Special Committee on the Community Benefits Agreement 2.0

>> COUNCILMAN >> area says running a few minutes late. So I'm going get started. Per his for his his direction. And I'm going to start off with introductions to my far left. >> Brittany Norris for the administration, Brian Russell Council research, our Richelle Office of General Counsel. A police office of General Counsel Peterson counselor's office. Our City Council district one? People is a city council district. 7. Ron Salem group to enlarge. Good morning to I want to quit city Council district 9. Welcoming COUNCILMAN Carlucci. What we start off with MISS Mary, can you kind of set the stage where we are and what we hope to accomplish today? >> Thank The chair. To the committee. So the you have a couple of handouts, if you recall that the last meeting and there was some discussion with respect to which path way the committee supported with respect to how the city funds under cba 2 point o would be distributed for grants the special committee ultimately landed on following a modified version of the Cultural Council model. >> We're an outside 501, c 3 organization would be responsible for administering a grant process for distribution of the city funds. So in light of that, the other item that was taken up and approved by the special committee was change to the appointment structure, which is different than what the Cultural Council appointment structure looks like. Where in the mayor and council PRESIDENT Would share for appointments. Each also checked to council confirmation. >> And the the Jags would have one current employee that they would appoint to the. >> To the board of the outside 501, c 3 organization. So what you have in front of you are to handouts from our office. One is the legislation that what draft legislation that the committee has been working on over the last several meetings. This is the legislation that follows the Cultural Council model. I've also updated it to address the change to the appointment structure that was approved by the special committee at the last meeting. To follow more of what we see in the code with respect to the opioid and psg models because they are similarly fashion with appointments by the mayor and appointments by the council PRESIDENT. I haven't made any other changes to the legislation other than that from the last time that you all reviewed it. The other hand out at the request of Councilmember Arias at the last meeting, Councilmember come committee members were able to reach out to our office to be in the shell to ask about specific items that they that you as members wanted to go over with respect to the legislation we heard from a few of you, most of Councilmember Carlucci says the item that he raised at the last meeting that ultimately he had made a motion withdrew it. So I've added that to the list for Councilmember Carlucci Councilmember Palou so had shared a hand out at the last meeting. And so to the extent that those items were still relevant to the draft legislation in its current form, I've included those on here. And he MAY also share some justification as you all work through these items. And then Doctor Salem, you had indicated desire at the last meeting and we discussed after that, adding additional guardrails on the disbursement of funds recognizing that while we might be leaning into an outside 5, a one c 3 model you hadn't expressed concerns about those disbursements placing the city in a precarious position potentially under the cba with the Jags. And so you would ask for us to identify some additional guardrails. The company placed on the disbursement of the funds. So what's on the hand out here are really things that have been pulled out of our code with respect to the opioid in public service grants model. And so I just listed in there. There's a lot of requirements with respect to what must accompany an application for a grant financial information that must be supplied. You MAY recall because you've addressed this somewhat recently as a council that you can put a cap on the amount of funding that can be provided to the requesting agency. You can limit the number of programs or projects that are funded in any given grant cycle. There's various things that you can do to kind of limit or put guardrails on how those funds are dispersed. And so that's part of what's also in this handout for consideration other than that, MISTER Chair. I think the idea for this this meeting was to work through some of these items to ultimately get this legislation in a place where the special committee feels it's ready for filing so we can get into the legislative process and in committees for overall council consideration. >> Okay. Let me make a couple of comments. Number one. Stuff Plus. We keep mentioning the public service grant process, but public service grant process that that is existing is within government. And and this this model, even though its model after the public service grant process is outside government. >> Through the to the chair. So you are correct. Both the public service grants process and the opioid process or internal to the government and the model that has been selected. So by the special committee is to use an outside 5, 1, c 3 to handle the grant process and the disbursement of funds. So the one thing that correlates now is the appointment structure is similar to our in-house model because that was a decision made by the special committee at the last meeting. >> And can you the number 2, can you provided to the committee? The position of the Office of General Counsel and using this model outside government with the use city funds. >> So this is item that came up during the last committee meeting and I'm happy to reiterate it. So there have been some concerns discussed in the office with respect to the fact that the city is in is under contract with the Jags for the disbursement of these funds under the cba 2 point know, with respect to the various categories, affordable housing, homelessness, initiatives, et cetera. And so we are under contract with the Jags to ensure that the city dollars are dispersed in court in accordance with that agreement. The concern has been raised in our office is that if we go to an outside model where independent 501, c 3 organization is responsible to disperse the city funds if they're dispersed inappropriately or not in accordance with the community benefits agreement that places the city in a position where because we are in pretty of contract with the Jaguars, they could compromise that contractor, the Jags dollars that are that are included in that contractor Con contemplated in that contract and that that was the concern I raise last time. >> And that is still a concern that our office has. >> At this point, COUNCILMAN Area says arrived as the chair and I want to turn it over to him. >> All right. Good morning, everybody. Thank you. Vice-chair, Salem yet. Thank you for for starting the Just 2 check. Our we on number 3 now. Correct on the agenda. >> MISTER Chair, doctor Salem had asked that. I just kind of remind the committee where we were in the process and where we stood with respect to the handouts that are provided teach. See. Okay. Yeah. That's what I have here on the agenda for number 2 of these d c. So I guess we are now on number 3. >> All right. So we do have a few public comment cards. Based on the work that we have to do today. What I do if you don't mind Summit mystery James, just give me that cart as well, too take care all the public comment cards more than id at the end. One, make sure we get through this committee first and we have time will will address these cards at the end. All right. With have 2 speakers in the queue starting with that Councilmember, you're recognized. >> Thank you. Chair of through the chair to MR. Topless. So I know one of questions that was brought up and MR. Barnes here. So one of the questions MISS Jean are brought up last time or or overall was whether or not the city can establish its own 5, one c 3 and like what that process looks like. >> I know that was a question. And I kind of want to. Hear hear how long that will take if we're able to do so. >> Through the chair to councilmember So yes, legally the is able to establish its own 501, c 3. The concern I raised or just the the flags are raised at the last meeting was that, you know, there could be a potential loss of momentum to pursue kind of what would be now option c because we would have to take the time to file with the state. The documentation to create that entity. We don't necessarily have an attorney in house that would do that. So we would be engaging outside counsel to handle that. That's a process that's already been undertaken by MISTER Nuns from to establish a 5, 0, 1, 63. And believe there's another 5, a one c 3 that's also been established. And so they've already gone through that process. But again, legally, the city can do that. >> Through through the chair us from start. So it looked at the city to do that. What what does that process? I agree with you I just want to make sure right now. To do it our key process. Key guys already have contracts that that we can just jump on and say go make-up. I don't see how does that work. >> So our office is authorized to engage outside counsel when deemed appropriate by the general counsel. So we would probably need to identify or from that we MAY already have under engagement for other purposes to to it assist the city in creating and establishing the 501 c 3 and then from there, it's really a matter of we have to create articles of incorporation. We have to establish the initial board membership, et cetera, file. Those documents with the state have that approved in order to and then there's probably also additional filings that must occur to assure a 501, c 3 exempt status through the rs. So there's a series of different things. Filings that would have to occur to establish or create that kind of an organization. >> how much time to think that is like? Yeah, through the chair Michelle is has some experience in this. So it just depends, you know, as long as the filings are all appropriate and correct and complete when you initially filed and we would obviously be retaining a firm that would do it just depends on how quickly they're processed at the state. >> I really can't answer that question. All right. Things are. Right. You're welcome. MISTER Cameron. >> Thank you, MR. Just to follow up on the questions by Councilmember Piluso. Mary from hearing you correctly. You're saying that the office of General Counsel. Even though you haven't set the record, he would prefer that we not pursue. And outside 501, see 3 to administer the grants because of potential impact with the contract. With the through the chair to Councilmember Maros. The Office of General Counsel is not taking a position one way or the other. It's our responsibility to educate you on the risks. >> Associated with the various policy decisions that you're making. And so that's just an item for consideration by the special committee. When you're determining how policy wise, which direction you would like to go. >> Well, through the chair, you didn't give a definitive opinion, listening to the tone of your concerns, which is is reason to pause. >> For the chair to Councilmember Morrow. So one of the things that mentioned that the last meeting and that's kind of come up in conversations with John Sawyer, who's the deputy over our government operations department who handles contracts for the city is that, you know, with respect to the Cultural Council model, cultural services are not necessarily a core function of a government. And so it might have made sense in that instance that we would have gone with an outside entity to administer that process because their subject matter experts and cultural services, whereas the grant process in the distribution of funds that we're talking about in this instance are really something that is more relative to our core government functions were talking affordable, housing, homelessness, services, etc. And so in that case contemplating that, the fact that it's more of a core government service and the fact that we already have proven processees in house that our effective in distributing grant dollars on behalf of the city and to ensure it's always. It's always. Better in the instance word pretty of contract with the Jaguars that were in full control of the process of distributing the city funds that we can assure that we are not going to end up situation where we might have defaulted under that contract in some capacity. So these are all just matters for consideration by the committee that we've discussed before and that Dr Salem wanted to to also raise at this juncture. >> All right, MISTER Joe Carnage. All right. Thank you, MR. Chair. So to the CHAIRMAN Plus, if are we are we trying to decide right right now if we for Maroon 5, 1, c 3 or if we use one of their 5, one c threes like. I'm ready to get. What are we talking about like I'm ready to start getting into some of these amendments and stuff. But what do we need to decide before we get into those amendment? >> Through the chair to Councilmember Carlucci. So I think the decision of the committee has been made to go with an outside 5, a one c 3 to write work on disbursement of funds. I think the question that MAY still be remaining is whether or not there are a couple of different 501, c threes put themselves forward with interest in being the party to administer the process. And you MAY just want to make a determination. Okay, which go to the dance with. Okay. Got it. So that makes them make sense to me. And I guess the next question through the chair to that's mystified. Plus, >> Does it really matter? Who creates the final one c threes? And that's just like a name and articles like we're creating the hole. >> Bylaws and the guideline like so to speak, right? >> Through the chair, Councilmember Carlucci. So the city, if the city creates the 501 c 3, there's an additional level of control on that that 501, c 3, then I think you would have with and fully independent the city is not dictating the bylaws of 501 c 3. That's currently referenced in the legislation. Although I will tell you that as this committee has taken various actions to amend and, you know, identify their course with respect to the legislation that you have in front of you. They have been consistently amending their bylaws to kind of address those staying so that they're in line with what's in the legislation that you all are working through and that he has consistently been doing that throughout this process. Okay. Cool. >> for me. I mean, I think we're we're kind of here at the point and that the time to where we just need to say, let's use what we got in front of us. I don't think the city needs to create our own 501, c 3. That's just me personally. Think that's going to take forever. I'm the new guy on the committee. You guys have been laboring over this for almost a year something. So I what do we need to do what we need to make a motion to move forward with the existing 5, 1, c 3 year. How do we like formally just kind of say, yeah, that's what we're doing. And then we just start working through this. >> So through the chair to Councilmember Carlucci, draft legislation that's in front of you contemplates that the oversight administration of East Side community grants program would be handled by historic Eastside cba organization incorporated. That is the organization that Daniel nuns from represents. And that has been consistently part of the conversation moving forward. So I think if that is 5, a one c 3 organization this committee wants to proceed forward with any don't have to amend the legislation. It would be if you would contemplate having a different organization manage the process that you would need to amend this bill today to effectuate that. >> Okay. So is that like Is it just like a consensus thing among the college because we do need to vote on that. >> So I think MISTER Chair, what you might want to do is just land on. Does the committee have a consensus to proceed with the historic Eastside cba organization or do you want to have further discussion with respect to the other? The other group that has been represented here and I believe they MAY have filed MR. Police so you might have better information or somebody in the audience and determine. Which one you all would want to proceed with. I think that's kind of a primary consideration before you would dive into the details of the legislation. >> Okay. Goal. So last thing, MR. Chair for me. I'm ready to put off the table. The city created some 5, 1, c 3. I'm happy to hear from both groups. But I'm ready to move forward, which is one of them. So we can kind of start getting into getting getting all set up. That's me. Thank you. I So before we take that action, I do are Palou this. Clark, Mary. And so let's just its peak on that part and then not that's the case. We'll just move forward, MR. Salmond recognized. Thank you, chair very quickly. I voted against. >> The the >> public service grant model outside of prefer the opioid and and I believe personally, the opioid model ought to be used indefinitely. I've heard this two-year stuff. I disagree with that. It ought to be used until. We're comfortable with it. And then we could move outside of government. The votes were not there for that. So I'm ready to debate which 5, 0, 1, 3, c we use. I don't know how we do that. But I I think what we should do forward at this point, I guess. Thank you. Thank you. Some. Thank you, chair. You know, Okay. So through the chair Mr, Populous and cause. >> Because I guess again with the sentiments coming from it. I honestly have been very wondering like what is going to the time constrained if we're going to go through our own city, make the 5, 1, c threes. And we have a couple of minutes tab list. Seems like we've directed that the past. But my question or something I was brought up was that bylaws and if we add in language in here saying, look, I laws will make sure that they add in x, y and z forever has an exclusive contract with the city that the language we had in here and ensure that the buck by whatever nonprofits chosen like still needs to align with with things that the city is asking them to do. >> Through the chair to councilmember, probably so. So I think with respect to how you want the process to work, what guardrails you want to put in place, etc. The to the extent that their bylaws need to address that are aligned with the ordinance. I think that would be a natural function of how you are dictating the distribution of city dollars to occur. There are other aspects of their bylaws that would necessarily be address through this legislation or by the council because there has Norris indicated last time 501, c 3 also has an opportunity for capacity building and jumping into other aspects that are not just focused solely on the cba. The Eastside grants their bylaws would address other things that would be contemplated here by the council. >> I just want to verify that any. I mean, like I think I think that's going to be critical for us, right to make sure that we're putting in language into the ordinance that says whatever party we what are 5, 1, 2, 3, that the city enters into a contract with will have the following criteria to that. And I want like have bylaws been established. Bylaws now for any nonprofit turning the nonprofit's going comes up or. >> As I indicated, MISTER 9 has a set of bylaws that have been modified according to the actions of this committee. With respect to the legislation. But honestly, I can't answer to the other organization, Anderson. Anderson Art, that's >> all right. Thank you. Speak up. MISS Clark Mary. Thank you chair. Although right now I think what I have to say, maybe a little premature because my concern is terms of establishing the 5, 1, 3 c is. The organization who does it? I know that there's one that's existing. But does that the one that's existing in this is a question represent the east side. So it doesn't. It's rhetorical. It's rhetorical. So so it does matter which organization, although there MAY be one that's established. Does it represent that community? And so that's one of the questions that we need to answer here today, as well as the set in our decision on which organization we'll have the 501 c 3. Thank you. Thank you, Ms Norris. Thank you, chair. I just wanted prep because I think there's going to be some consternation between the 2 groups because the council mccart Marie's point. >> I think there's an assumption that whichever nonprofits changing someone has like a card on their side. That's not the right phrase. >> The administration views what's currently with legislation is good by our standards because it's a blank slate. I think what you guys in here, as far as requirements on the board and by a lot of Stephanie to be accepted in order for that organization to enter tech contractual agreement with the city. We are also positioned and more than willing to hold a educational summit following your actions today to bring both sides together, interested parties and walk them through the process for board appointments. What they can expect. We can talk sunshine. We can talk procurement, all the nitty-gritty suffered happily having to handle city funds and we'll make a request that the number of members on the officer General councilor their ethics and so forth. So >> com, people which whichever nonprofit you're still going to play by the rules that take place. Nurse Tabish here and we're positioned and ready to bring those 2 sides together to have that conversation. All right. Thank you. And so I want to just chime in very quick. I know last time we we we come being. >> We talked about this. And to me, the biggest thing is it's having fair representation from both sides, obviously in the room right now is is in somewhat divided right? But I don't really care which non property goes to. At the What I care the most about is the board member representation. And that's what want to do today is also to make sure that both sides have representation because ultimately that's really what matters. That's what drives us forward. A nonprofit just a shell. It's really about the people that are representing that shell. So as long as both sides have equal stake at this, that's really what we need to come up with. So as MISTER Carter's you mentioned, I'm ready to move forward with whatever nonprofits are already established. Only it. Both sides have representation on the board. That's the only way. All right, MR. You're recognized. Thank you, Chair, MR. Duncan come up. >> And I appreciate what what MISS Storms just just brought up because I do think there will need to be follow-on meetings that there's a there's a decision made today. I think it does need to be. I agree if we already know that we're probably not going to have our about a one c 3 status by the city. We have ones that are here. What a what is the name of the organization? Of the nonprofit was established? >> historic East Side. >> The Ba Organization >> And you do have bylaws established. Yes, sir. Okay. Can you make if there's going to be a meeting that the administration is going to host? I would hope that you would meet with ms John Bart well in advance and kind of go through different bylaws and different things like that that need to be kind of established based on some the conversation we're about to have here because, of course, to the point of this to the this. To honest, I think you're good now want to make sure it say one thing. >> We talk about the organization representing the East side. The truth is. There's not in organization that represents one side or the other. It is the it is the way organization has been structured to represent the side. So it is been structured have a member of the mayor's office to have a member of the City Council's office to have a member from the Jaguars. And to have representation. From the East side. That's what it means. 2. Mean that the organization represents the east side. >> But to chair, so, know, to to that and right, it was a matter of. We knew that was going to be 5, one c 3 nonprofit. It. It's going to be up to us and up to the administration to make sure that we have appointees that do makes sense for entire community. We put restrictions on. Who's supposed to be on the board. I assume we're going to talk about that more here. I have no prom seating as well. MR. Party want to kind of come into putting as well. And MR. Martin representing another entry in this. Mike. My question is if there was if the administration is calling a summit, if they're doing some sort of a van where they have a lot of folks are kind of explain what the border process going to look like this on our conversation today. Is that something that that? You would be interested in kind of working with if the nonprofit is. The one that's listed in in the legislation. >> Our position is consistent with COUNCILMAN Salem. We would prefer it be in-house city. If, however, that is our only choice, of course, we will proceed with that. But until we get to the very end, that's going to be our position. And just to clarify, we do not have a 501, c 3 that is created to accept these fights because we were waiting, of course, for the council decide what they want to do. But we were never organized to accept cba fun. >> But now think our see cars a crouch is next. But he's going to line with something about say which time moving forward. I m our coaching. I think chair >> okay. Will. So it sounds like have 1, 5, one, c 3 that's ready to move. Is that right? As the through this year Plus, because I've heard you say earlier, there's there's 2, but is part of say that they don't have one but MR. Nunn said they have one. >> Through the chair to councilmember Koji, MR. Non does represent the historic Eastside cba organization. >> I recalled and I could have been wrong. But I recall that one of the notice meetings that was held by a portion of this special committee. >> That there was another group from the east side that had indicated that they had filed to establish an of a different 5, a one c 3, but maybe there's some members in the audience that could address that more specifically. Okay. >> Chair, whoever threw the chair your hand raised. And again, this is this is just a quick you do that. It's just a yes or no. And I would I would. >> in the beginning, we were not prepared to except the pies because we were going with the opioid modern version. But since there is going to be another problem, one, c yes, we're gonna put out step in that position. We have laws as well. And we have a turkey and that is the only option outside of the opioid model. Then we will represent the set. It not be just months. >> Thank 9. Might just name and address, please. Batavia hairs. Address. Okay. Okay. Thank you. Thank you, All right. So let's just cut to the chase here. >> Due to chair populist, there's really 3 things here that matter, right? The board, the ceo in the bylaws, those are really only 3 things that ultimately matter. Correct. As far as when it comes down to 5, 1, c 3 doesn't matter who created it doesn't matter what the name of that is. It really ultimately matters with the bylaws say what and who is the board? >> Through the chair to Councilmember Carlucci, I would think that those would be matters of primary importance to the council. And I think, okay, this came up at the last meeting with respect to the appointment structure and for the board of directors. >> Okay. Cool. So I MAY just are just moving forward with the one that's in the legislation. We make sure the board is right. We make sure the bylaws are right. We make sure the CEOs, right. That's all going to get flushed out. >> So >> through the chair to Councilmember Carlucci. So there hasn't been any conversation about addressing who the ceo was, how they staff there. 5, c 3. It's really the board of directors that I think has been right now. I get it. I mean, that's that's that's a down the line thing. I'm just making the statement that all those things will get flushed out the ultimate things that matter of the bylaws and the board ceo, whatever that will take time. But I think we need to start using our time too. Get into this. So that's that's where on that. >> All right. No other speakers in the queue right now. So I'd like to just get a consensus that maybe was show of hands or should we just do voice vote on this? MISS A fabulous. The consensus. >> To the chair, consensus on what on which? 501, c Because store you say you wanted to get a consensus on which one we go with, right? Well, I indicated that the legislation was drafted with to direct to provide that historic Eastside cba organization which is the one represented by MISTER Non is the >> 501, c 3 that has been selected. If you want to change that, then that would that would be a discussion and emotion you would make. But if there's a consensus amongst your membership to stick with that organization that I think you can move on to next as it is right now. I see the cute night up. I'm just going to go very quick with everybody. We have a consensus to stay with the legislation that's currently drafted with the current I want to see 3. Yes or no, MR. Yes, that is that. Yes, areas. Yes, phantom. No card. Yes, Mary. Now so consensus is yes. We're gonna stick with what we have right now. Right now. I have the queue opened up. I'm ready to go to the amendments. And as you guys have something else to add, let's go to the amendments. So MR. Shannon, during the Thank you, chair. >> You made a comment which if we're going to move in this direction, that the that the board is represented from both sides. I hate to use the word both sides because it bothers me. Talking about a neighborhood, but for the sake of discussion and I'm looking at all the appointments and I'm trying to determine how you would do that. You've got to buy the council president to by the mayor. You got one from each neighborhood. That's going to be a challenge. I believe that Doctor Salem, that legislation. >> Maybe I printed the wrong one. Now it's 4 by the mayor for by the council PRESIDENT, one from the Jags. That's the 9. Correct, which starts on Page 4 of the handout. You have in front of you that the appointment structure that was addressed there was a consensus that the last meeting to ship. So we've gotten away from one from each neighborhood. No. So if you go in there on Page 5 item, number 4 qualifications to the extent feasible. The mayor and council PRESIDENT Shall endeavor to appoint members who reside in or have a substantial economic business interest in each of the 5 neighborhoods. And it also ended that list them there. It says no more than 3 members regardless of appointing authority shall reside in or have a substantial business interest in a single neighborhood. >> So what's forward for? But that these are where you need it These are the qualifications that you need to use to make your appointments, whether you're the mayor, the council presenter at what I hear. You say, yeah, ok? Well, that's going to be a challenge for somebody. >> Yeah, I mean, that was what the board discussed. Again, if you want to revisit this today, you can. I will just say, MISTER Chair, one of that we raised to cut that there could be some legal impediments to that appointment structure. And I think Daniel, none has looked into that. You MAY want to allow him to address that at some point today, just to share their legal concerns with respect to 100% of the board of directors being appointed by. The city and the jacks. >> MR. Sales. Yeah. Yeah. I It will just be a challenge to to make sure that the board is adequately represented. >> Yeah. And to that point, I know last MISS John Bart send over some resumes as well. 2 to 2 Some people from from. From that part of the community. So it will be a challenge. But I think we have work to do and it's what we need do to to make sure that we see is to finish line. So I'm I'm ready for the challenge, MR. To lead. I'm going to put Ms Norris and the administration back on the hot seat for the moment like that with with the notion of there being to the point about customer Salem said 2 sides, right? Like the administration should get everyone in the room. She Barton's for non and the community in a room to talk about what? I think. What what for qualifications are we're going to be looking for. And it's my understanding administration might opinions on on. Legal opinion on appointments. Want to speak to that. I'll be honest to charity COUNCILMAN Police. So I'm not sure what legal opinion referencing, but I do think in our summit when we detail the qualifications required. >> And the board appointment process and then also to some of the preemptions. If you're on the board, you don't get to touch these dollars. And I think that might also be a revelation for some folks. I think stuff like that's going to help MAY be narrowed that list in a good way through went through the same us to publish a grad. So it's so if you're on the board. >> It was my understanding. You could. You just not vote on a certain item or some like that. >> Through the chair to councilmember police are not necessarily so membership on the board MAY entirely exclude that member or their organization from being able to apply for grant funds through this program. It's a case-by-case analysis that has to be conducted and the board members are required to follow ethics laws with respect to how they handle the dollars in the process. And that's something we've discussed previously. But membership on the board MAY absolutely entirely exclude them from the ability where organization from the ability of pursuing these funds. Is it mayor shall like what? Sorry because there's a specific analysis that has to be conducted by an attorney to address the facts, the facts and the scenario at hand with respect to each of the members and if they have a conflict. So I can't give a blanket answer to you. It's the same way we handle conflicts, discussions and analysis on behalf of the council members. Okay. I >> I there were some there are some folks spoke to that. I thought. If they were able to just not go to a certain item or be or be involved in the debate that that there might be. I know, especially when it comes like brand offers real I want I want some business owners, Rhonda Fields, the Randolph to be on the board and there might be a vested interest for it's like. That's right. >> So through the chair to Councilmember Palou. So what I would encourage is to the extent there are individuals who have an interest in serving on this board. That they MAY want to reach out to the legal counsel to the 501 c 3 Daniel nuns office and asked them to do a preliminary analysis that made identify whether there would be a conflict situation relative to their serving on the board and desiring to pursue grant funds. Sorry, chair. So what if, because the board, I assume will create a few subcommittees. >> Of non board members of the community that could be on the subcommittees. If you're on one of the subcommittees and there's a vested interest that you MAY get out of it, are you a lot of kind of serving a volunteer capacity. >> Through the chair to councilmember police. So again, back specific, depends on the nature of the work of the subcommittee at center. I can't answer these types of questions in a vacuum. Okay. All right. I'm sorry. I just I want to make sure that I knew that. I know we got a lot of work to share. Are. >> We are now going see what the amendments MISS North Sea has. It's a very quick. >> I was just going to add up to the conversation. Reminder, this is a multi-decade board rate with years and years of funding. And no one here is going to be on it for 30 years. So you can have a time to serve. Get off the board in time to apply or vice versa. >> All It's the fatherless for these amendments. How do we proceed? Take them all up one by one or to scare them out and and take him up altogether. >> To the Cherokee, I guess that's kind of how you want to manage the meeting as some of these might be conflicting. So in the sense that you MAY want to follow the list and have a discussion on the items and then see if motions get made. Like, for instance, item number one, under councilmember with respect to deleting section one, 18.9, '06, in its entirety. That would be a bit in conflict with Dr Salem's List which would add that some guardrails that are currently in the legislation and hit his interest in adding additional guardrails. So you just MAY want to have that discussion. Your other option is you can go through the legislation each section intern and talk about that section and see if there's specific modifications that members MAY want to offer to those sections. It's kind of how you choose to it. Address the conversation. >> All right. I think to go that route before we make any action will go through all of them to make sure that we have any conflicting issues as a producer. Go ahead. It's how about yours. Thank you. Chair actually. Yes, I think that was honor and a former >> generation that section soap. So my first item is completely taken out, but ignore that. Want to tylee. I'm probably fine with the eu grant's portion. I was just back when we had grants council and the board. So we all kind of a breeding. So that was foolish want to clarify for corporation includes both nonprofits and for-profit businesses. Has that been out and here is what matters. It's a run on. >> Through the chair to councilmember So I haven't taken any action to add any of these into the unilaterally. I wanted to leave it to the committee to determine what they wanted to do. With the exception of at the last meeting, you all address the appointments. And I did make that change to the bill. >> Understood aren't. So so for the second item, right? Just want make sure that we look at it as a for-profit and nonprofit. Again, we kind of alluded to this in the past is going to be plenty of people that have property personal property on a Philip Randolph or whatever else that's going to be a for-profit institution are for-profit business. Want to make sure they have the ability to to to receive dollars nor did that if there's a facade permits, something else. So to make the clarification here. And then the language will says that they must be in existence for at least 3 years and have 3 years file tax returns. I don't know if I'm need all that. In here, but I. Is that like a state requirement or thought about. >> Through the chair to Councilmember Palou. So so these types of eligibility requirements kind of were pulled from our internal processes that we have and some of this is also part of the Cultural Council model that we dictate these guardrails in all of those models. With respect to the types of organizations that would qualify to receive city funding >> I would like to remove that the three-year portion because there's going to be a few a few folks that are going to. Probably begin operation in the next year, too. And I want to make sure that that. They're gonna put the time and energy into it. I do think that there should be a requirement. They have some some equity on hand that they have funds on hand. I think it's another section Section k, but don't think they have to exist for 3 years, especially if these dollars coming out the next 3 to 7 years. So that's that's my opinion that if we want to reduce that to maybe different number of years of file tax returns. But I still think. I don't think we're barn too many folks from But I don't want to put too many impediments. If you're like a newer nonprofit or or or entity. So so point is I would like to make the change that allows for nonprofits and for profits and then removed the 3 years portion. >> MR. Police, I would just I apologize, MISTER Chair. So with respect to the first item with for-profit and not-for-profit, so Florida Corporation contemplates both. It doesn't limit it to one of the other in all of those entities filed to become Florida corporations. But I don't think the adding the clarification is going to change in the, you know her anything So just so, you know, that was not the intended. Either one type of entity would be excluded. >> Okay. So nonprofit and for-profit right now have the ability to see funds through the grant process. 2 threw the chair to councilmember unless you're limited. Otherwise correct, MR. And I would like to start move. The must have 3 years. I know I don't have an apologize, but I. It's a minute. I mean, like that's that's subsection 907, bravo. Be is include that language. That's one kind of bring it up. We're going to vote on it. One independent. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. Requirement of proof of cash. I just want it. That there should be no. Capital that one of green teas that this should have some capital on hand. I just don't think that it's a dollar for dollar match. I think that we change that too. Anything else, right? Because I mean, there's a number of again, businesses that are out there that definitely out money on hand, nonprofit money on hand, but they're not they're not probably not going do a dollar for dollar match. And I think the bats. I think when you change that, I think we do. It's 50, $0.50 per dollar at the very least something different. I'm sorry on to item 5 I think that we should. For some of these other groups that we've said, if you get money from the cba, you cannot also get money from kids. Hope Alliance or Housing Community development or social services. I think that needs to be removed. I think if you are ability housing, if your goodwill, if you're if you're one of those groups and maybe you won't earn a contract with the side that shouldn't preclude you from getting dollars from from other groups. I think. Quickness of fatherless. So to say about that. Through the chair to the committee just for consideration. So the list Mr is talking about is something that we've haven't are. >> Code with respect to our other grant programs and certainly that can be modified as this committee sees fit. I just remind everybody that while the list exists for those grant programs, there have been instances where organizations have proceed funding in multiple programs for the same program. Again, would have to be for the same project or program. So if they apply under kids, hope for an after-school program, but they're applying under Eastside for homelessness initiative. They wouldn't be precluded from doing that because it's different programs. But where they are applying for multiple sources of funding from the city for the same program or project the council is able to waive that to allow them to collect from both sources. So it's it's a list that's in there as a as a rule. But it's ruled it has on occasion been a waived by the city Council where you determine an appropriate. >> But can we were a bit right now in this piece of legislation is what I'm saying. >> So you wouldn't be waiving it. What you would be doing is what you're suggesting is removing a program from the list or removing the list. Understood. >> Parson gave funds dispersed of that language. If never get there authorize board directors to establish its embassy process. I mean, I because that inherent in the document or is that? >> through the chair, it accounts blue. So see your item. Number 6, the one thing that was not necessarily specifically addressed in the legislation that would be in addition is to clarify that it would not be the city funds cannot be dispersed to individuals that you would only be dispersing to Florida corporations, which is what is in there. That to the extent you MAY want to add that clarifier. So it's clear in the ordinance code that individuals they're not Florida corporations, but that they would not qualify And then your 7th item authorizing the board of directors to establish its own procurement process that is in relation to some language that's in the bill that just indicates where possible that they follow city procurement Processees. It's not obligatory, but I think that's where your your comment came from. It. And my concern with that is anyone has dealt with the city knows the procurement process in the grant process is very onerous and long. >> And so this. I just want to make sure that they have they have the means great, the and so long as that happier. >> For that era. Yeah, I don't think it was written is a an obligatory. Alright dictate. I think that where that might really come in is if their funding potential capital projects that would be kind of where that would occur. And I think the the idea or the intent behind that is that there's some sort of a competitive selection process for contractors, labor, materials, cetera. So they're getting the best value the way the city always pursues for the use of the city dollars if so, so >> in their in their meat, let's say they do a a. And rfp and they say we want to we want contract out to do work on these 80 homes. Could they put in their matrix? And in there? In their metrics could say if you are east-side business that you get a priority get that that grant and does that conflict with our procurement process. That was my concern. There. >> Through the chair to councilmember police. I don't know that it would conflict with our procurement process. We have a local preference our code. So I think they would be in a position that if they're doing it competitively, I think that meets the intent of that provision in the cut. What we're talking about in the bill, but they wouldn't be obligated to specific criteria are other matters with respect to how they build their rfp. >> What if I buy? I'm Jeremy home building and East Side home building. I'll see. And on the on The Matrix score doing the score sheet and talk about the score sheet, everyone. >> score that higher. I don't think there's anything about what's in the bill that would preclude that. Okay. So I can score higher just being in the sybase business. >> If that is how the board of directors wants to establish the criterion, the wait for the criteria I think they would be free to do that. >> Great. Excellent. Okay. I'm comfortable. All right. Thank you. Chair. Thank you. I do have 3 speakers like you regarding amendment. So let's discuss that before we proceed with the next MISTER Ronson recognized. >> Thank you, chair. The one that I heard that that I think is very important that MR. Pelosi doesn't appear is the three-year requirement. If we're going to move this outside of government, we need to make sure the the entities that are applying or well established with a with a track record is a not for profit. And I think remove that or eliminate that would not be a good idea. Thank you. All right. Misconduct. >> Thank you, chair. I will continue with what Councilmember Salem said in regards to item be in that same section and add some language because you can be and organization in existence in Florida that you were 3 years. But you MAY be inactive if you've ever gone to sunbiz, you can see that there are several entities that are that register, but they are inactive. So to make sure that they at language saying that organization is active and in good standing, that means that they would use many of you are up up. Businessmen say, you know that you have to file your report every year and other aspects and wanted to remain in good standing. So I would add that language. One question too. I'm not wants to answer and it MAY be missed a populist. Maybe the council representative for this particular district and we see east that reside. Always been. Have you had a bothers me in this section. The organization was operate in Duval County. That's so broad. Why can't Why? Why? Why we limiting it to the east side? So is there any justification rationale for session? Open statement? >> Through the chair to Councilmember Clark, all try to answer that question. So this is really part of what's been pulled from our other programs where we're not necessarily focused within a specific area or neighborhood of the county. But I think the intent there is that we want to make sure that the influx of dollars is coming into businesses that are owned and operated in Duval County. >> That being said I think there's other that you might leave that the way it is so that you're still kind recognizing that while they might operate or be located in Duval County, they MAY still have a focus on the east side. They just MAY not house or offices in the east side. They might be somewhere else within Duval County. So you could probably add another eligibility. And I think there is some language in here all try to locate it. And it specifically indicates that the programs of the projects would have to be focused on the east side. So the work would be there that not necessarily where they're located would be there. >> Okay. So thank you for that. Was the populist to the chair and I would be more. Comfortable with a pair of under this section. If that language is there, if not, then we do need to add some other language. Although I do understand from Councilmember Palou sos explanation in regards to determining whether or not a business organization will receive some type of funding that there is maybe a list of look for yours and one of those look for which MAY give a business and advantage is whether or not it actually exists in the east side. So does make sense you just make sure I was going through. >> Subsection g Councilmember Clark MAY help address some of that. That just states that the organization shall provide services or activities, which benefit are made available to a broad range of people in the city focused within the Eastside community. And shall be offered on a nondiscriminatory basis to those people. So you you might find that that's acceptable or that you want to tighten that up a little bit more. Okay. Thank you so much for that. Just want to make sure. And then to do the chair to Councilmember Palou. So you said that you want to delete the cash. >> Match or you want to modify it to less than a dollar. >> Yet for that for the yeah. For the cast match, I think varies $0.50 You like 50% at the very least. I do want to delete the 3 years under Subsection b, which seems 1000 conservation. Most the colleagues. And that is just because I I think in the next couple years there will be a few new, not profits. And a few new businesses are going operate in the east side. I really don't want to preclude them. I think that there are. But I think this board do some considerable work. I think this board could hire consultant that could help people establish businesses, make sure that their records are in order help them establish nonprofit help like I mean, you could you could do all sorts of staff of this board. And I just think if some of that to go through that work and then be told. All right, great. Now you open up your painting business yet you operated your solar panel business. But going to have the floor so you're saying that? >> No, they can be knew. What would you with ties to the 2 years? Because I was talking about the cash that it first that I actually am in favor of the original amendment to remove that part. I think it should be removed for the reasons that you're stating. However, I think because we're looking at. 30 years. The years at a minimum for that business to that is a shunt event. Establishes is a good number. Because it check right there in a show that they've had some experience with having to go through. For example, the process of being established in the state of Florida. Yeah, I would like to remove the one dollar cast match like to be minimum $0.50 I you say I would like to see it as a down time. Okay. I'll take it out No. In favor. Taking out I mean, when we think about some entities come to us they're having dollar domestic dollars that they want from the city and some in some cases, it's really big dollars. So, you know. Okay, just like I said, I would add the language guys to making sure for paragraph b that they're those corporations are goods, they're active and they're in good. Standing with the state of Florida. That's that's important. Thank you. Thank you it. Thank you. All right. MISTER Carlucci recognized. I think MISTER Chair. >> Yeah, I'm in agreement on a section be here get us through the chair to establish we need do. When you do anything as we make the are we making the motion for these individually, MISTER Chair, all to aisle together as one. So do it to someone offer an amendment to item number 2 to make sure it's acted in. Good for down Okay. So what does someone need to make the motion for that? Okay. So make the motion to add the language activity and in good standing to police on a number 2. Yeah, that's fine. Just when you move it, it will have it already be in there. So so has it is right now. We have 3 motions that are not real emotions, but the 3 things one was going to be. >> Making the 3 year to one year. But then we're seeing keeping it to 3 years, you know, be a no match for his Very. The second will be inactive status on some from this current Mary, are you making all 3 motions now? You can take all 3 motions. All I will make them. But individually, right? If that school again, okay. So motion a second floor. >> Through the chair to Councilmember Carlucci, I just want to make sure that I accurately capture what the board is acting on or the committee's acting on. So you want to include language that the organizations must be active and in good standing for the 3 years? Yes, and we do. We want to include the clarification language that Councilmember Palou so references in part 2 of his list, which is just click, adding the language that Florida Corporation can be nonprofit or for-profit. Are we just not worried about okay? So those 2 items would be included in this motion. Think it's been a clarification. >> All right. So we have motion and second on the floor all in favor indicate by saying Aye, aye, all opposed say nay motion passes for I to status includes both nonprofit and for-profit businesses. >> Thank you. And then just a quick question on item number 6. And I don't I don't know of so the the purposes of programming directly. >> Does that does that kind of exclude infrastructure and stuff to or is that just kind of like a? >> a general statement, I guess chair to counter implicit. Chair councilmember a That's really the question. So you write programming is different than capital projects. And so even as we as I look at Section k k is referring to operating or capital projects. So that's that's why they're still should be some match, but probably not a 1, 1, as for. Like programming is, you know, kind of kind of more social services type type stuff. And that's where I was most concerned that we want to make sure we had direct language on that. So I just remember say, says, require that, see be a fun show. Only be dispersed to for-profit or non-profit for the purposes of programming directly to support the public at the law. So where is that in this whole legislation or use a new one at that? Yeah, I think we would have that in eligibility probably section 907. I think I think MR. Published already have some language. It's close to that and was probably is going to add to that. >> Through chair to councilmember So I just want to make sure the cba requires that the funds be spent in the side right? So whether its programmatic or capital, it's being spent in east side we've already addressed that for profits and nonprofits can apply for the funding. We've already addressed that. Its Florida corporations, not individual. So I what is it MR. Police say you're trying to address here with in light of all of those things. I think a lot of these weren't prior iterations of the aisle. So I'm not sure there's any vehicles or there's no need number 6. All right. >> That was really all I had MISTER Chair >> yeah, I was I think there was some other things. But whoever else wants to make the motion for the other 2 suggestions. So thank you. >> As it is, we're going want to on action, which is the active status and the nonprofit for-profit status as well as collect Mary, I want to recognize a very quick if you want to pass up a motion on your no match as well. So it is continuing forward. >> Absolutely. I moved to delete the section in one 18.9 4 and paragraph k that there be no match required for those organizations applying for the funds. >> We have motion for that coming second on that. Second. Your second. So we have motion a second. Further discussion as to prison. The chair, Mike. And I just want to make sure these are for capital projects. These are the more expensive >> things. So not have any money. It is a bit of a concern. I think that's I'm willing to reduce the match. Think there is a lot of property owners that that once you get something done, but they're to be 0. Matches is a little concerning for capital fund programming. I think we can do a little bit different. Okay. No. Go ahead. Finish. Thank you for that. Because I was really thinking about like the small organization. So >> I think we need to add language that distinguishes. The organizations. Can we as not? Can we get as a language so that we make a distinction between? Here have little like that to you like it. So we're talking so it would nice to the organizations themselves. For example, you have like the company's attempt. I keep thinking about mom and pop. So those that are like smaller organizations as opposed to those that are making positive. It's and they need their profits are in the, you know, hundreds of thousands as opposed to those who just MAY be in the hundreds and thousands. So maybe like some type of tear fact, some kind of charts and that if you I'm making over x amount, then you need to provide a cash match. >> I like that idea up for discussion on that motion right now. I have a couple speakers in the queue. I want to go first mismister sentiment that is going to be on this. I will. >> Thank. Thank you, chair. I if you look at the front page of of of this bill. Initiatives for affordable housing. Workforce, housing, economic Development. And mitigation of homelessness. So if you're going up initiatives for affordable housing and workforce housing, I assume would be potentially large dollar amounts and and no company is going to come in there and do that work and provide a match or anything like that. I'm concerned is. I get the impression we're trying to fund? A bunch of small businesses potentially in this area. >> That will not. Show the physical change that we want to see in this area over the next 5 or 10 years. And and I want to make sure that we're all aware of that. I don't want to I don't want money going a little store necessarily worth it. If we are going to do that, that should be minimal dollars. >> We need to see huge physical change in this area. And that's the way I think we should be thinking about versus >> some of discussion. Matching dollars for a little small business act. I don't think that's that's going really change that area. And and I just want to put that on the table. What you know, that. We just there just seems to be a whole philosophical difference. But what I'm hearing from councilmember and I'm not saying you're right or wrong. I disagree with you. But I thought this was more. Big time change physically in that area. Transformational, great, great comment and not I'm gonna and please don't take offense to this. But we're not going to support someone that se