMMUNITY FOUNDATION.
DO WE, DOES THAT MEAN THEY CAN WRITE A CHECK TO LONG BEACH COMMUNITY FOUNDATION? THAT DOES THE CHECK HAS TO BE WRITTEN TO LONG BEACH COMMUNITY FOUNDATION.
IF NOT, IT WILL NOT GO THROUGH.
THAT MEAN THAT'S A WAY THEY CAN PAY BY CHECK.
AND IT'S IMPORTANT THEY PUT THE MAYOR'S FUND FOR HOMELESS BECAUSE THE MAYOR DOES HAVE HIS OWN FUND.
OR THEY CAN JUST SCAN THAT QR CODE AND THAT WOULD TAKE THEM, THEY CAN PAY IT OVERLY.
AND I THINK THAT'S PRETTY GOOD AS FAR AS THE WORDING ON THE MECHANICS OF HOW TO DO IT.
THEN IF WE'RE OKAY, IF WE DO NOT GET SOMETHING, THEN WE WILL MOVE FORWARD WITH THIS ENVELOPE NEXT, NEXT ONE, NEXT MONTH.
SO ALL WE NEED TO DO, THE NEXT ONE IS COME UP WITH SOME NICE THINGS THAT WILL APPEAL TO PEOPLE.
WELL, HOPEFULLY, UM, I DON'T, I, IT'S NOT ON THE AGENDA, SO I'LL JUST GIVE LIKE THIS REAL, THIS VERBAL UPDATE.
I REACHED OUT TO CHRISTIE HASTINGS, UM, FOR PRESS TELEGRAM.
ASKING, IS IT ON HERE? I DIDN'T SEE IT.
SINCE WE'RE ON, WE'RE STILL DISCUSSING FOUR, RIGHT? YES.
I WAS, BECAUSE I LOOKED NO, I LOOKED AND I DIDN'T, I SCANNED RIGHT OVER IT AND SO THAT'S WHY I WAS LIKE, OH, IT'S NOT ON THERE.
SO LET ME JUST SAY THIS VERBAL THING.
I'LL SAY WHAT I'M GONNA SAY NEXT.
NOW THE DRAFT NOTICE, I WAS A LITTLE CONFUSED ON THAT FOR THE PRESS DRAFT.
I THINK THEY'RE WORKING ON THAT.
SO THAT WAS JUST SIMPLY, UM, REACHING OUT TO A CONTACT AT, UM, THE, WE TALKED ABOUT MAYBE HAVING A STORY RUN ABOUT OUR HIGHLIGHTING SOME OF THE ORGANIZATIONS YEAH.
THAT WE ARE, UM, THAT WE FUNDED BE THAT WOULD BE NICE.
SO I REACHED OUT AND I HAVEN'T GOTTEN A RESPONSE BACK YET.
SO WHAT I WAS GOING TO SAY,
BUT, UM, I REACHED OUT TO HER JUST SAYING, UM, THAT, YOU KNOW, WE ARE THE, WE ARE THE MAYOR'S FUND.
WE'RE THE HAYSTACK COMMITTEE AND THE MAYOR'S FUND SUBCOMMITTEE.
WE DO, WE'VE BEEN FUNDING SOME REALLY AMAZING ORGANIZATIONS THAT HAVE BEEN, UM, HELPING OUT HOMELESS CITIZENS.
AND WE'D LOVE TO HIGHLIGHT THEM AND LET THE CITY KNOW, YOU KNOW, WHERE THEIR FUNDS HAVE BEEN GOING.
SO THEY ALL THE SAME SELLING THE CITIZENS.
SO, UM, I'M SURE SHE'S BUSY, BUT LUCKILY WE, WE HAVE A FEW THINGS, UM, IN COMMON.
SO SHE'S ONE OR TWO PEOPLE AWAY.
UM, SO, BUT SO IT'S OUT THERE.
SO I THINK, UM, I THINK IT'S OKAY IF BY PUTTING THIS OFF ANOTHER MONTH.
BECAUSE HOPEFULLY WE CAN GET EVERYTHING COINCIDED.
SO, BUT THE OUTREACH HAS BEEN MADE AND I'M JUST AWAITING.
UM, AND SHE'S, SHE DOES A, A LOT OF THE REPORTING ON ALL THINGS LONG BEACH.
SO THIS WOULD BE CONSIDERED ALL THINGS LONG BEACH.
WELL I THINK, UH, WE, I'M SORRY.
SAME RECOMMENDATION ON THAT, UH, AND FUTURE AND THEIR
[00:50:01]
ITEMS. WE'VE ALREADY DEALT WITH THAT.CAN WE, SORRY JIM, CAN WE JUST VOTE ON THIS ONE? JUST APPROVE.
DO I NEED, I I MOVE THAT WE APPROVE, UM, THE, UH, REPORT ON THE DRAFT NOTICE FOR THE MAYOR'S FUND TO BE FEATURED IN THE PRESS TELEGRAM.
AND AS ROBBERY DEALT WITH THE FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS AND WE HAVEN'T BEEN GETTING ANY APPLICATIONS, WE JUST GOT THAT LITTLE FLURRY OF THEM.
WE, WE DID GET ONE APPLICATION, BUT IT CAME IN WITHIN THAT, THAT'S WHY I'M TRYING TO OKAY.
DELINEATE BETWEEN THE TIMELINE.
BUT IT IS SOMEONE THAT WE PREVIOUSLY AWARDED AND I GUESS THAT WOULD BE THE QUESTION.
SO FOR SHOES, UM, SO INITIALLY IF WE WERE FOLLOWING WHAT WE THOUGHT, YOU KNOW, WE WON'T, WE WOULDN'T, UM, FUND AGENCIES THAT WE FUNDED IN THE PAST.
THEN THEY DON'T MISS, THEY DON'T PASS THAT THRESHOLD REVIEW.
BUT BECAUSE IT'S UP IN LIEU, WE'LL SEND IT OVER AND THEN YOU GUYS CAN REVIEW IT AND SEE WHAT YOUR THOUGHTS ARE.
UH, BUT IT IS AN ORGANIZATION THAT WE'VE WORKED WITH IN THE PAST.
SO WE WILL BE GETTING THAT ONE IN THE MAIL.
MY ONLY QUESTION OR THING IS, WHEN WAS THE LAST TIME? 'CAUSE I FEEL LIKE THEY'RE, WHAT? THEY, THEY WEREN'T LAST YEAR, WERE THEY YEAR BEFORE? THEY'RE YEARLY.
WAS IT 2023? I FEEL LIKE IT WAS BEFORE.
I FEEL LIKE IT WAS A LONG TIME AGO.
IT FALLS WITHIN LIKE A WEIRD PERIOD HOLD NUMBER.
ANYTHING ELSE? ANY PUBLIC COMMENT? NOPE.
UH, SORRY JIM, CAN WE JUST VOTE ON THE FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS? YEAH.
I, DESIREE CAN YOU SECOND THAT? I SECOND.
AND THEN JUST TO NOTE, THEY WERE AWARDED 2022, BUT THEY FINAL, WE ISSUED A FINAL PAYMENT TO THEM THIS YEAR.
I THINK WE GOT NO PUBLIC COMMENT.
IT, I THINK WE GOT SOME THINGS DONE.