I call the Charlottesville City Council. >> Okay. >> Okay. I call the Charlottesville City Council June 1st, 2026 meeting um to order. Um Madame Clerk, will you please call the role? >> Yes. Council >> here.
>> Councilor Payne >> here. >> Here. >> Vice Mayor Ashin >> here. Mayor Wade >> here. Um is there a motion to approve or amend the agenda? >> So moved. >> Second. >> Okay. Um all in favor, please say yes. >> Yes.
>> All oppose, please say no. Great. Motion passes 5 to zero. Um, this meeting will be divided into three sections. The first is a work session to hear and discuss presentations that do not require a council vote. Um, followed by
close session and then the regular business meeting at 6:30. We do have close session today. And today we're going to hear about um investing in community and participatory um budgeting. and Misty Grave and and Chad
will um discuss that >> actually. So, sorry, I will take over for a quick moment. >> Um Taylor Harvey Ryan is going to present to you uh investing in community. I'm going to do participatory budgeting. >> Misty is online in case we need her for
the vibrant community conversation. But just to frame this evening uh for council and for the public, there's been a lot of conversations that you all have had in my almost five years now of you going through the vibrant community fund process. Uh and we're going to let you
have a little more fun today by talking to us about any um changes that you might be interested in considering, any questions that you might like to pose that we can give answers to. but to go beyond vibrant community just to really take a look at all of our investment
opportunities in community. So our home CDBG, our calf, our hops. So we have the staff representatives for those various efforts who are here. But Taylor as the grants program manager is focused on compliance uh getting our agreements initiated each year uh conducting site
visits and more or less keeping track of all of the city's grant making and grant processes across the city. So, I'm going to turn over to her and have her give some general overview for how things shape up in our current budget process. And then I will talk to you about
participatory budgeting after you have engaged in whatever you want to talk about in regards to vibrant community fund and any priority setting that you might be interested in. Hello, Mayor Wade, city councilors, and city manager Sanders. My name is Taylor Harvey Ryan, and I have the privilege of
serving as the city's grant program manager. All right. Today, I will be providing a brief overview of the city's grant funds, specifically the funding that the city provides to nonprofits and community partners. I will review the city's grant opportunities, the grant processes, and timeline, as well as a
brief mention of our compliance protocols. The city provides grant funding through eight different programs. Um they're listed on the screen. So we have intergovernmental contractual fundamental organizations, vibrant communities funds, Charlottesville affordable housing fund, also known as
CAF, housing operations program support, hops, community development block grant, CDBG, home investment partnerships, home, and small business energy efficiency incentive grant program. I will give an overview of six of these programs. Um, and I'll let the Department of Human Services give you
the full run through of vibrant communities funds. And then today we will not discuss the small business energy efficiency incentive grant program as that runs on a totally different timeline through office of sustainability. All right. So, first I'll talk about intergovernmental contractual. The city
of Charlottesville provides funding to organizations through a funding agreement or MOA orou for services to um or for city residents that we're either contractually obligated to provide or provide a required benefit for the city. Um the list of intergovernmental/contractual agencies is there on the right side of
the screen and there are about 22 of them with the note that region 10 is only counted once even though we support multiple of their programs. Next is our fundamental organizations. Fundamental organizations is now in its second cycle of the formal designation
by the city. Um they are any entity designated by the city which provides a unique unduplicated service to the residents of the city of Charlesville. The service provided must be in alignment with the priorities of the city as indicated in the strategic plan framework as well as be a service that if not provided the city would either
need to take on itself or fund another service provider to provide. Please note that um we don't take applications for the designation of fundamental. We just designate you and then you apply for funding as a fundamental. And then there are 10 organizations that are designated um as fundamental so far and these are
their reasonings for their designation listed there. Next we have our CAF and HOPS. Our neighborhood development services team manages CAF and HOPS. CAF is our Charlottesville affordable housing fund which provides critical resources to nonprofit organizations and developers
for the creation, preservation, and rehabilitation of affordable housing units within the city. The goals of that program are to increase the affordable housing stock, preserve existing affordable housing, support long-term affordability, stabilize neighborhoods, and prevent displacement, and also
promote inclusive growth and housing equity. HOPS or our housing operations program support provides funding to support the operational needs of nonprofit organizations that provide essential housing related services. The HOPS funding aims to ensure housing stability
and prevent homelessness by assisting organizations that serve vulnerable populations, including low-income residents, individuals at risk of eviction, and those experiencing homelessness. And unlike the calf, which targets development and preservation, HOPS focuses on serviceoriented programs
such as rapid rehousing, permanent supportive housing, and eviction prevention. And the goals of that program are to enhance housing stability, support vulnerable populations, promote continuum of care or COC alignment, and then strengthen program capacity and operations.
Then we have our CDBG and home, which is the community development block grant and our home investment partnerships grants, which are both funds provided to the city from the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development, also known as HUD. CDBG is used to provide funding that helps Charlottesville nurture healthy and
vibrant communities with special emphasis on fostering benefits for income eligible residents. And the eligible activities under CDBG are economic development, public facilities and infrastructure enhancements, affordable housing activities, public service activities and planning and administration.
We also have the home which is managed by our partners at TJPDC on our behalf and it provides funding for housing rehabilitation, down payment assistance and new construction for qualifying households in the region. So that was an overview of a vast majority of our grant programs and now
I'll talk to you about the process and timeline and this is just a highle overview. So organizations must submit an application unless um they're told otherwise. So if we have an MOU or MOA then you might be exempted from having to submit an application otherwise you do apply and the only exemptions are
within our intergovernmental and contractual category. All others are application only. Um we do have a I'll say new um new grants portal which is our neighborly software which we introduced last year like formally um and so we
have had folks through cap hop CDBG home and fundamental apply through neighborly so far and then this year um intergovernmental and DCF will come in through our neighborly portal as well. Um so we do put out a notice of funding opportunity. We normally post it by July
1st which lists out all the application timelines for the entire uh fiscal year. We are amending those timelines this year so that it better aligns with the budget process. So typically we have had applications range from uh summer all the way through winter. Um but now we
are tightening that time frame so it's just summer and fall. And then we will have our review process with all of our reviewers take place in winterish um so that we can have our recommendations for funding to council in alignment with that budget season.
And I'll say this most aggressively impact CDBG CDBG and home as that review process normally was like January February. So they're backing up. Okay. And lastly, I'll talk to you briefly about compliance. Um, so the
city has implemented a new compliance model which does include quarterly reporting, executing agreements, and monitoring site visits. I will say we have been doing this in some way, shape, fashion or form for many years, but we just did not have like a systematic um way of doing it. So now we have one um
and so we are implementing that. Um, and so unless you are an organization covered by anou or MOA, you will have an executed funding agreement or grant agreement through my office, which will indicate your funding amount, your scope of work, and all the other legal and technical terms that you um folks need to know. Um, those agreements also
include your reporting schedule and your payment schedule, which is typically quarterly. Um, we monitor your reports for completion and to track how organizations are doing in relation to that scope of work and meeting their outcome. So if we gave you x amount of dollars and you said you were going to serve this many residents, we are tracking to say you spent this much
money, did you serve this many residents? Um so we are actually tracking that. Um and we are also doing site visits whether they be in person or virtual um to see how folks are actually doing um with those services and actually going to be able to see those services as well. Site visits have been
introduced um but they are going to be more robust and higher in number and cadence um going forward. And then alongside compliance, because I don't want folks to just think that we are going out and just checking up on you, we are also offering technical assistance, whether it be with your applications, your reporting, and then also helping folks to maintain that
compliance um so that we can ensure that the programs are operating at their best using the funding that the city has provided to serve the city um residents. I think that's my last talking point and then is it back to you? >> Okay, cool. And then my last Yeah, turn it over to you Misty.
>> Oh, Misty. Give it to Misty. >> Yeah. Is she online? >> I'm here. >> Okay. She's >> All right. >> I'll turn your >> Good afternoon, mayor and council and members of staff in the public. Um my name is Misty Graves. I'm the director
of the Department of Human Services. and uh tonight with my colleague Reggie Allen who is our human services planner are going to go over um vibrant community fund briefly and then open up some um facilitated discussion around um
what considerations council may have for future iterations of vibrant community fund. So the goal of our presentation for the next several slides, Reggie is going to give a brief overview of FY28 and we start planning FY28
uh in the middle of even submitting our FY27 budget. So we are ready to discuss some of those changes and then um again facilitate a conversation to get some clarity around council's vision for FY29.
Reggie. >> Okay. Hey, thank you, Missy. So, again, my name is Reg General Allen and I'm going to be talking about some of the updates. The most obvious update, Hunter Smith would usually be here, but I am the new Hunter Smith, the new Michael Jordan when it comes to this process.
So, bear with me. So, um we're going to again I'm going to talk about some of the updates. One of the main updates that we want to talk about is the elimination of the $75,000 threshold. So, as you may know, previously site visits were based on a 75,000 funding threshold. So we want to remove that
threshold and we want to become a little bit more strategic and um our approach be more targeted which ultimately streamlines this process and ensure that site visits are guided by program need risk and organizational factors rather just than the funding um source alone.
So um again we want to eliminate the $75,000 threshold. This change ensures that all programs receiving funding are subject to the same level of review oversight regardless of the amount requested. We believe uh removing the threshold promotes greater equity and
consistency by ensuring that all organizations are held to the same expectations and standards regardless of funding level. Um I also want to talk about how we're going to do that. What's going to be the criteria? We don't want to just eliminate the site business because uh you know we want to have uh
what's best practices. So there is a criteria that we have included. So we're going to look at the program risk level and these are going to be programs that we identify as higher risk due to funding structure um complexity or other operational factors that may warrant
more frequent monitoring. Performance outcomes. Programs that are that are not meeting their established goals, benchmarks, or performance expectations may require additional support or oversight through site visits. And um compliance history.
These are going to be organizations with prior compliance concerns, reporting issues or findings from previous monitoring activities may be prioritized for site visits to ensure corrective actions have been implemented. >> Could I ask stop you a second? You said
one of the factors would be um something about the whether there's a something about the structure that creates a a greater risk. >> Explain that for me. >> So as as you know there are new organizations that may apply for a
vibrant community fund and so with sometimes with their particular applications you know there's some guidelines that they don't meet. So if they are able to submit the application we're able to go over there and ask some of these identifying questions. So that's what we mean by that if that makes sense.
>> So largely for for groups that you don't know very well. >> Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Like new new and emerging organizations. Okay. >> You know, so so generally when new and emerging applications are submitted, they're usually asking for 10 $20,000 which we don't commit uh we don't do a
site visit for them. So now we're looking at all organizations. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Okay. All right. And so another uh criteria is if there's been changes in operations which means significant organizational changes such as leadership transition, staffing changes,
program restructuring or modifications, we're going to also look at those organizations and potentially do a site visit. As I just spoke about new and established organizations, um we're going to look at new organizations because they could actually benefit from
an increased engagement in technical assistance. Um let's see increase efficiency through targeted approach. You know we believe as we implement this model we we do anticipate a reduction in the overall number of site visits but this reduction
is intentional and reflects a shift toward quality and impact rather than just quantity. And so let's uh look at some of the highlights. The library community fund process is designed to be transparent, inclusive, and result driven. So these
highlights reflect the transparency, community involvement, and accountability. And so the first point that I have up there is recruitment of reviewers. We always want to highlight the reviewers because we understand that this is a critical component of maintaining a fair, transparent, and
effective review process. And so we intentionally uh cultivate a diverse review panel to ensure the applications are evaluated through multiple perspectives resulting in more balanced equitable and informed funding recommendations. You know so
participation in this review process provides reviewers with valuable insight into community needs available available services and the impact of local organizations. I initially started out with the vibrant community fund as a reviewer. So being a reviewer is is it's
just uh for me it's been like a 360 just to be able to start in that process and then actually become one who's working on this process to be part of the process. So >> Reggie watch it. I started as well. So here I am.
>> Look what it was. >> Yes. >> Yeah. And so I also want to highlight that as as Taylor spoke, we do have orientation and technical assistance. And so we provide orientation and this assistance as an important strategy for ensuring a
fair, transparent and accessible application process. We have ongoing technical assistance and office hours provided for applicants that they can just come in there and ask uh questions if they need be. If they need some technical assistance, we'll
give them a time and um we'll just allow them an opportunity to ask whatever they need to ask. Um, and I also want to highlight that this process we have a continuous improvement and accountability which every year we get together and we identify improvements.
We gather feedback from applicants as as well as some of our reviewers and we're just continually looking for ways to to um improve this process. And let me see the last one. Transparent
and competitive application process. This process is based on transparency. It's competitive and we want to also make sure that the organizations that are involved that they understand the transparency. And so
with this process, organizations are encouraged encouraged to evaluate their programs, strengthen their proposals, and demonstrate measurable impacts in order to remain competitive. So that is all what I have here. >> I'll take it now, Reggie. Thank you. All
righty, Misty. >> Reggie mentioned our commitment to continuous improvement and so over the years um we have collected sort of a summary of feedback and challenges that we know to be true. One, as you all
know, the number of organizations applying and the amounts that they request far exceed the amount of funding available. Currently in this last cycle we had 84 applications plus 12 arts and uh arts service or arts
oriented um applications and 10 cultural events um applications. Um and so we that was probably um over $5 million in requests and we typically work with a 2.4 4 to 2.7
available funds in the vibrant community fund. We also hear that it's challenging when we are not able to fully um fund certain organizations. As you know, there are
certain tiers to the recommendations that the reviewers provide and um a a lot of times funding um is not going to be fully uh awarded to those organizations. So we um are also considering you know does that impact
the feasibility of these organizations to be able to carry out their their programs. Um we also look at the um organizations that have historically applied to Vibrant Community Fund. It is
a competitive process, but Vibrant Community Fund has been a a mainstay in this community to uh support nonprofits to continue to support the good work that they do. Um, and sometimes, you know,
if if we are um going to make any changes to the vibrant community fund in any sort of major way, we want to make sure that we fully um share that kind of information out with our nonprofits, especially if you know there's a a different structure or a different
priority or or direction that council wants to go. We want to make sure that folks that have historically gotten funds from the city are aware of any changes that we do. So, we wouldn't implement anything um any major changes until FY29.
Um and again, that's what we're here for is to kind of hear from you all about any expectations that council may have around that. And then um at times uh at the end of the you know review process
and during the budget work sessions um council has augmented organizations their funding requests um in that budget work session and that at times can interfere with the vibrant community
funds reviewing and also um sometimes offers is imbalance and inequity around those other organizations that don't get augmented and um can be challenging if nonprofits aren't getting the same kind
of access to those augmentations. Next slide. So, I'm just going to take a moment here and, you know, just highlight that the original intent of the vibrant community fund was to start off as an operational support to a variety of nonprofits in
the area that support council's vision and um you know, I wanted to just lead off to get some initial council feedback. When you think about the purpose of vibrant community fund and what council hopes to achieve with that process,
what are some of the um goals that you all have as a as a sort of foundational principle of what the vibrant community is for? Wonder if anybody has some initial. >> No.
>> So you want comments now? Okay. Um >> well I can I can go to the next slide and then take all the comments together if that's helpful. >> Yeah, you can go ahead. >> Okay. Some of the considerations that I
would offer up is that um there's some things to consider that would um may it may address some of these challenges that we've had year-over-year. Some localities will choose fewer priority priority areas for eligibility.
Currently, our priority areas align with the nine um outcome areas that city council has um adopted. Some localities may choose one, two, three or varying number, but narrow the
scope down so that only eligible applications would meet a fewer fewer pillars. Um we are also looking at reorganizing the arts and cultural events process. Um that will go through Sam Sanders for
review and a separate process. So that would also help free up potentially some of the funds in the general um allocations and um you know we've talked at times about collaborative grant making. One of
the challenges that we've heard is that there's several organizations that seem to have similar services and how might we encourage folks to in the nonprofit community to collaborate their funding their services and align
them with a a funding request in a more collaborative way. And then there's a number of other things that we've heard, you know, that BCF can be challenging and that it may need to be tweaked or there's some adjustments and you all have asked for
this work session. So, I want to just encourage you all to just engage in in in a conversation about what are the things that you want Reggie and I to leave this session knowing and how me might take some of that input back to
continuously improve and adjust the vibrant community fund so it best meets council's vision. Um, so is it back to us now? It'd be good if you can bring up those questions or
ask >> back one slide. >> The one about just like the origin statement. What? >> Yeah, maybe that one. What what what would you It's now currently a general operational support much like um the
hops. It's general operations for services that meet the needs of residents in this community. Is that still the vision for the vibrant community fund? Um and and what does council hope to achieve
with having this opportunity? >> Right. Okay. Thank you. Michael, you have any thoughts or you know? Uh I mean I guess to the questions posed
I would say one um very small practical purpose I see of the VCF is if there are nonprofits who um if they can demonstrate that they have support from local government can
um access additional funding sources that there's a mechanism by which to do that I think is important um more two more broadly Um, I think just that there's a mechanism in the city by which to support nonprofit partners on
programs that are um, you know, making a measurable impact on improving people's lives in the Charlottesville community. Um, and you know, I would hope that what we can accomplish is over time, um, we
are making an impact in in ways that can be measured. Um, I guess some of the questions, you know, I have are would we have more of a measurable
impact doing what we do now, which is more smaller amounts of money across numerous different nonprofits or would it to be um us making a large larger investments into a smaller number of new
programs? Um and and in addition to that, um I know when the vibrant community fund process was created, one of the goals was to try to um get a more diverse set of nonprofits able to get funding. So you didn't have
as much of a dynamic where kind of institutional connected nonprofits usually get the majority of funding. So, um, and from my understanding, the VCS have has been a success in terms of diversifying the amount of nonprofits that have been able to get funding or
newer nonprofits are able to get funding in a way they weren't before. So, there's a way to kind of um continue and advance that work because I think that is a win for the VCF process. Um, and
yeah, and I guess the other thing is, you know, I know it's said every year throughout the process to nonprofits that the Vibrant Community Fund is not for your year-to-year um core part of your operations budget.
This is for new programs or to do new things. But if you're relying on it to take care of your core staff or just to function as an organization, you're not approaching the VCF process correctly. Um, and we hear every year from numerous nonprofits that many don't view it that
way. They are applying viewing it as kind of a a guaranteed bakedin part of their core operational budget and that without VCF funding, um, their concern is they may not be able to continue to function as a nonprofit. So, you know, what what additional, if anything, can
be done to kind of get that message understood that um that's just not what the VCF is for because funding is never guaranteed year-to-year. Um >> it seems to me if you if we're going to do that and that that's a perfectly
legitimate discussion to have but then the purpose of VCF as proposed on this slide here would have to be changed because this this purpose says general operational support doesn't say just new programs.
So I I can imagine I can understand why nonprofits might be a little bit confused about what they're supposed to be doing. Yeah. And I guess you know um you know maybe new programs is not as you know the ideal word for it but I guess the core of it is just funding is not
guaranteed yeartoear. So if your budget assumes that you get VCF funding you're approaching it wrong because it's a competitive process. There's no guarantee you get it >> and and we do share that feedback with all of the applications several times throughout the process. Uh I think I'm
just acknowledging that historically um that has been sort of what uh Snook mentioned is that you know organizations do and and have relied on city support to
continue their services. Yeah, >> we need to get um little holograms of Chrissy saying one time only money. One time only money. >> Um so uh thank you for the presentation.
Um my first question is about the site visits um where you said it's the elimination of the $75,000 fresh threshold which means it's open up to all organizations. Um, but then there's going to be increased analysis for more organizations,
but then ultimately you're anticipating a reduction in overall site visits. So is that like you're measuring twice, cutting once by doing more prep and analysis without a site visit or how does that that
bandwidth work out? How is the the workload reducing if it's expanding the opportunity for more activity? >> So, we're saying it's going to reduce >> so we're saying that it's going to reduce on our end, but even as Taylor
said, you know, with the compliance part, they're going to be monitoring them and doing site visits as well. So instead of us doing, you know, one one organization having two and three different site visits, you know, we we will work with Taylor as well to see, hey, would you consider this particular organization? Do you think that we
should do a site visit on that organization? But that's what we're saying with my process, you know, with the reviewers on my end, it could potentially reduce the site visit, you know, because what we're what we're finding is that we're going to the same organizations every year. So the VCF
office and grants office will now coordinate site visit >> absolutely >> processes. >> And we would only review or we would only provide site visits if there was a compelling >> for a site visit versus just a blanket statement that you you have to
>> cuz in time past it was 75,000 to 100 and just guaranteed a site visit. >> Yeah. >> You know. >> Um okay. And then thank you. Are the site visits announced or is it like surprise we're here? I don't know. like what is that what does a site visit entail? >> So no we so again most organization
during orientation all organizations are notified that if you ask for this particular amount of money we're going to conduct a site visit and so what the reviewers would do we will look over the organizations and we will you know work out the logistics as when we should meet them but yeah they're they're well aware of the site visits we coordinate the
time that best works for them and we will meet them to do a site visit. So, it's less of like a health inspector style visit and more of like a, hey, we're going to meet with you and talk with you about your program needs and try to work on your >> Yeah. Yeah. Because there's some things that they cannot convey the message that
they're trying to to to get out to the community. They can't necessarily captivate all that, capture that in the application. So, we're there to ask uh some additional questions. >> Okay. Thank you for explaining that. Appreciate it. Um and then for the other consideration slide, uh there was talk
about reorganizing the ultra arts and culture event process. Is that um reflecting the arts council arts commission discussion that we've had? >> That's part of it. So the the desire would be for us to take the arts count
um arts events arts organizations not arts events arts organizations out of the VCF process place them with the arts council and fund that effort with folks who know what art is know how to evaluate art know how to appreciate
it award funding and supports and then the events today would stay with me in the city manager's office as a part of the quality of life fund. That is the one-time fund that was originally set up that I have been using to support community enrichment events. So, an
event that is meant for everyone uh that comes around on our annual calendar. Think TomTom, Solar Seville, Black Business Expo, Pride Festival, Sin Barber, all the various things that have become a part of our DNA each year. Um
we ask a couple of questions to get details and then it's a small varying nominal amount up to a large amount depending on the size of the event and the scope of how many people might be attending the economic development impact. that then becomes more of a
review of those types of events separate from what is about program support for an organization's operations and ability to serve the community on a day-to-day basis year round. So, it's to kind of split that out and let BCF just be about
programming, safety net supports, strategic movements. Let the events be more of a community enrichment analysis by my team and then have the arts related organizations be arts council. We could move the events to arts
council. We'll have to determine that based on what becomes of the arts council and what that scope feels like. >> Um thanks. And then do we where are we with the arts council arts commission's process? >> Is James over there? I can't see on this
wall here. Um, we are, uh, I'm setting up meetings with the folks who are been working on the arts council and we're going to be following up on that. Our next step in the process is to release an RFP or otherwise put information out to get
somebody on board to help us set up the um, commission and um, take the next steps to pursue the council. >> What's our like goal timeline for all of this? In an ideal world, we have uh stuff ready for the sometime in the
fall, but looking at capacity issues, >> make sure we are set up to go. >> Okay, great. Great. Thank you. Um, I uh I'm wondering if if this is not the most
important thing, but all the things you were just talking about, the the arts events and the things that you know are uh lively activities for the community. Um, that's part of what makes a community vibrant. And so if it's
changing to a kind of more service and and um catching people falling through the cracks type priority for the VCF funds. I wonder if that's still the right title for it. If we're kind of shifting the
arts out of it, if that's the thing. Again, not the biggest concern, but um I know semantics do matter um at some point. Um, I guess I I don't have tons of of major
thoughts about this at the moment other than I can appreciate the fact that um it is difficult to have like a food bank and a gallery in the same pot competing for the same money. um even though both contribute to the community in in
totally different ways, it's hard to to put those against each other in a um in a competitive grant fund or pool. Um, I think one of the things that we all agree is that we spend a significant
part of the budget process talking about BCF when it's ultimately a small part of the overall budget. And um you know I I I uh I appreciate the fact that we get to review this um
and have and can you know top people off here and there on with from our our fund. Um but if there's any way to kind of streamline that I don't know if there is or not. It might just be something that we have to do every year. Um
okay. Thank you. Yeah, >> it's hard for me um this process because I cut my teeth on nonprofits in this community and a lot of them still have my number. So, well, I mean, a couple thoughts. The
first thought I had is that you I have been very critical of of council coming in behind the BCF committee and changing allocations either reducing or usually increasing the allocations in
various ways when we have not reviewed the 990s. We have not looked at anybody's budgets. we have not done any of that other kind of stuff that that I assume that the VCF committee had actually done. And so just from a sort
of how you would set up a system to have the ultimate authority be in the hands of people who know less than the folks who started with the recommendations doesn't make a lot of sense to me. uh which is why I have for the last few
years just taken the position of I'm not secondguessing the VCF committee. They did their work and and let's go with it. The the broader concern that I have and what what I'm really thinking about is not so much fussing about the process as
looking at the substantive result. We wound up with I don't know I figured out like 10 or 11 different organizations uh doing some form of afterchool activity for kids. Some of it ostensibly mentoring, some of it ostensibly
tutoring, some of it for sports. Uh we wound up uh in all of these different categories. I mean over $300,000 uh for mentoring activities, $130,000 $140,000 expressly for tutoring and plus
some of the other grants had a component of each one of those things in there. So my my purpose in reciting all of this is not to to try to come up with specific numbers, but rather just to point out that what we end up with at the end of this
process is It's sort of a and I I'm trying to think of an appropriate metaphor and I'm I'm blanking I guess, but it's like putting together a jigsaw puzzle where you only have half of the pieces that we know
we're leaving gaps in the process that there are people who, you know, who ought to be covered who aren't being covered. An example would be uh what what we had we're f we're funding um the
city of promise for example and city of promise was working specifically with kids at one school and the proposal was well can we help them can we get them to do the same kind of activities in another elementary school we've got six
elementary schools uh how is that all working out and the answer is an awful lot of the kids who might uh benefit from those services aren't having the services made available. Uh, and it's not their fault. It's simply the fact that the way we've set set up this
process is that unless somebody comes and says, "Here's a community I want to serve, we don't have a way of directing services to that community." And so one of my thoughts had been out out of all of this and I I look at other examples.
We had two or three different groups uh who wanted to provide services, financial literacy services. Again, different pieces of the spectrum. No continuity among them. Uh couple different tutoring organizations, a
couple different uh early learning organizations. They were both YMCA and to a certain extent Ready Kids. little ready kids award was for a lot more than just um early learning. But we there was no sense at any time that
somebody had looked at it from sort of the top down to say how if this is a goal that we have of let's say I however you want to articulate well actually one one example would be there are a couple different organizations that want to provide services to folks just getting
out of jail. uh how are we going to fund uh a comprehensive support for people just getting out of jail? Little bit over here, a little bit over there or we also that's an example
of there's also a fair amount of money and effort coming from the jail itself. Uh and so we've got the jail itself. We've got OAR which is being funded as uh one of the other contractual organizations. We've got these other
groups. There's no sense of putting it all together as though somebody is looking at it from above and saying, "Here's how we're going to direct this entire scheme." And I would really like to try to figure out if we were to say, "Okay, we've got $2.3 million. Let's
figure roughly $600,000 per subject area and let's get a group together that's going to work on re-entry programs, however that may manifest itself. Here's a group that's going to work on mentoring programs
and have some some organizational structure that would allow some group of people to look at the entire spectrum of needs and the entire spectrum of people who are willing to offer services in the
area and perhaps maybe say to somebody uh you know we don't have anybody serving this community right now in this particular area but you're doing something kind of like it. Would you consider doing something else in that area? Uh can we get a more comprehensive
approach to it? Uh and I don't I I say all of this not because I've got a grand scheme that I want to implement because I don't. I've got a lot of questions and a lot of concerns and a lot of thoughts that perhaps people with a lot more direct experience in this area might
might have a better ability than I to to structure something. But I would really like to think about a way to to approach a problem from a sort of a a whole picture rather
than just the the couple of pieces of the puzzle that get handed to us on on a particular occasion. Um, and how that would work out, like I say, I'm not 100% sure, but I think it it would have a better chance. Oh, one
other comment I wanted to make. If we're if our only limiting factor is that the programs that we choose to support have to support in some way the uh council strategic vision and outcome areas.
Well, we've got nine different outcome areas. It's I can't think of anything out there that doesn't come under one of those nine. That's not a limiting factor. to say uh that our vision is to be a city where everyone thrives is not
a limiting factor. It's an enabling factor. And maybe that's a good thing all by itself. But if we're looking for some way to to kind of say we've got a limited number of dollars and let's try to be focused on the on certain problems, neither one of those criteria are
limiting factors. They don't help the decision making process at all as far as I can see. Uh so I I would like to see us focus on fewer areas with a more significant contribution in those areas
supervised by some body some group some maybe similar to what we've done with the the calf fund where the housing advisory committee has sort of oversight of of how those kinds of programs might might fit together. Maybe we do
something like that to deal with for example re-entry issues. Maybe we do something like that to deal with programs for mentors. However we want to designate our topic areas, I just that's the the model I
would like to work toward. >> Thank you. Um Sam or Misty or Regin, do you have any clarification questions? >> Did you go? >> Yeah, >> I didn't go yet. >> Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. But I just want I'm just talking about for what Roy
>> did. Did you capture everything, Lloyd? Was that Is that what you're asking? Okay, >> I'm coming back to you >> just now as always. >> Okay, >> go ahead. >> Okay, >> great. Oh, Jen's got ideas. Okay, so >> you sound so ominous.
>> I am. I I had to write them down so I wouldn't lose my path. But they do kind of um boomerang off of what you were saying because we had spoken on this a little bit earlier um when I in January, but um for the fund I need some clarity
first. For the fundamentals, how often is some is an organization added to the fundamental list? >> Sorry, Taylor, I'm looking at you. Taylor, do you mind coming up to the mic and telling me how >> I'm not going to answer it, but go ahead. Oh, no. Go ahead.
Go ahead, >> Sam. >> As often as I approve. >> That's not a system. Um, >> it is a system because the desire has always been that fundamental was not supposed to be a place that people were striving to be. That fundamental was a
selection based on a strategic commitment, priority, or need. So they were standing out for a special purpose, a special reason for ensuring that their funding support was highlighting the
prioritization of their effort. >> Okay, that makes sense. I mean, if you add need, >> everyone wants to be fundamental. If you don't do it that way, everyone would be in line. Everyone would be asking Taylor, how do I become fundamental? When can I become fundamental? And my
answer is when I say something. that has happened that people keep asking I want to be fundamental and so sure. >> So to councelor Snook's point that's the limiting factor. >> Okay. >> Because otherwise how would you manage that?
>> Well I I worry that we have a couple that really could qualify to be fundamental if we base it on the critical needs of the very moment i.e. the administration we're living in like food pantry and sexual assault resources. >> But you all haven't said that. >> Oh okay. So I'm wondering
>> I'm following your lead remember. >> Okay. So we have to tell you what we think the thing for fundamental and then get you in the mood to Right. Okay. Got it. Okay. >> Cuz I'm following your lead. Okay. So if you if you designate priority areas, which you did when you said strategic
outcome areas, you set nine. I asked you not to. We got you to reduce to seven. I wanted you to go even fewer. So for those reasons then it then becomes hard to land where you're shooting because you're shooting in multiple places. So
>> I'm a three priority girl so I got laid to this train. So >> So the question really is about how do we get to the VCF opportunity being more strategic because that's what I feel like I kept hearing and why we're bringing it back to you this way to say
is there an approach that you would like the team to reshape? I've been out here here almost five years and we've talked about vibrant community fund every single year and we've talked about being frustrated by it, >> but I'm going to make comments when
y'all finish and I'm going to tell you how we're supposed to look at vibrant community just from my own past experience before you. >> Okay. So I would say that there seem to be a couple in just like the arts and culture there seem to be a couple in the VCF pot which would seem to be better
served for the acute needs at least in fundamentals. So that seed planted then um okay so then moving up my difficulty ladder um is it possible that we can establish the
mechanism that the arts council will eventually take over for FY28 in that we set up the group that is qualified to review arts and culture
um applications and We apply some of the um community enrichment fund and some other set aside fund from the VCF pool to start practicing that now now while the council gets stood up.
Could that be done sooner than FI29? >> Is that when we're thinking that's going to happen? James, it's hard to talk to him and I can't see. >> I know. Me neither. Can you hear me over? >> Said fall, right? >> I was also distracting him with nonsense at the moment.
>> You were saying you were saying fall >> fall. I'm talking to the commission. I I can't speak to when the art council will be ready. Minimum that I think they have a longer timeline to get up and running. >> Sure. Sure. But when does VCF open? You said summer.
>> So like July summer or like now? Now now summer. >> August. >> August. Okay. So by August, could we stand up a crew that is >> No. >> pulling out arts from BCF? >> No. >> Okay. >> Because we need to go in a more orderly
process because how do we determine who's that group? >> Well, I that's what I was wondering if it was possible. >> Yeah. >> Okay. So at this moment, the timeline is that arts organizations would continue to apply until there is a receiving entity
for those applications to either be diverted to or a separate application process established for. But that doesn't exist today. So we're not cutting them off. We will receive them in the normal process and then we will pull them from competitive consideration
so that Reggie doesn't get a list that much longer. It will be shortened by the removal of arts events and arts organizations. >> But by a in April of 2027, we will still be comparing food pantries to arts. >> No, because we will have pulled them out
of the competitive part. >> Okay. >> We would have to figure out what our approach to looking at them would be. And it could be I'm I'm getting ready to go rogue. >> Okay. >> We may have to seat a review panel within VCF that is strictly arts
focused. That's what I'm asking. Can we do that now now for 2017? >> It's not now now. It would just be the team that would be organized would be within that system because we're transitioning. >> Super. >> So, we would get to your point. Yes. But it would be when we start reviewing
applications later this year. >> Great. Okay. So, it is FY28 that we would have a segregated >> arts. Okay. Great. Are you going to parse that out of DC VCF? >> We would have. Are you going to give them extra funding? >> I don't know. Are you going to find
extra money? >> That's the question. >> So, that doesn't that's another question because >> today those groups are funded out of the >> 2.4 >> 2.7 that exists in that pot. >> When we did the hops transfer, we pulled
it out of the VCF number and brought it down. >> Okay. >> So, that's a that's a budget question. So that's the other reason for not predetermining too much because we have to get into the budget cycle. >> Got it. And you are really safe. You don't want to do any from the community enrichment fund. You want to keep that
all for events. Okay. So events are now segregatedish. They were separate. >> Yes. >> Arts are >> going to be >> going to be for this for my second budget. Yeah. The 27. Then
for talking about real redesign in 2029, along the lines of what councelor Snook was saying, if we wanted VCF to act more like a collective impact fund where every dollar is pointed at the same
outcome and every grantee is measured on the same data, could >> that's a gigantic shift, >> but so Fine. So >> you can do whatever you want. >> Okay. Because this is the other thing. Could there could there because now what
we're talking about are kind of tears because that would be also be a shift that maybe one year funding is not going to achieve. >> So you ready to hear the tear idea? Not tears like crying. Don't start crying. Don't cry.
>> Okay. >> There could be fundamentals. That's our core agencies. They don't have to reapply. They get it year-over-year, right? Fundamentals are year-over-year. >> Okay? >> They apply, but they still get it annually.
>> Annually, >> it's not competitive. >> Then a collective impact cohort that say maybe closes the gap on academic achievement. Let's say that was our theme. And that's a three-year grant with shared in our example academic
metrics, which it can be pretty broad. takes a lot to close the gap. Um, and then a small pool, an innovation pool, that's a one-year bet on new nonprofits, on new programs,
new ideas that is really programmatic, not so operational. That's on a, you know, it's an innovation one-year thing. Not crying. So, um, >> that's a reimagining.
>> That's a reimagining. I just feel like having run the map to health grants can't achieve anything in three years. I don't know how these guys are achieving anything in one year besides operational staff support ultimately, some programming, maybe, but one year is unrealistic to move the needle on
anything, much less achieve a strategic priority. So, it seems like it's time to rethink how we spend this cash and make it a lot clearer that we are spending it to really get some outcomes which everyone is measured
against. >> So, that was the that's it. I'm done now. Well, if I could kind of this is was not VCF related, but it's something that I've been talking about on a broader scale too, which is we have these nine strategic outcome areas, but
we don't have >> seven or nine >> seven >> outcomes. Like we've got a handful, you know, we've got uh $10 million a year or I guess strategic moves to or goals to meet. You know, we've got our goal of $10 million a year for affordable
housing. We have our goal of decarbonization by 2045. Um I forgot the year. Um you know we have a couple of those but I think if we expand that into a couple of other areas that will help
align our spending and um internal operations. For example, um you know, when I was in Minneapolis for the conference a couple weeks ago, one of their goals is by 2030, they said it in 2015, by 2030, 60%
of all trips within the city will be not in a car. And so that has led them to prioritize expanding transit and expanding bike lanes and the bike share program and all these things. And so like what are some goals that we can come up with that will easily align
our spending habits, our networking habits and our our um internal operations habits so that it's not just it's not as loose as environmentalism or as or um uh you know education but like
close the achievement gap by this much by this time like something more concrete that we can go towards and then this might come into play aligning with that um as well. >> So yeah, >> and I was just coming up with those. I I
haven't done any, you know, concrete >> so about that. >> Yeah. Um Jen, your tier approach. Um there's something that you said before that about um all of the nonprofits um
having to I forgot the wording like being able to >> show the same metrics. >> Yeah. >> So if you if for example I'll keep going with my close the academic gap >> if and councelor Snook was recommending like maybe there's three of those. I'm I
was I just chose one to keep it simple. Close the gap. But you could do re-entry. Close the gap and D, you know, like keep it but keep it small. >> Then you would not say you weren't being successful if 40 people showed up to your after school tutoring. We would say
that the metric for success is uh better attendance rates, better grades, uh >> fewer fights, >> fewer uh yeah, disciplinary actions. But everyone whether you're the food bank entering for closing the gap would be
measuring or your afterchool tutoring you're proving that your concept is helping to close the gap and you are getting measured against the same data. >> Does that make sense? >> It it does. I I just um I just know that
in this community is some nonprofits that have a full staff with grant writers and seasoned staff and others who are not as seasoned and they can you know you know you've written grants you can make
you can write a report to make bring you the morning paper you know so and they may the work may not really being done, but you can you can see it. So, I mean, you can write it down. So, um but
I don't have the answer. I just know something has to be changed because like you said, Natalie, I think we all talked about this that you know, we have a I don't know 300 $290 million or $80 million budget and we spend 70 80% of
our time on I don't know this year was down to $2,500. It was pretty it was pretty small, you know, there at the end. So, and and that's just part of having an in an an engaged community that's that's doing
this. So, um I think we've generated a lot of ideas. You have something. >> Yeah, thank you. We have generated a lot of ideas and our decision is kind of coming down to like do we do a longer term overhaul, do we do shortterm patches? Um, and it seems like there's
some interest in exploring a larger overhaul, but in the short term, if that ends up being more feasible, um, something that I would be interested in wondering is, as you mentioned, sometimes grants can be used for seed money for larger
things, and I'm wondering if the waiting procing process uh, can somehow weight those requests higher. so that we know that the money we are
giving is going to actually go towards um some kind of broader funding network. So it's like, okay, we're giving you $5,000, but you're not just spending $5,000 and making a smaller impact. That $5,000 is going to net you $50,000. And
so maybe it's worth funding that $5,000 more than something that only goes to the end of that that cycle. So, I don't know if that's possible in the in the process, but if we are thinking small term or short term for now, that's something maybe to consider. But I
again, I do think there's some um appetite for a kind of larger reconsideration of how we can make these dollars go further and um >> have a deeper impact. >> Yeah, have a deeper impact. Thank you. >> So, let's hear from I'm Jim, were you going to go? I'm just going to add one
thing that I think the idea of of having fewer grants, but those grants may be like a three-year grant makes a lot of sense and particularly if it's being viewed in the sort of as the whole system the ecosystem of you know dealing
with the achievement gap for example which have a lot of different parts. >> Yeah. Yeah. logistically if one thing I found complicated either to to figure out while we're doing this process speaking of like reading the um
a lot of the backend um pieces that of data that we don't get is it possible that we can see if we are contributing in kind not in kind but I don't know the word for it to an organization by paying their rent or contributing to their
space so that can be help us understand the full picture of what we're giving to them. I don't know if that's explicitly called out when we did it or if I missed it. Okay. >> So, um in in light of time, I'd like to get
Sam's feedback and you know, guidance for the next step and because I know we have one more presentation before >> I'm doing that one too, so I'll control that. Um before I speak, Misty, I wanted to give you a chance to react to what you've heard and let's just see kind of
where her head is at the moment. Um, I just appreciate the engagement and giving a little bit more clarity on, you know, where council is, um, facing some of the ongoing challenges because I'd like to get to a place in which we um,
address those, whether like Miss Ashan spoke like maybe it's small short-term things that we can do as we work towards a larger um, project. I will say that waiting, we could certainly incorporate
waiting um you know giving folks bonus points for um you know whether they work collaborate collaboratively if you know two or three or more orgs submit an application that they're going to work on a project together. we can
kind of look at some of the other communities that sort of offer an incentive for those kind of applications that would get to some folks um and Mr. Snook's comments around several organizations applying to do the the you
know a similar service. So we can look at that. Um and then you know the matches we can certainly put like a bonus point or something like that that if the application serves as a match to a broader source of funding, then there
was there would be a way to elevate that. We can certainly look at that. I don't think that um we would be in a position to necessarily implement that for FY28's application, but like I said, we any changes that we do, we would want to start deciding on those or talking
about those now so that we can communicate proactively with our nonprofit partners. So, um, Sam, just one quick comment. Thank you, Misty. I just wanted to note that, you know, participating in many mentoring programs in this community and
I think it's >> I've always said that we need a wide approach net to reach kids because mentor kids through C4K, they may not thrive as well at the Boys and Girls Club type of thing. So we I think that
you know if we said Boys and Girls Club or whatever they have more kids or whatever and so we may not do others. We I just want to be cautious of that because we want to reach as many kids as as we can. We just have to decide if we're going to go deeper and wider. I
think that that that's a a question. But anyway, >> so I'll frame it by the notion that there is there's work to be done in our community of trying to send a clear message uh to our nonprofit partners
because they deserve that. uh and that message is that there's a change of foot in our approach to funding and we need to be able to arrive at what that is so that we can communicate that kind of to Misty's point that we can't make changes
for the next budget cycle because we don't we're our runway is short. We're about to open that process and we haven't been clear to them that they need to reorient themselves to how they look at this. But we know and you all know and past councils have known that
organizations have looked at the vibrant community fund as a source of funding that they rely on. And we need to send that message to them. If that is a message that you are ready and you're clear about sending that to do so would be at your own peril and that you are
not guaranteed to receive any specific dollar amount each year because we hear references to people expecting that they will. We hear references to I don't understand your process. Our process is very clear. We have a good process in my
opinion. Um and it is the same process that everyone goes through and it's the same process that has had to be the set of hoops that people have to jump through. So that is not a clear and accurate statement that it's not transparent. I disagree. It is very
transparent because there's a site visit component. There's a rubric that they're using. It is all reviewed by staff to make sure that everyone is going through that portal the same way. the output that is the recommendations is reviewed
by staff, reviewed by my office and brought to council. So, it's a multi-tered process of looking at all the different things. We have individuals who are not getting what they want and then they allege that it's not transparent, not fair, and I beg to
differ. So, what I'm hearing you all say is that it's okay for us to start clearly communicating to them that's not how we see it. That is not what we think is happening. You should not expect to receive the same $35,000 that you got last year just because you applied again
this year. One, because it shouldn't be expected that that's possible if 40 additional organizations applied year this year versus last year. It's virtually impossible for you to get the same $35,000 because there's more people in the pool. That is happening year
after year, but yet we're being questioned as to the process being flawed because I didn't get the same amount as last year. So I think there's clarity that we have to be willing to deliver so that you then don't have to go through what you go through in the
work session where folks come and tell you that your process is not transparent or fair because they didn't get what they were hoping to get. Having come out of this world, spent many of years writing grants myself, seeking grants at
every level, I was never I was never able to allow myself to believe that I was guaranteed anything. So for that, we had to apply, apply, apply. And I think what we're asking is, is that the message that you want sent to the organizations? Because they are not all
operating from the same place and the same belief that you're not going to give them what they need. which is why they come after the reveal and try to get you to change the reveal. Um, I think it's it needs to be appreciated
that the process is the process, the outcome is the award. And that's what we really need to embrace more of. I hear a desire for strategic investment. I hear a desire for measurements, uh, uh,
measuring of the needle moving. We can do all of that. prepared to do all of that and tee that up for the FY29 cycle and give everyone the notice that that's what's coming if that's what you desire. I think that's what I'm hearing. I'll
check in again with you when we do your retreat a little bit later where you can actually make a decision and we'll be sure of how to frame some of that. But that's the clarity that I've been looking for with the staff because I feel like they've had to endure hearing their friends in the nonprofit world say
that the process is flawed and it's hard for them to take when they've worked so hard to get through this process and I've been very quiet up until now. So just wanted to share that with you. That's where I am and I think that's the work that still needs to be done. >> Okay. Before we move on, any other
comments on that? I think that's it. Michael, any any >> Thank you. Yep. >> Okay. Now I'll get on another soap box. >> So the remaining time that we have is on
participatory budgeting and um Misti is going to stay on because she was a part of a prior uh effort. I'm using the same slide deck misty so that you know um it's not the full presentation because I pulled some slides out but uh there has
been an expression of uh an interest in doing participatory budgeting here as an active a program. Uh so we wanted to just kind of bring u the entire council up to speed on the conversation and uh to kind of measure where you all are,
how you feel about it. if there's any additional information that be may be needed, we can try to get that for you. Uh, but I wanted to uh in framing the conversation for um the conversations that we have been having with a couple of you that in FY209
um in the adopted budget, the council set aside $100,000 in city funds for participatory budgeting process. It was a pilot. The goal was to engage residents in more of building trust uh with their local government and being able to determine where uh city dollars
would go in the community. Steering committee was uh assembled. They were going to work between the months of December and April. Uh and that effort was to try to determine how to go about making the decisions about what um ideas had been generated, what opportunities
were possible, uh how to uh allocate those funds and all of that would have been wrapped into what is a participatory budgeting process. Um they were to look at additional models and to figure out what was the best way to reflect our sentiments here in the city of Charlottesville. So just starting
with the question of what is participatory budgeting? is viewed as a democratic process where community members decide how to spend the money. Uh and it gives real decision-making power because whatever that group comes up with is what is funded. Uh that comes with a few guard rails in that you can't
just turn that over without full context and our residents don't always know what projects might be in design phase phases. uh what may be part of other grants that we're seeking and efforts that we may have, especially if it were an infrastructure project, say a street
project, there's a VOTE component that could be connected to that. So just because we have the idea doesn't mean that it is applicable for this particular moment because there might be something already moving. So there's a process for how you solicit the input, collect the ideas, go work through those
ideas and determine which ones are viable, and then you allow the committee to spend the time and energy to go through those and determine what is the um actual recommendation for how to spend the funds. So this is what it is also what it takes. Um there's a
steering committee involved just to make sure that the process goes as it's supposed to and that it remains fair throughout the entire process. residents will come together and brainstorm ideas. That's where the ideas for what could be done with the funds. Uh where that comes from. The proposal design team will work
to develop the proposals because again, you have an idea that we want to put this new splash pad in an area where one doesn't exist today. Well, we got to make sure that the team understands how much does a splash pad cost, how much land is needed in order to do a splash
pad. Do we already have that on a list? Is it really a splash pad or is it something else? All those different things come through that process >> and then the residents will vote on the proposals and determine which projects will be submitted to myself and to all of you. And then the winning project is
implemented over the next budget year and the steering committee will continue to work to monitor the implementation because the follow through is everything because you don't want to start a process and not finish it which is what we did. So, um, the types of projects the steering committee will recommend
them. They can be a capital project. Uh, that means a one-time expenditure. That's some of those physical improvements that might happen in the public rightway. Uh, and then there are also other community benefits um like maybe signage for neighborhoods, uh, beautifification efforts. It could be a
whole host of things that make its way through a process like this. Uh, in 2019, we went through the work of doing that. We had $100,000 identified. We identified the area where the project would happen and then we did not
execute. Uh so the question based on the interests that have come up uh from the expressions from council members is are you interested in us embarking on this journey again? Uh and if so, we would ask you the first question of how much
money are you interested in setting aside for such a purpose? and then we'll get to work on figuring out how to implement such a purpose. But the timeline for how this would particularly work would be in August, August or October, we would be collecting ideas.
Um by from November to February, we'd be looking at proposal development, voting on options in April and then looking for implementation to begin thereafter. This would be uh as we're presenting to you at this moment, the earliest would be
FY28 for the actual implementation of a project. 29 is possible. FY29 being possible because it all depends on how the idea generation goes, the consideration goes, the voting goes. Um and I think that's really what we want
to point out to you that it is a lift. It's a lift that we were embarking on doing internally. So we had a um interd disciplinary team assembled to do that. You could also contract it out and contracting it out that means that's
procurement. We don't pick any one individual to do that. We've got to put that out. So there's a process that that has to go through. Um we'll work on that and we can make that happen and individuals can respond to the opportunity to serve the community, serve the city this way in support of
its community. Um, so that would be what I wanted to just share with you as a conversation that has been coming up. I'm going to try to go back coming up a little bit here recently. Uh, and because we have just finished this
budget u cycle and now have FY27's budget set, then we can begin to start putting the parameters together for what would an FY28 participatory budgeting process look like. uh determine how much you would like to set aside for that because that needs to be budgeted for.
So that means we need to set that up. So Chrissy's asking me how much she wants to spend. She's got to find this money too. Uh so we'd have to be able to do that. And then of course this all gets framed around this RFP because if we're going to be uh recruiting someone to do that, we've got to pay them as well. So
that it's more than just the dollar amount that would be spent uh on the project. It's also going to be that facilitator if we go that route. >> Yes. Um this is not my thoughts about the whole thing just a one particular
question for the types of projects. Um can you give some examples of things that we've done recently or that are in our planning process that could be something that the committee would consider? >> Meaning some projects that the city's already doing that could be
>> Yeah. Like selected that could have been part of the petri budget. >> Sure. I mean, um, like I said, some signage for neighborhoods. That's that's one I'm going back to my old life. Um, beautifification along a corridor that we think it's a special corridor and we want to dress it up and it'd be
something that, uh, the community itself might respond to. Um, it could be, and help me out over here in the gallery, sidewalk sections that are missing, >> uh, that we do not have on any list that we want to try to get those activated
sooner because it might just be that um, isolated piece that could be missing. Um, >> Stribbling came up as one idea when we sent it out to the neighborhoods >> way back, but that was well before we knew how much that thing cost, so that wouldn't be appropriate today. But it
could be it could be that no to to Chrissy's point that any any idea is a good idea until we verify how much it's going to cost and the capacity for getting it done. >> Well, yeah. I guess my my question is like how technical
>> or less it doesn't have to be. Right. So, is there something that ends up being like too technical or too vy that it can't be? >> No, no, no. Because it wouldn't be limited to that. It's not it's not only a capital project. My appreciation for this is this is also community spirit. It's community pride. What are things
that fall into that category? Um if I take conversation I had with you councelor Ashan about uh message boards and having message boards in a certain style a certain you know fixated posture around the city or something to
that effect. That could be something where this the response from the group could be we want better communication and we would like you to feed us that information in a digital format around the city. That that could be something. Um
the goal would be that we would want to make sure of course that if you're setting aside $50,000 to $100,000 that it's something that you can connect to as the governing body for using the funds that way. But because it's coming from the community, then of course
there's a small group that makes up the idea generating group, but there's a broader community that also has to appreciate it. So it could go in a number of different >> I would add Sam that when I was out >> I forgot she was
>> still here. Okay. Um, in 2019, I went out into the the neighborhood that was selected on a couple different outreach um, opportunities and just sort of teed up the idea of participatory budgeting and
sort of got some light brainstorming happening. Some of the things that um folks had expressed is like redoing a playground or establishing a new playground. Um could be related to lighting as it supports like public
safety or the perception uh of public safety. It could be even something like um one one of the city schools did like a a community art installation and how how might folks engage on what the art
looks like and and where it goes and things like that. So those are some of the things that had come up >> previously. >> Pocket park, >> right? >> Specialized bike parking to your credit. like there could be things like that
that requires some outlay of cash to buy something, install something, and care for something. I mean, it could go in all those different directions. >> So, um, my question is, you know, a lot of times with, you know, I'm not exactly I know Michael has talked about this,
but I don't I don't think I've ever been part of it. Um, but I have been part of different neighborhood association groups and been part of them. And um a lot of times the neighborhood groups they may they may be the people that if
they vote on that they are the groups. They may not be um reflective of the community but they they may be able ones to come to the meeting if they agree to something and then we start installing. like you know we didn't know about this
where but the majority of the people at the neighborhood meeting you know may have supported it so I'm not and it's hard to overcome that but how do what have you found it >> yeah I mean there's always risk with that I mean communication is a big part
of everything that we have to do and and one of the areas that we know we've got to do better at I think this is going to be this would be a process should you choose to do this it would be one that comes with special attention I think this will be something that we will be regularly talking to the media about. Um
there will be regular updates along the way so that the public at large could stay engaged with how it's progressing across the timeline. Um I think those would be some of the aspects of what if we were to go the route of doing it ourselves or bringing someone else in to
do it. That's those are component parts of the execution plan. Um but yes, there's always a risk. um having done this for a long time myself, you can't make everybody happy, so you don't always try. Uh and then for that, you you try your best to make sure that
you're working with um representatives of the neighborhoods who are going and seeking that input and able to speak to that because I think that's what you want to make sure of. I mean, we know that from our own experiences. If we pick up a plan that was laid out just two years ago and try to go and
implement that today without any additional communication, we're likely to hear push back because people have changed their minds. People have moved away from the idea. They don't feel about it the same as they once did because it was a hot topic then. It's not a hot topic now. This would be a
protracted period of time that we're working to keep people engaged. Um, >> I would also add that we did we started out doing engagement as like street outreach. Like we got we partnered with an ice cream truck and went to the
neighborhoods and kind of got kids involved and their parents and caregivers out into the community um to get to get the concept um out into the the folks of the folks that we like wanted to make sure knew about it and engaged. So, we prioritized some of
those locations and places um that we knew that we wanted the feedback to come from. Um part of the other additional cost will be things like ice cream trucks. Maybe not ice cream trucks exactly, but those outreach and um
incentives to get community members out to do the voting activities, to do the brainstorming activities because to your point, mayor, we want to make sure that there's we're reducing as many barriers as possible for folks to be able to come out and engage. That's why it wouldn't
only just be in uh in-person activities. There would be online opportunities. I think even we >> either stood up an email address that people could email ideas to or something to that effect. So we make sure that it was a lot of different outreach
opportunities. >> Okay. So we have some interviews. So let's try to >> Yeah. Um so I I I mean obviously there's a lot of things to balance here like speed versus engagement uh infra actually spending money on the project versus spending
money on the um facilitation of the participation. Um and and I wonder how much of this is like civic engagement opportunity in general and like we I feel like we we do
try to do um community engagement for projects. Um we don't always knock that out of the park. We're trying to get better at that. Um but even beyond just this one particular issue like this one particular park like getting out there
to do this is how your government works information in advance because one of the things I think we all are aware of is feedback that from from people who don't have the full story and can't properly weigh the tensions and trade-offs is less useful
than feedback from people who have gotten an education on the topic. Um, so we have to make sure that we're doing that, which I I know is the kind of the whole point, but that takes a lot. >> And so how is this different from like implementing a small area plan process
or how is this preventing the squeaky wheel problem? Does this create a more systematic way of addressing issues throughout the area? like we did a for example um we could say okay this year we're going to do a participatory
budgeting project in this neighborhood next year we're going to do it in this neighborhood so that it is equally distributed and it's not just the loudest voice gets the project >> um and then my my question is what wasn't implemented in 2019
>> Misty do you remember what the project was 2019 >> we did not implement the process we did the outreach It didn't. >> Unfortunately, the project was stopped and we weren't able to move forward with the design.
>> So, it wasn't that there was a project that was chosen and engaged. It was like the engagement didn't even happen. >> The engagement did not happen. >> Got it. Okay. Thank you very much. >> The announcement that it's coming >> and then we didn't come. >> Right. So, >> we're just very delayed perhaps.
>> Yeah. So yeah the I mean the problem that participatory budgeting solves is not a budget problem. It is a trust in your government problem that it's solving. So it's all the data is not about like this that or the other. It's like you are giving people direct
tangible evidence that their government is listening. So >> or it's like concrete community engagement. The community is engaged in painting this mural in building that garden. >> It's the followrough. >> It's the followrough. It's implementation which a small area plan takes a long time to do. This is a budget cycle implementation. So any I
mean you know big cities Seattle New York spend 3 million 1.5 million on participatory budgeting for different uh bureaus. So it's all about building trust and civic understanding and education. It's it is that tool. It's
just using budgeting as the mechanism. Um and I think the I think it has to be RFP. This seems like a huge lift that we're already having capacity challenges that to do this right it would need a someone managing that
process but the does the steering committee come from inside the city or was that >> both both so res >> inside and outside >> inside and outside and then is the um and eight months does seem to be the minimum amount of time that I've seen in
the literature but the um the dollar amount, the h 100,000 was to execute the project or was everything ice cream trucks involved and the project? >> Misty, do you recall if the 100,000 was
meant to cover everything or just the project? That's one of the things that we learned in the um in the design of the how participatory budgeting could look in Charlottesville is that there was a lot of associated costs that weren't baked
in. And so um >> yeah, >> we were going to consider like taking it out of the hundred as as not just for the project implementmentation, but taking out the uh marketing and the outreach money part from that overall
100, but we didn't get that opportunity. >> And I'm reminded that from Chrissy that we also had $15,000 set aside as a recurring item in the regular budget. So that would have been where we would have started to apply things from. But to Misty's point, that all probably still
needed some attention to figure out if even that was going to be enough. And then maybe the next time we did, it could have been a different number. So the last thing is I've from what I've looked at you we can kind of limit it to say not all ideas are good ideas and say
okay we're doing recreation and all we're going to focus on for the >> six neighborhoods that we picked for pilot year one is recreation ready set go and then they the the participants design the need under that
you know you could do public safety you could do anything so that you are limited um in that and that seems to narrow down like use the eight months as well more efficient. >> Yeah. More efficiently. Um but then you have to deliver.
>> So you can't you have to set up the expectations. We're not going to build an XYZ and recreation. It's got to be within this scope. >> It's feasible tangible implementation. >> Thankfully the proud wedding projects have to come to me so I can say nope, we can't do that. >> Right. Right. Right. Right. you know,
and I mean part of the process in Richmond and because it's a very specific process and part of it is there's that dream phase, but then right after that the reality >> community and staff are at the same table as equals and staff are winnowing down. That's not feasible. That's not
that's would involve VOD and then only after that winnowing does voting happen. So part of the structure itself is throwing out things that just aren't possible. Um, and I would just say I do think this would be important for the city to implement. In my mind, it's like
a the process is the most important part of it and it's a skill set that once the city develops could be applied in different contexts whenever we need to do more intensive community engagement. I do think, you know, around $100,000 or
so at first could be a good starting point and to view it as a demonstration project. Maybe we just kind of replicate what we started down in 2019 where one neighborhood is chosen and it's just kind of a demonstrating the process. Um, but I do think it the most important
thing is just doing it, demonstrating it can be done, and whether it's an RFP or done internally in the city, having it done in a way where it's not just a one-off. the city can keep using this tool because in Richmond and other places that intentionality of going out into neighborhoods, canvasing
doortodoor, going to people rather than expecting people to come to city government um engages people who don't normally engage with city government, improves trust. people understand how staff think better. Um, and also the
community has expertise and ideas that um, sometimes the city misses because the city very much has expertise but can be very much in its own bubble um, and and miss things as well. So um, anyway, >> so I'm feeling as though I'm hearing
yes, but we need to figure it out. >> Yes. >> Yes. >> Got it. Okay. That's what I'm looking for. >> You ready? >> Yeah. >> Okay. >> Would you like me to read? Yes, please. >> All right. Pursuant to motion 2.2-3712 of the Virginia code, I move that this
city council close this open meeting and convene in a closed session as authorized by the Virginia Freedom of Information Act as follows. One, pursuant to the Virginia Code section 2.2-371A 111A1 for discussion and consideration of prospective candidates to be appointed to the following boards and/or
committees. the Charlottesville Redevelopment and Housing Authority Board. >> Second. >> All in favor, please say yes. >> Yes. All oppose, please say no. >> Okay. Thank you. We'll be back at um 6:30.