present are myself commissioners Anderson Mills Shackleton Hedstrom Evie Gduche absent is Benson and we'll start with the uh with the agenda uh the agenda was included in
the packet is there a motion to approve the April 15 2025 agenda i approve it all support okay all those in favor i any opposed motion carries all right next item uh are the
uh are the minutes of our March 18th 2025 meeting you'll find those in the packet in pages 2 through 4 uh is there a motion to approve the March 18th 2025 meeting minutes so move
is there a second a second thank you any discussion on the minutes all right all those in favor signify by saying I I any opposed all right motion carries all right next agenda item is a review of
the financials and I'll start on page five and actually go through inclusive of Superior National Golf Course through page 14 and at this point I wish to turn it over to Commissioner Shackleton so referring to the EDA
balance sheet and uh profit loss statement uh the one note to to mention here is that the EDA received a $216,000 payment from the state of Minnesota for some FEMA work at the golf course and so
that's reflected in the statements here that money has been transferred to the golf course so you can disregard that when you see it so The only mention I would make to uh in the balance sheet for the year is that uh we've had a lot of activity with the
grant applications and uh if we were to fully fund all the grant applications as of this week it'd be about $156,000 out considering our $200,000 budget for the year and then considering expenses going forward till June when we
see the first levy payment it could be tight i I wouldn't if another $25,000 grant request came in i would caution depending upon when we started to pay out some of these grants that we've let's say approved so we might want to
just consider that before our ley payment in June when in June is that payment typically about first or second week we get about 60% okay of our funding we show some money market um we show money in money
market is that liquid or is that uh Yeah it is liquid but the balance is about 220 if you minus payables we're about 220 156 going out another 30 45 for expenses to get us through June got it and so that's why we're kind of looking
at tight i I if everything pencils out accurately it's about a $20,000 cushion but that's projecting out to mid June you know so it's a little tight that's all okay we we'll discuss I think in in much more detail the the grant program later in the meeting but one of the
things that has been I think at least initially discussed is is bucketing the the applications that can help time the payouts as well yeah so if anyone has any questions on
the ED I'll move it to the golf course okay okay golf course day uh balance sheet looks healthy there's cash in there uh there's enough to get us through the golf course to the golf course season when cash flow improves um the one big
difference between this year versus last year is the payroll expenses we have six people on salary this year versus only two last year so there's a a a bump up in pay for uh for labor so that be the
only note I've noticed difference any questions go for us not not necessarily on the financials but I was looking at the equipment list and I I Somehow it only lists like 18 golf carts but those are owned and the rest are
leased so that Well those are the ones that will be leased in the future so they they own all the golf they purchased 72 golf carts last year and so that's owned by the golf course but they weren't listed in the equipment for some reason and the cap
yeah well that I saw in the it talking for the cap capital expenditures for next year no equipment inventory oh and inventory for some reason it shows uh eight rental five maintenance they don't show the
rest as an asset a lot more self strips than that yeah you're saying as an asset it's on page 10 page 10 is what I'm looking at i
can Okay so this is the budget okay like I say it's not a budget question it's Oh I see okay inventory okay mowers that would be clubhouse wouldn't it [Music]
they're saying they have more than that that doesn't have to be answered right now yeah I'll look at it that I think is separated by clubhouse and um maintenance oh we can take that as as homework yeah okay I'll do that that's fine no need no
need to answer right now any other questions or discussion related to the budget move we have whatever we do yeah yeah that movement yes i'll make that motion very good a second thank you i don't believe
that needs a vote okay uh next agenda item is public comments so if there's anyone in the audience that wishes to approach the front table and a microphone please do so now
Mr president yeah as a resident co county I would like to provide some public comment before we delve into the remainder of our agenda certainly great um I'll probably hop down there just to present a clear division between my
position as commissioner and president okay turn your hat around so my name is Alex BB Judich and in 2022 my family moved to Grand Marray from Juno Alaska to open Superior Crearyy uh this May we're going to start our fourth
summer serving homemade ice cream to our friends and our family and visitors to Cook County from around the country and the world um it's a big year for us we're streamlining there have been changes in the past 12 months that we've made regarding what we offer things are
uh improving our sales are increasing and we're making a really gradual and deliberate uh entrance into the wholesale market so that's exciting um this is our exploratory year for that we're going to lay the framework so in 2026 we can hopefully start distributing
our product a little bit beyond Coke County nothing too crazy some of you are familiar with that plan we were a recipient of uh the business fund development program grant we applied for the maximum amount of $25,000 last September
um the project for which we were seeking funding was to purchase the building that we have been conducting business in since 2022 uh we followed the process to a tea it was deliberate it took a while it was
intentional and at the end of the day we were incredibly grateful to get a check for $25,000 after we closed on our property January of this year um by submitting the application back in September we were fully aware that just because we were applying for an eligible
project didn't mean that we would receive grant funds that's uh part of the process you apply your application's vetted and the committee and the board make a decision on whether or not to issue you funds so thanks for investing
in our business not all of you are part of that decision but all of you will be part of decisions moving forward um I wanted to just talk about a couple things um that we're most grateful for so first of all our our funding package
right was a mix of uh the backbone was a traditional loan through um our bank um the second component was a low interest loan through the ILR that was an extensive application process but I was thankful that the business development fund application process was as thorough
as it as it was because I was able to utilize a lot of what I presented to this organization in that Ir application which is just as intense as a traditional bank loan um so uh we're
grateful for this ability that this uh ownership of our building now provides us we have physical stability which means we'll have a roof over our heads for longer than the 10 years that we uh signed in our lease back in 2022 uh we have financial stability as well um for
our business beyond the end of that lease long-term planning is a big part of why we wanted to buy our building in order to complete renovations that we needed to grow we needed to customize our space our landlord was very gracious
but a certain point they drew a line saying "I'm not comfortable with you customizing this facility beyond what you've already done." Which makes sense um now that we own the building we can make a financial plan to complete the need improvements that we need to to
grow our business expand into wholesale and continue growing our storefront sales that's going to be um 3 years or so we're looking at over $150,000 of additional improvements just to achieve those benchmarks we described to you last October uh the third part is
revenue diversification and this is wholly tied to wholesale um we need to expand our sales beyond the storefront uh most of our business is hyper seasonal it's between June and uh August June 1 October or August 31st that's
when we make gosh 75% of our income and as many of you know it's pretty smart it's wise if you can to diversify your revenue stream which is why we're looking into wholesale um we've had great luck with the kind of test pile accounts that we've been working with
since September um our goal here starting next fall is to generate income year round uh with a strong focus on wholesale in the offseason um and store uh front sales in the in the summer does that make sense yes okay um so by owning
the building it unlocks the access to make the improvements on the facility that we need to to accommodate that goal efficiently um in accordance with uh industry standards so it's a success story we're not quite done with our project yet um we have bought the
building we're working on improvements um I do want to talk about the application process a little bit right um and this is where my testimony as a taxpayer in Cook County um I think is important to the discussion that may happen later today
um I think there's a really strong need for clear and transparent requirements for applicants and project eligibility um the document starts off with intentional
flexibility in the opening paragraph and while I think there is room for intentional flexibility I do think that eligibility is something that shouldn't be flexible in my mind eligibility is something that
is determined based on criteria the flexibility part might come into play when determining if an application aligns with the EDA's strategic plan so I think moving forward as you consider
the guidelines perhaps consider clear and transparent requirements in our particular situation it was unclear throughout the entire application process if purchase of building was or was not an eligible expense um we were told it was we were told it was not we
were told it was but only for certain types of businesses ultimately what happened was we reached a consensus and our application was brought to the finish line largely in part due to uh two of the commissioners on the review committee they worked with us they helped us align our mission with yours i
think the the thought was common we shared an interest we just had two different ways of looking at it but when it comes to criteria eligibility is something that you probably need to think about standardizing and keeping clear and
consistent as far as grant agreements go um there are a bunch of different grant agreements out there floating around the internet as part of my preparation for our application as I read as many of them as I could to see what I was getting myself into and what I learned was every application agreement is different i'm not going to go into
details but I would encourage you to standardize that at least uh to the point where similar project types have similar grant agreement language so everybody that's buying a building has more or less the same expectations of
them as the other person um likewise with a equipment purchase for instance um that language looks the same as well regarding grantee responsibilities and the grantor responsibilities the last part of this is just the transparency in the public
process i know the EDA has been in transition for over a year with different commissioners different director we now have a new consultant as well i think it's really important to make a goal of this committee moving forward particularly as it pertains to
this program which is almost 38% of the levy request right it's a lot of money $200,000 we just talked about that um I would respectfully request that we make an effort the EDA makes an effort to
maintain transparency keep approved grant applications that are being considered public keep confidential or sensitive information about those businesses private um but publish the agreements that DDay is making on behalf of the Cook uh county taxpayers and the
applications for which they're granting funds so that's it we're having great this season we uh we're 18 strong uh retention rate is nearly 100% two of our team members are international students the rest are Cook County adults and high schoolers um this year we're looking at
adding at least one more year round position in the next 12 months and we're right on schedule with a deliberate uh plan for growth so that was my report i haven't formally done one but I felt the need to today um to share a positive experience
with the program one that took some time but we got to the finish line and we're really grateful thank you thanks Alex thank you Alex if there are no other uh public comments I'm going to turn it over to Heidi who has actually brought a um a written
submission with her from a president that's the thing is I meant to bring the written submission with me so I could read it word for word uh to you all um but I'm going to summarize it and what I propose to do is include the written um
public comment in the minutes for the meeting after the fact if that's okay so I received um an email yesterday from one of the applicants for the business development fund grant program she asked
that it be submitted under public comment and that and asked me to read her comment on her behalf because she's unable to be here today but uh this public comment is from um like I said an applicant for the grant program um she
had applied back in January 2025 for the program um her business um her business and and this is is public information and she approved for me to to talk about what her business is
um her her business is uh Timber and Tide Cabins it's a new business it's a startup um basically in a nutshell her application um was reviewed by the grant review committee but not approved and so
therefore the the full EDA board never received a copy of her application or or or even really knew that uh this application came through it was an application um for $25,000 to repair two
roofs rooftops pretty much very simple application um the summary of her public comment is that she understands that the EDA is is discussing changes and amendments to the grant program
guidelines and application and she is suggesting that the EDA board all seven of you um approve some sort of language in the guidelines or criteria that specifies the types of businesses that
are eligible ible and not eligible for this program um because the reason being is in the current guidelines and criteria criteria her application simply to
replace rooftops for her business was listed as an eligible project so um she didn't quite understand why she was denied the application um and uh she'd be happy she told me to pass this on to all of you to
answer any questions um about her concern or her comments um um and I'd be happy to pass on her um her phone number her email to to you all she owns another business in town right now um her name
is Gina Joyce and I'll give her her contact information to whoever wants it after the meeting um but that's that's uh that was her public comment and um and I I guess I can't answer too many questions because those are her comments
and not mine um but there you go thank you okay next item on the agenda uh is our first resolution and this is resolution 2025-16 approving the
WTIP Northshore Community Radio annual underwriting contract we discussed this in our last meeting and reached uh a consensus to move forward but we've now got it in the form of this resolution because we've got the contract and this
is in pages 15 through 17 with WTIP it's [Music] $280 for a 12-month period as I mentioned in our last meeting there was a rather boilerplate and never updated
uh underwriting script that had been developed before we ceased uh continuation of that underwriting relationship with WTIP so we we challenged the station to come up with something to refresh that um speaking
specifically to the business grant development program so I'll I'll try to put my best radio voice forward here but um this is a draft of the new script which is one of the homework items from our last meeting so local programming on WTIP is supported in part by the Cook
County Grammar Economic Development Authority whose business development fund grant program is here to support local startups and established businesses located in Cook County with funding opportunities business owners can learn more and check if their business qualifies online at
cookoutmneda.org that's not the That's not what I see what you see is as indicated is the previous version oh I see yeah this is the new script that we just got today okay that's the kind of the boilerplate general we thought it was too general so
okay in any case it it uh focuses on the business development grant we can absorb it uh we can tweak that as often as we need to uh say in the future as I mentioned before when we're maybe surveying Cook County on Tech Knight
Harbor uh input that's a message that we can that we can do on WTIP amongst other outlets questions comments um I was going to move the resolution so we could talk about it is there a second
support okay discussion i think it's a good idea um back when I before I retired and lo a business we had the same kind of thing in the ongoing contract and I think we had developed several um little
um underwriting messages messages and then they rotate them yep um and I and I like the idea of given given time available to our director u you know to refresh those to what's hot for the moment you
might say exactly yeah yeah and the radio station's quite flexible in that regard other comments do I have a future in in the radio business yes you do i think as long as you know we're updating that message I would seriously look at at least once a month you know sure make sure that we
put eyes on it and maybe tweak it agreed in fact we can make that part of our meeting i think that would be appropriate okay any other discussion all right so all those in favor of um resolution
2025-16 regarding the WTIP contract i opposed motion passes okay next resolution is 2025-17 approving business development fund grant agreement with Unimus
Enterprises LLC for a total amount not to exceed $25,000 and you'll find the details uh on pages 18 through 24 and it's my understanding
that uh that Matt is here is that right yes great hello so the material is in uh in the in the deck uh but as many of you would be aware Unimus is a um a welding and
fabrication enterprise uh that's been in business now for a couple of years i think that right okay years three years and uh is in the process of expanding and uh this grant speaks to uh equipment purchases uh to support that expansion
so Peter and Heidi I'm not sure if you guys received it but I did send you a revised copy of the application early this afternoon is that the cop copy that everybody had received or you might move to the microphone for the recording
purpose um in answer to your question no the latest copy uh was not um provided in their packet they received the original your original application okay like Friday yeah so the the only thing that I
had changed uh between between the original application that you had all received and reviewed and the application that I had just submitted early this afternoon was after getting some clarification information regarding the total grant amount yep um
my initial understanding was that the grant total or project total I guess those were the words that I confused was for $25,000 of that $25,000 I needed to match 25% of that um I then was told by
Heidi that the the total project cost uh would be no more than or no I think no less than $31,125 if I remember that correctly
31250 would be the project size for maximum 25,000 grant correct yeah so what what is the request for is this for 25 yes so the current or the revised request um in that application that I
submitted was for um $24,000 even okay the total project cost being $30,2649 okay the request plus 25% correct okay okay got it but fundamentally the
equipment that's being procured the plan still accomplishes the same premise everything is still the same it was just some additional equipment that would help expedite things and make life easier on my end okay so the grant request is actually
slightly less than what we see here to as I understand for you to meet your 25% uh input the grant has to be slightly less he he said he's Yeah you said it correctly
he's requesting 20 He's requesting 24 for a 30,000 something project correct y Commissioner Mills can we have more details on what those changes are absolutely um so the additional equipment provided I was also able to
provide accurate quotes as of today um but there was a quote from Ariat Manufacturing to drill all of the Guardian fire suppression unit pipes for 20 units um there was a quote from
Russell Steel to procure two 316 by 4x8 sheets uh to plasma cut out the feet for those Guardian fire suppression units a rotary welding positioner to weld those
feet to the pipes and uh the pipe themselves um those were the changes that I made to the agreement or the application i apologize thank you discussion or I just wanted to add a
comment so this is an example of of why the grant review committee is is trying to clarify the guidelines is because of this confusion i think was even I was confused when I was first looking at it and Matt and I had a chance to talk talk
about this late last week and and in and just in really understanding so the match the 25 the 25% match requirement is based on the total project
cost now if you could Alex if you could explain this better for me or anyone on the grant review committee so we'll we'll get into this in more detail the review committee uh Commissioners Anderson and Shackleton we spent a lot of time figuring out how we can simplify
the language to make it as user friendly as possible because it isn't and it hasn't been for a little bit maybe just in the last four months but anyway we'll move forward but but the the matching requirement is a percentage of the grant request that the applicant or the
grantee is required to invest in the project for which they are seeking funds correct yeah so I don't think that Yeah so we'll we'll talk about it and I'm I'm actually going to ask the educators on this committee and some other folks that
are good at writing in a way that's easily understood to help us craft the specific language in the new guidelines moving forward because there is some ambiguity there is some confusion but the idea is the match required has to be spent on the project not just held in
your pocket um and demonstrated yeah I think the uh input we got from previous EDA director Mary Somnis uh who's explained um uh the way in which the
money can be allocated to make sure that the match is met it's just when a recipient who's gotten the award turns in receipts if they need to have a 25% match then they get only 25% back or 75%
back of whatever that receipt was for so in order to receive $25,000 you would have had to have spent $31,000 1,025 whatever so that's that's a way of thinking about it does that help
yes yes let's talk about for the grant program during the agenda item for the grant program i just wanted to thank you for dealing with the the confusion and your new application fits and it it is um exactly what we needed so thank you
awesome thank you very much and do you want to say on any other questions or comments on Unimus sure yes after commissioner after Alex uh hi how are you good to see you good to see you um thank you for a clear and concise application that included all of the
elements that we needed to make an endorsement um whether or not they were required I think the review committee appreciated the the backstory of your company including the earnings that you made in your first couple years and your
projections that aligned were all very realistic and promising um I like what you're doing it's something that is in a industry that not many of our applications kind of delve into manufacturing metal manufacturing and
I'm particularly excited about the innovation you showed with your firewall guardian suppression systems that's an exciting um kind of small part of your business that I think will grow so thanks for a great application and thanks for putting some time into it and uh working with us as we navigate into
the future thank you Commissioner i was waiting for a question but no just to say that's a great comment um and forgive me uh for not being more familiar and clearly there's a lot of confusion but um our um
um so the pipes uh and the sheets like there's materials involved here that are beyond like for this one project is that right correct okay and the tools can be used for your business right for the business after the fact specifically
tailored for this for this yeah and so I guess just my question is is that a typical application for for the grants is to have materials for a project i mean clearly tools because that's building the business right but that was just something that stood out is like oh
is this I I think in the past people have gotten printers and also ink so I mean that would be kind of the same thing yeah yep thank you paper yeah um I'll Yeah thank you great
i would done a lot of welding myself and hired welders and worked with welders i've never had one show up with a tie my line of work you know better than most you don't get many opportunities to wear one so I'll take any chance I can i assumed you're coming from a wedding i
assumed you're coming from a wedding but Well to funnily enough this is my wedding yeah I'm not going to question that statement thank you for your professionalism thank you very much all right so we'll close discussion and
uh all those in favor of resolution 2025-17 for unimos i opposed one abstain just to make sure motion passes congratulations thank you very much
all right taking us to resolution 2025-18 approving the business development fund grant agreement with Ruby Lon Graphics LLC for a total amount not to exceed $6,000 the details of the uh Ruby Loon
application can be found in the packet starting on page 25 it's 25 through 34 and as I understand it uh Jessica Jacobson Smith is actually in attendance here hi Jessica thanks for for joining
us if any questions come up but this is a um an apparel decorating company uh filling a unmet need currently uh in Cook County uh a new business and I'll just give you a moment to if you haven't
looked at the material yet to breeze over the material i have yeah i'd make a motion to approve resolution 2025-18 um for $6,000 i'll second to Commissioner Mills and Shackleton uh
discussion or questions for Jessica commissioner Mills so this this is a situation where um an applicant could have say also thrown in $10,000 of
sweatshirts okay i'm just learning about this inventory right yep yep yep i'm just learning about the program you know my first uh grant review uh meeting was just the other day and so I'm getting caught up here but thank you
i don't have a question i just wanted to make another comment that thank you for the time you put into this it was not just a one-time exchange of information we requested additional followup to um kind of enhance your application it was
wonderful uh your portfolio was um appreciated and um I think evidenced the skill that you have in this trade that you're about to get into so um good work thanks thank you i have one more comment again thank you for
for helping us or being patient as you uh as we navigated through your application in the process and I also wanted to add for those who don't know um both of these uh these grant applications um came to us through the
SPDC so and and most of the applications for this this grant program do come to us through the SPDC and um Pete is here today uh the EDA's SPDC consultant and um he he uh helped uh both applicants
through the process along with former consultant Pat Campanero um so uh we just really appreciate all of the extra help um and the extra meetings that applicants and our SBDC consultants put
into um into these applications uh to make it a successful program thanks Heidi uh Commissioner Hester well if this to me just irregardless of our application process is the right kind of thing that EDA should be doing is is
starting helping startup businesses like this um locally so are you aware of Dave Seckleberg do you know Dave he used to do he used to do this some years ago was he set out screen printing was he set out screen printing yeah he had a big
screen printer big roundabout thing yeah i don't know was that a name or the name of the building or Oh okay that might have been um Well whatever mike's one reversed but anyway it's nice to have this uh the
capability local so happy to see you doing this i'll say um I'm on the faculty at Bichi State and I'll say uh go Beavers like your your your uh alum or your faculty would be very proud of you for all the
work you put into doing this and the way you're showing how to make that degree work for you awesome thank you great terrific thank you all right um so with the discussion I think complete all those in favor signify by
saying I on resolution 2025-18 i opposed motion carries congratulations thank you so much all right taking us to our next agenda item and that is the SBDC report page 35
and I'd invite our newish SBDCA SPDC representative Pete Mott [Music] good afternoon everyone uh I am Peter Mott the consultant with the Small Business Development Center here in
Grammaray and I'm very happy to report to you today continued brisk visits and business down at the office in um downtown Grand Marray um this month we
had 30 client meetings uh compared to 33 last month um we saw five new startup businesses through our doors this month that we're working on currently and um several of the
businesses are existing businesses that are either looking to expand or looking to work more closely with our human resources clients to or with our human resources uh professionals to develop um
tailored uh programs to meet their seasonal work demand um so we're getting into some exciting conversations with some small businesses who are looking at providing more benefits to some of our seasonal
workers so that's been an exciting new element to the discussions this month um I mentioned there a mix of existing clients that we've been working with for several months and new clients that have come in the door
um we are getting referrals from a wide variety of people um and I want to express my appreciation for those clients who have come to the SPDC through EDA contacts um that is really a
great way for me to connect with people who are clearly interested in the economic vitality of our community and your willingness to partner with me and send those folks to me um is important
to me and the work my organization does so I we really appreciate that relationship um right now our clients are very diverse um you've seen a couple today but we are really dealing with uh things
from retail to restaurants from sweets to sweats and everything in between um thank you um I've really appreciated in my short time here the the work I've done with
the director uh Director Krampitz has been an extraordinary resource for me not just in understanding my work having previously been in a similar position but also connecting me with the work you guys are doing and making sure that um I
provide a consistent um set of communication pieces to you whether they come in the form of these grant applications or other business related items i'm very appreciative of that help
thank you let's see um so I'm very excited to you know kind of work or understand how the EDA is developing their business development grant criteria and program
and I look forward to working closely to make sure that the clients I come uh or I bring to the group are well attuned to what you guys are looking for um the transition is in full effect um Pat
while she keeps um contact with me and she regularly checks in with me um she has kind of given up her keys and she's kind of flying into her new um adventures um which is kind of exciting
in and of itself um so I just appreciate the work and I'm enjoying working with the clients and if there's ever a time that anyone needs to reach out to me with questions or they just want to talk
about something I encourage that to happen and I look forward to that and that's all I have so and I Pat Pat was so self-sufficient I haven't caught up with her lately but you know over the years uh you know first
working through uh uh UMD and then with Northland Foundation she relied you know on the back office you might say of experts uh in those organizations are you uh tapping into that and getting the same kind of support that or enough
support absolutely good that's one of the the the key resources that she connected me with are these subject matter experts which allow me to kind of depending on what um issue comes up with
a client explore whether or not I have resources beyond my skill set to bring to the table and so that that has been very rewarding good yeah thank you Pete make a beat appreciate it
okay just a quick question so this final report from from uh Pat is this is she's no longer providing consultant services with the small business development center as of end of the month end of the
month okay and then that's okay well the end of of which month well I believe that she's acrewed about 10 hours in April as some uh projects continued to hand off to to
Pete okay so it's not a final report sort of that's my question is if for Pat you mean yeah she's going to continue logging hours i thought No that might be I thought there was a goodbye letter I read earlier i think I think I think
she's done after those 10 hours thank you sure okay taking us to our um discussion items one of which we've already got at least started on but the first one is the business development fund grant program and I'd refer you to
pages 36 through 38 in the packet and I'm gonna turn it over to Heidi and Commissioner BB thank you i'll just provide a a a brief introduction history and introduction um
so back on April 16th 2024 so a year ago um program guidelines were created um for this program so there were no guidelines prior so the grant review committee at the time uh worked with the former director and created the
guidelines that um that are currently existing um so new guidelines um it may not be a brand new program but it's a a the program is is starting to develop its structure and and improving um for
those at home the way the program is funded and and Alex talked about this earlier about 38% of the ED's EDA's annual budget goes towards this program and the EDA is funded through an annual
property tax levy so uh the EDA is is funded through property taxes of the community um I think that's important to always keep in mind that uh how we're funded and um and and keeping as excellent stewards of of the the the
taxpayer dollars that we're supposed to be operating um so far this year in 2025 uh we have received well actually it's updated because I received another one yesterday so the EDA has received eight grant applications for this program in
2025 there's still a couple under review um the grant review committee has met 11 or 12 times either working reviewing applications reviewing the guidelines so the grant review committee is very very
busy and and working hard and doing an awesome job my part in this i just wanted to go over the process um especially for those at home watching of once an application comes in what is the process for approval so uh briefly um so
the applications um come in to me mostly via email um or hard copy but mostly via email once I receive the application I forward it as fast as I can to the grant review committee um and before
that there there there is a standing grant review committee of three people but there oftent times alternates have to step in due to different conflicts of interest with the applications so once it's determined who is reviewing what
application then the grant uh review committee meets they hold a meeting um review the application um often times the there are follow-up questions uh whether the application is incomplete or just there's some curiosity from the
grant review committee has some questions about the application so then I go back to the applicant and provide those questions to the applicant directly once the applicant responds with the answers uh to the question or the request for information um then the
commi the committee the grant review committee decides whether or not to forward the application to this this full EDA board of seven people u once it reaches once the application reaches this this board and this meeting that's when the application is is approved so
that's the process there is a process and it does take a while um and uh and that's it i just wanted to make sure that uh the process is is known out there in the community and it's helpful
for the review team too since they're they're so busy and meeting so often um that the committee uh a community knows that the the volunteer committee is doing is working through through these applications as fast as they possibly
can because they're we don't have deadlines for the program yet um so as the applications come in they're reviewed and then the funds are provided on a first come first- serve basis
$200,000 annually budgeted each year for this program that's it and now um I believe Alex is going to summarize all of the work that the committee has been doing as far as the guidelines
so I think does everybody have access to a draft that was shared with the committee we're not going to read it but if you would like to for your convenience reference it um we'll hit a few points but again the most important I think component of this is that the
work that went into the guidelines in 2024 was substantial and we're not we're not doing a complete restructuring of this as most young grant programs go you try it out for a year you see how it went and then you look forward and see
how you can keep making it even better with the foundation that's already in place so that's what we're doing here um so the first section is program objectives um the only addition that I'd like to make to this section and this is based on the review committee's uh work
is we need to include a reference to the strategic plan the overall mission of the EDA um everything that the grant or excuse me the review committee does the applications that they process and the recommendations they make should be in alignment with the strategic plan of the
EDA um outside of that there's a sentence that says this program is intentionally flexible so I want you to keep that in the back of your head as we move forward um that can mean a lot of things um perhaps ambiguity is a synonym
for that phrase um so just kind of remember that our goal here is to administer a grant program that are based on guidelines that align with the EDA strategic plan so that's kind of our framework moving forward the idea is that this program is transferable in its
administration so regardless of who the director is who the business consultant is who sits on this table on the uh the board it can be implemented the same way um and achieve the same results right no
matter who's involved that's our goal um moving forward eligible applicants um I think there's the biggest thing I think that we hear about this is residency is should residency in Cook County be a
requirement to receive grant funding um the review committee discussed this we don't recommend requiring it however we do recommend including a section on the application that allows the applicant to uh elaborate describe demonstrate their
commitment their connection to Cook County which is important to all of us so the geographical requirement however does ask that the applicant is registered as a business entity with the uh state of Minnesota and their business is located here uh providing services
here um that's the extent of the uh eligibility for applicants that the review committee um is presenting i would like to make a recommendation as a commissioner that we consider um adding to the application instead of business
name registered business name and then provide a place for them to pro uh provide they're doing business as a lot of us do business as or under an assumed name and right now that's missing from the application pretty important part of it um I'll submit that to Commissioner
sorry Director Krampus um so we can perhaps consider that in the future um other than that the only exclusions are cities towns and local units of government so I guess my question for the board here as this is a discussion
um what are your recommendations for applicant eligibility based on what we have here in front of us is there a need to enhance them scale them back is there any sort of criteria that we'd like to introduce perhaps
considering the type of business um or the services they provide chairman Commissioner Hedstrom he's so horrible uh of course I've been around longer than anybody here and uh I
uh I agree there has been ambiguity and openness and and confusion but uh understand too that over the many years that we've had grant programs we have been having a hard time getting people
to apply for those grants and and you know my view has always been we're here for economic development we're here to do good for the community and help out who we can however we can and u and I I say that without disagreeing with with what you're doing here and it's you're
all encompassing i can't think of anything that isn't uh um included in that list of bullet points there which is fine with me i mean it's so you know then it gets down to the the grant committee timing when
you know I mean we're only going to I mean it's wonderful that now we're tapping out we're we're using up our 200 grand that that we have available um so that's great i mean that means we're doing good help and support for businesses in Cook County so I really
endorse that um where else am I going with that i mean so it's all good i I don't know i'm I would be one to advocate for more flexibility and just you know figure out
how we can help well in your case you know it's like it didn't quite fit let's let's figure out how we can make this project fit you know uh in helping a new business and existing businesses it's all what we're about I think i mean it's
economic development authority so that's that's where we are specific uh chair Mr chair specific to eligibility of applicants however um is did you have any clarification or or points on that i guess got everything
covered so the question I would ask though is it ties back to that testimony that we received from a short-term rental operator this would be a place to insert language if we want to exclude certain types of businesses from this i'm not recommending that we do so but
it's a consideration to make coming down the pipeline is marijuana dispensaries which is also a political topic here in Cook County whether or not we agree with selling marijuana or not we will have applicants in the future asking for
funds to start up their businesses so just like short-term rentals which um are a political issue here um we need to prepare ourselves when I say ourselves the the board to consider these types of businesses so do we want to exclude
outright exclude short-term rentals or do we want to allow them to submit an application providing that it's an eligible project and let the application stand for itself yeah I would propose the the latter um the program
objectives in my limited experience in looking at these applications what I feel tends to happen is that certainly applicants and perhaps sometimes even commissioners will gravitate towards the here's what's uh
available or here's what's applicable here's what's not applicable jumping over the program objectives entirely and yet those are doing a lot of work here and ultimately it's the economic impact that the business will have that we
should be considering frankly whether it's marijuana or something else including frankly um short-term rentals now a short-term rental operation that employs one person and isn't isn't growing to anything more than one person maybe a house cleaner on a you know few
hours a week doesn't strike me as the sort of economic growth that we would necessarily support taking off short-term rentals entirely as a category might prevent us from looking at opportunities that we haven't even considered yet in that general category
that maybe we would support because of the economic impact so I'm less inclined to prescribe which businesses we want to exclude i I agree if I can respond I think it's um I think you're absolutely right i
think if we accept applications based on these three criteria then we can let applications stand on their own uh develop their argument present the facts and assess it based on the evaluation process right i'd also agree with both statements
cool having having guidelines objectives eligible projects el applicants i mean it still comes down to the review committee and and their decision on how it fits our
program and or maybe it's how what the available funds are or how I mean this is not uh this is not a guarantee of getting funds from us you know this is just a okay here here is a possible place for you to come and you know I
would encourage maybe it's a waste of their time if if they don't well certainly waste what you want your guidelines to do is is sift out the people like government agencies and management fees and overhead and financing cost so they don't waste their
time making the application but you know we have a lot of other stuff in the bucket there but then you know it's up to our committee and the board here to say that kind of fits or doesn't fit and and it's up to our our group here to prioritize where we where we uh spend
our funds sure yeah i I think we're trying to strike a balance and you guys have done a great job on this of overprescribing and taking the the human and judgment element out i don't think we want to do that the other
extreme is becomes a black box and no one has any idea why something got approved and not approved and we're nowhere near that space don't get me wrong uh I think we've we're getting quite close to a very good balance in that space one other came up here during the
discussion commented question how do we disperse our funds is is it an actual 75% match of submitted bills or do we just write a check for $25,000 if I could respond we'll touch on that once we get to the grant agreement and and
and amounts just moving on if we just things to talk about that's a good question though and it's something that we've all spent a lot of time wrestling with uh so moving on to eligible projects um this the major I guess
changes we did make in this section we recommended categorizing instead of listing a bunch of different types of project so previously um marketing expenses were expanded on you know signs billboards whatever different
elements of marketing that we just put into one category for marketing um instead of listing things out so the list looks smaller we didn't omit anything from the list of eligible projects that was uh developed last year but we did condense it and
um I'm just looking at that list and everything should be the same as last year so those are examples of eligible project types the ineligible expenses and more or less are the same there is one at the bottom that adds product
inventory ingredients or materials for resale or promotion um for consideration and so we didn't make a recommendation on whether or not to do that but it is something I think worthy of our discussion um does EA want to fund
specifically items that are going to be sold so as we were discussing earlier we can buy a tool to to to make something do we want to also buy the material to make something that's going to be sold for profit so it's something to consider we don't have to make a decision right
now um we've had lots of applicants I think in the past that have absorbed the cost of goods in their startup budget themselves as part of their matching requirement um but I don't know i'm not
aware of any previous applications that has sought funds to buy inventory so it's something to think about um any input on that would be appreciated um whether or not to keep that on the list of ineligible or not i can tell you what this that corrects uh Commissioner Mills question earlier
that she could not have applied for $10,000 for sweatshirts yeah in this or materials for so this our existing guidelines do not prohibit that that's this is the proposal is to add so right now our two applications that we just
approved are in full compliance with the guidelines so these are suggestions suggestions and this is based on research i'm not going to say the industry standard is this but it's very common in business development grant funds not to cover the cost of inventory items or
materials or products that are going to be sold so it's that's that's what lines of credit are for that's what uh um you know when you buy product you probably have a 60 days to pay for it i mean you hopefully you turn your product
before you have to pay for it ideally so that's more of a banking thing yeah that's where Peter comes in in helping with the banking relationships outside of that Peter M i think a question just to pose to the
board right now is and this is just a thought something to chew on right now is is the eligibility of an applicant or a project determined on a case- by case basis or is the eligibility of an applicant or a project determined by the review committee and what I'm getting at
here is that I I think we need to build out a little bit what's left up to the review committee to decide and what goes into the guidelines as criteria so the obvious answer to my question
about does the review committee determine eligibility for applicants is is no because a person has to be doing business in Cook County they have to be registered with the state so that's not something we're deciding um where it gets a little fuzzy is I think the root community does find themselves in a position where they might be deciding if
a project on this list submitted by an applicant is in fact eligible and I think we need to maybe just think about establishing a little more rigid criteria for project types so we can
perhaps apply the evaluation criteria that we have been working on and then use our judgment and flexibility to make a case in the review process to go one way or the other and this is just a question because it gets a little fuzzy I think when the review
committee is determining if a project is eligible if that project is on the list of things that is eligible so it's just it's a thought it's a thought I'd love to hear perspective for sure and you know I've been dealing with grants a long time too but a lot of times the
grant makers will have a prioritized list of of eligibility so for instance you know maybe it's just not a list of bullet points maybe there's some sub sub bullets here uh certainly
equipment is something that we're probably doing uh construction of a new building and expansion of buildings repairs maybe not so much uh you know I trying to look for something else here but maybe there's
there's uh um you don't want to exclude just offhand but you don't want to encourage people to apply for for things that are maybe lower on our priority list you might say um I don't know exactly how to word that well I think you could have eligible
projects and still decline the application it just doesn't meet the impact that we're hoping to get you don't think there are other parts of the application that don't measure up so I I think leaving it open is fine you
know because you can if it doesn't it's not a good application it's declined for another reason it's it's okay commissioner Anderson thank you um I agree with Commissioner Shackleton and I'd say that I think one of the structural issues that we can address to
be better stewards of the minimal uh or the limited amount of funding that we have is an idea that we suggested to um condense the time periods in which we review grants so that there's actual competition and I know in the past there
wasn't enough applicants to you know consistently use all the money but that is not going to be an issue going forward the grant committee and members of the EDA are really interested in investing in um the vibrancy of the
economy here and being good stewards and um I think having been on grant committees for a long time and written many grants like the issue that we have is that there's just one thing to look at at a time and so how do you
determine which of the let's say 25 applicants we're going to get this year is the best use of our dollars it's that best use versus yeah okay that's okay that'll probably work um we don't get to have that
conversation so I think by squishing them together a little bit more we'll get that i understand the concern have grant cycles yeah grant cycles um just feedback on on the question regarding eligible products projects
rather you know I I view um eligible applicants as strictly objective it's either yes or no uh eligible product projects rather there's some degree of of judgment there but you've listed out I think enough
specificity to clearly separate the wheat from the chaff but to commissioner Shackleton's point on on judgment and the human element again that's where program objectives come into place that's arguably the most subjective of the areas and that's where I think a lot
of the discussion maybe even argument around one grant application versus the other might come into play ultimately how much of an impact will it have whether it's this type of business or that type of business in in Cook County
so from my perspective there's a nice mix here between the subjective and the and the objective that's I think fair to applicants and provides the grant committee and ultimately the board I think enough flexibility to make the right decisions
absolutely uh I think I'm aligned with the review members as well and with what you just stated um in the next section you know we can move on to grant amounts but we have made a recommendation I think as a committee to um adopt a
quarterly review system or cycle for applications i I believe that we had a consensus on that our last meeting uh to address the points that Commissioner Anderson just made and and and you two as well uh Mr president so we would like to suggest that um get rid of the
rolling deadline and establish uh quarterly deadlines um January April July October whatever fits the seasonality of a lot of our businesses so applicants have time to submit an application for projects that are going to begin in the spring summer to address
the hyper busy uh seasonality of of our our community so yeah I don't think it's asking applicants too much in this space to have enough foresight and planning to put together an application long before the project is scheduled to start so I
don't think that's that's too ownorous of an ask um and importantly it also provides applicants some clear understanding on when answers will come when monies might start to to flow so it isn't just a a
big question mark so I like that idea okay well I'll um make note of that and when we present the final draft of these in a month uh we'll be sure to include that um uh grant agreements um I think the only
suggestion here would be to achieve some standardization um perhaps at least for the benefit of our director who puts these things together uh they come into play in the reporting side of things too so if we have 16 different a grant awards from
last year with 16 different agreements and timelines and expectations and responsibilities it gets a little fuddled and we probably lose sight of the whole purpose of them anyway so this is going to take a lot of work it's not going to happen today but I would recommend that we spend some time once
these guidelines are done once the application is done and once our evaluation process is complete that we look at standardizing some agreement language uh based on project type or award amount whatever but something to
organize that process um may I ask a question as staff mhm um does this include uh the guideline updates uh scoring uh ranking system because that would be extremely helpful for transparency yeah so that's a great question i think
we and our if I may we our review committee has been working a lot on this and applications and we slowed things down a bit so we could have this discussion but the rubric is it's underway it's not a rubric for but it is a scoring system and who knows what
it'll end up right now we don't have a finished product but it's it's a concept that's that's in play right now that will be developed to aid us in our um evaluation process great moving on to the match requirement open to recommendations on
how to best present the concept that we are trying to apply to grant amounts of $5,01 to $25,000 we've tackled it in many different ways but we have yet to come up with a universal approach that makes
sense to more people than not uh anybody on the board that has recommendations wants to take a stab at welcome to or in the public or the public absolutely uh the application itself this is something that we've spent step in yeah
can I ask um our most recent recipient um what would have been more clear to you to explain or to for you to immediately understand the match requirement your email was very well spoken as far as just outlining the
maximum giving a perfect example of the maximum amount of funds that could be available i think also including a minimum amount of the funds being available so that then you get the comparison between the amount that would be granted to the applicant and the
amount required by the applicant to match then having a minimum and a maximum they'll be able to use that as a scale to guess okay this is what I'm dealing with per my amount in the project uh but once you outlined it to me that the grant amount and the match
amount is dependent on the project amount then it became a lot easier to understand and I think that's the clarification that was missing for my part yeah there's a couple of examples in here and in fact you've actually built
uh a quick little formula so if I've got a $22,500 project I'll be able to type that in and clearly understand what the grant amount associated with that might be or conversely
um what my total needs to be if I'm seeking $25,000 so I think that that's going to work well um application we've looked at what's required and what's supplemental or encouraged um the list looks a little
different for the application requirements um just a quick note is that we still are strongly encouraging applicants to consult with the EDA director or the small business development center consultant prior to submitting an application um Pete Mod is a great resource for
developing applications application supplements and getting your application at least on the table to be considered if not to the finish line um so the required applications actually have changed based on our last meeting I
believe and we're no longer requiring a business plan or financial projections we're requiring simply a completed application form with any additional pages attached a project budget listing sources and uses that include itemized project costs sources of funding formal
estimates etc um but we did remove that business plan requirement and projections from the re requirement list um does anybody on the review committee want to elaborate on that yeah I can speak to that so um our current resource
of superstar Pete Mott who is one person as he said he's had how many people this month or in the last month five new people 30 clients 30 clients so um unfortunately Pete doesn't have the
capacity to teach business development skills to 30 people in one month there are uh programs that Pete and I have discussed that would potentially expand our ability to include that in the future as an expectation um such as the
score program that I've talked about previously but with our current um just recognition of what's available to people we understand that many businesses in town here are able to be run without that specific technical
knowledge and so we think we can review um with basic understanding of budgeting without a full business plan um but we are all about building our collective and community capacity around these things and hope to see
uh the competition get more fierce and the returns on the investment even greater over the next couple years may I make a go sorry um I come from you know big corporate world uh and certainly we we use
business plans extensively but for for the small business owners in the in the room that that care to answer uh do you all have business plans are you asking like the board or everybody in the room yeah no no okay
thank you i mean my comment would be uh these grants this grant program is to to create success in in whatever business we're trying to support uh you know finances and dollars up you know in
their hands is one of them certainly training on how to do business is another one and and having doesn't have to be a full-blown business plan but there you know some sort of how how am I going to use this money what kind of uh uh operation budget it
may be pretty simple but you know it I don't think it's a bad thing to force people to think about how they're going to use the money and how they're going to pay it back and and how they're going to make a living that's I tend to agree it's not it's not a bad thing i mean it's and it's a two-way
thing i mean it's you you want to Pete's big part of Pete's job and I asked earlier about is he getting the resources he needs from Northland Foundation and I know Pat you know relied heavily on on UMD and the people there uh really helps right I'll just
say I mean I've taken um small business development courses to learn how to create um a business plan and it's a I can't remember scores training it's either I think it's about 20 hours So 20 hours if so a lot of the problem that we
have in terms of the conversation we're having is just um a lack of information right so Pete could do that if all of them showed up at the same time and he was running a class for them but if they come in willy-nilly random and why do
people apply last minute because they just found out how many of the people who applied to you those 30 people just found out about it okay well I I would guess it's a lot I would guess it's about half they find out about it and they apply you know so we're working on communication that's why we have the
WTIP thing going that's why we've written in new expectations around reporting so that grantees will be personally invested in getting the word out and spreading communication so that it can be a change dynamic in time it may not be us or Pete but you know maybe
we can rope in higher ed and I think maybe absolutely oh they do that yeah they have done those programs regularly my point earlier was is that an established business that's has a proven track record right i wouldn't necessarily expect or even need
to see a business plan from that grant application i would you know but somebody new starting up couple years old struggling or just not struggling but just you know going from ground up to something then I would kind of want to see what what's your idea what do you what's your plan right but I think
that's why I I wanted to see it removed from required down to supplementals just because you get some of those well established businesses that want looking for a grant and I don't need to see their business plan so I I think um in my conversations with many people in
this room regarding this topic is what's the function of a plan that's presented to a committee for review it's to demonstrate forethought budgeting the general concepts of here's where I am whether
I'm a new business startup an existing business here's where I need to go and here's how I'm going to get there so perhaps consider the term like a business plan that addresses the scope of your project so if you're starting a company from the ground up we're going
to expect a business plan that matches the scope of your startup if you're buying a piece of equipment you're a 25-y year business in Cook County well the scope of your project request is going to look a lot different than the scope of a project for a startup but we
still need to see where you're at here I am 25 30 years in business i need to be able to increase my production and this is going to help me this is where I need to go and this is how I'm going to get there so I I think I think a a simple and a simple
statement you know a plan a project plan a business plan that addresses the scope of your project might might fit well that's that's what it does say project budget sources i mean and their narrative is about telling the story of where it's what they're going to do with
the money and how it's going to work what the return on the investment is like those are other answers to other questions in the application sure sure no I I get that but I I see the application questions as the
organization's attempt to have the applicant demonstrate how their program aligns with the EDA strategic plan a business plan demonstrates the project itself that is going to help that business align with the mission statement to make
this place a better place to live and work so it's it's a consideration i'm not for against but I I do think there's a strong case to be made for a plan that addresses the scope of what you're trying to do yeah especially I think to Commissioner Shackleton's point uh brand
new businesses because the project is the business and if there's no plan for the project there's no plan for the business we'd have to take a pretty hard look at that application i want to buy X to do what with we we agree with that and that's why we wrote it may be
required okay so we we if if we get an application and they're new and we need more fleshed out then we say this is required for you terrific okay commissioner yeah i would just add that so these are public dollars that we're
we're putting out there and I think we need to have a pretty high standard for for distributing those and I'm really impressed with this draft revision um of of
um the the the guidelines and um you know I I agree that the demand as word gets out the demand will be greater um I don't think this is meant as emergency funding like if someone walks in and
says hey we need money now like that's not what this is about this is about thoughtful methodical planning to really grow a a longlasting business um that's not just like a one-off it's it's something that will be sustainable and that does require planning so um I just
don't know to what degree we need to require because uh depending on the business a business plan can be quite uh extensive um so I I think there needs to be Yeah I'm I'm not entirely sure but it it I I think our standards need to be
high and that won't that come out with committee work because you're you're reading these things i mean if I was on the committee I'd be reading these things maybe several of them at a time hopefully and you're going to have questions i mean I
everybody's got pretty broad experience in business and you can look at something and say I can't see how this pencils out you know so then you go back and ask the further question part of what we're what we one of the problems that we have I think is that we receive applications that don't have the
components that we need to make a recommendation one or the other so we we turn them around and we ask for additional and that takes a lot of time um so I'm not proposing that we require a business plan for everybody or anybody
but know that it will extend the time that it takes to review your application um and the idea that we can encourage or may request things I think makes it difficult perhaps for somebody who is
helping an applicant build their application um present something that's a total package um because a business plan may be required supporting documents may be requested financial doas may be requested evidence of funds
may be requested so we have lots of like supplements that we're just telling you like you don't need them right now but you might need them in the future so I'm I'm not opposed to things as is i just it will until we start generating multiple applications on our quarterly
review cycle um it will um require us to extend the process that 60 days is probably going to become more of a reality if we don't implement a deadline um and increase the the traction but I'm good i'm good leaving as is for now i'm
not suggesting we change it's a question to pose and um I think our review committee made this recommendation i see some movements yeah that's too late it's gone thank you oh oh you forgot sure yeah you know uh getting a loan from a
bank for a business requires um a business plan generally and we want to be um more flexible than that um the reason for that um the flexibility is to right to really promote this and maybe
things aren't working out on on that end or or just disorganization or whatever um the bank's reason for that just to to make sure it's viable and they'll get their return right and we want to do something similar although more generous
is by giving money public dollars to a business um and so that's just where I'm I understand a full business plan is is probably over the top for that required and maybe project budget sources and uses with itemized uh costs
and sources of funding might might be enough and I am new to this uh well I was a substitute once for this for this committee and so I'm I'm I'm not in it like like you guys are so I really appreciate your perspectives and
and we'll really lean on on your judgment but I'd be very concerned if there was no mention of business plan in here whatsoever and we were just going to punt on the whole thing but as Commissioner Anderson reminds me it's in here as a supplemental material it may be required
Uh I would encourage the the committee to if in doubt require pressure test it and and see because a business plan can take any number of different forms right we can get quite a simple one or a massively detailed one we don't want to be prescriptive in that space necessarily
but so oh I commissioner Mills I I uh concur with your desire to uphold the highest standards and and and all of that um I would say there I learned from Mary SA some examples that were emergency mergency funds that were about allowing
um existing businesses to be maintained here that were providing useful services conditions happened they needed the funding and it allowed everyone to benefit from that business being able to exist it's providing a service so even that I think we don't want to rule out
well those we had emergency funds in the past like that was a thing oh I see yes so I am known for uh uh I guess just saying it like it is so um being the
newbie as I am I this I've been in the the role five months so I'm just going to speak on um what I've seen so far um I think bottom line and and forgive me if I'm speaking out of turn um somebody stopped me but uh this program because
there were no guidelines to this program um until last year um and how I've seen it ran um in the past and now as I've been here I think there was a culture to nobody's fault a culture of this uh
program anyone could walk in the door whether they had a business or not and receive grant funds simply put and I think that the bottom line here is we're just trying to to develop some sort of process that anyone can use and and an
extremely objective process that you know grants aren't given based on who you know or how long you've been in business or whether you're a startup whether you're not whether we like your business whether we don't so that's kind of the bottom line and as as your staff person that that you hired to to
recommend um for this economic development program I would say let's um let's just make these guidelines as objective as possible and remove the um
the you know uh I small town element of it and treat it like a program as anyone coming in the door as an applicant it's we review the application based on the strength of the application and how it aligns with the strategic plan for the
EDA and that's it so uh forgive me if uh that was too forward but that's just me speaking as a new uh new in this role as of five months and what I've seen and and wanting to protect the the integrity
of the EDA um moving forward um and so I think that's the best way and I I appreciate the numerous meetings that the committee has been spending on this and it's I haven't been part of those meetings and so um you know thank you so
much as volunteers and you know you're you're on this commission appointed and um a a couple of you are elected and um but it's mainly volunteer work so thank you so much for that and anything I can do as as your staff person please let me
know and I'll be there to do what I can thank you so we're only about uh what twothirds of the way through this we going to get into the procedure review process evaluation i I assume you want to go through section by section yeah I mean I this it's it's this was scheduled
as discussion um so however much discussion we want to have will determine how long it takes sure but I do think it's important to just hit a couple more points on this great everybody had access to this they can read it and the discussion doesn't end here you can So point of order um we're doing this discussion now you're going
to rewrite this or Yes take this input um is this going to be in presentation form for our next meeting or just the second draft or your final draft or what what's what's your anticipation we're hoping to propose the final draft next
so if we'd love to have your review we do have um the we can also uh before the next meeting get to you the review criteria and scoring system I think and so that we could approve the whole package maybe at the next meeting even
so I would suggest that we like if we're going to make changes like go to quarterly that we do that you know some future point of time it's going to have to be for next year for instance because we spend most of the money right give us more than a day or two to
review that then yes yes okay this is great thank you very much so if you're going to batch them and I think it's a great idea to batch them into quarters that ought to come with a timeline for both us to hold ourselves accountable to but also for applicants to be aware of what of what to expect um
regarding the uh operationalizing the the total project amount you know the recordkeeping associated with that and the reimbursement associated with that these are many of these are small businesses and so I think as in the past
we'll want to continue in the future to reimburse on an ongoing basis to not put someone $31,000 in the hole before they can get $25,000 from us but using that example so if it's 31,250 project that's
what gets booked into the system which might be nothing more than an Excel spreadsheet uh the first I would propose that the first $6,250 in I'll call them receipts that get submitted are not reimbursed so we
backload the um you frontload the the contribution from the applicant and we backload the reimbursement so 31250 is the total project amount the first 6250 is not reimbursed but has to be substantiated with documentation and
then the the subsequent 25,000 is reimbursed as the as the receipts are placed yeah what we have built into is is a multiplier so if if someone has a 31,250 grant um and they submit receipts
the multiplier would be 0.2 so if they gave us a $1,000 receipt they'd get $800 back that 0.2 keeps us on track okay until that final invoice comes in as long as we're multiplying it by 02 we're going to be perfect at the end of it okay and we created a multiplier for the
the 10% as well so that's built into the system too so we don't have to worry about you know getting out of sync okay so that's fine but to be clear though the project gets recorded as 31250 not 25 and to be clear that's for the for
the future right because we haven't been doing it that way correct past you're right no that's in this which hasn't been approved yet okay perfect okay more fun just give away money than talk about all this stuff but I get it all right
anything else from the grant alex do you want to terrific i just I I want to point out under reporting so the evaluation criteria we're still developing and the in terms of what we will look at and how we will score those but under reporting there's um the
additional piece of having the grantees involved in the communication around this including we'll give a list on their reporting thing of several options if we approve this several options ways in which they could be public facing
with their um what they got and how they benefited and what the return on the investment is for everybody and um I think that's going to really help us uh turn up the dial on how many people know about this and so that's exciting
that's great can I make one point on that i I think that that's included i I I change it to May but I would be totally in favor to making that a requirement and the only reason is it it's a may is because as we develop the reporting
system to track all of these things as we develop our grant agreements and build the system and you know have the resources to do it i I object to may I would let's strike it but the other the other thing to think about as well is that we might have a requirement for a
written report in the event of an audit um of this grant program we can't show a social media clip as proof of a written report when it comes time to uh uh audit our grant program which I think is a is
a possibility maybe not a likelihood we might just want to require written trail and offer options to do other things but that's Well I commissioner I don't I can't do it right bb Guch your last name go ahead okay uh I I um I
think we have an accountability to track what has happened as I've talked about many times I think that we need to be the ones to follow up and create that auditable trail um it's it's yes you can ask for the written reports but I know
from Director Grampit's conversation about all the hunting down she's had to do with different things that another thing on her plate to follow up on isn't likely as beneficial that way but I I've proposed a variety of different ways in which we can check and get back
information about the success of our intervention and the return on that and study what has worked in the past what hasn't what are getting the better returns and involving higher ed in um helping us to conduct those evaluations so I entirely agree we should have an
auditable trail i just don't think their written reporting is going to be the best source for that great so my comment I had written in preparation for the section is simply that the review committee has come up with several wonderful ideas for additional reporting requirements uh determining the return
on investment um among other things and that section on reporting will expand as as we get to it essentially as we develop the resources to do it um right now we got guidelines we have an application to look at we have a evaluation system we have agreements and
we have reporting so it's it's I think it's something we've acknowledged as important to do and uh improve and I think we'll do it as we get to it sounds like committee work i'll say there's a there's several outstanding reports that have been due
that I haven't had there hasn't been capacity for me to follow up on this is one tool and one program of the EDA so it's it's difficult to put all of my resources and time just to this this one program even though it is almost 40% of
the of the budget and and part of the part of the EDA but um I definitely think we should hire somebody or partner with somebody students exactly um rather than me doing that but um I'm more than willing to do it but just
making sure we know what where my time is being spent and prioritized how you want me to be spending my time as a as a board right some of the qualitative um outputs of these projects it would be nice to know and and and to publicize but at the very
least especially as it relates to the to the auditable elements we're not reimbursing anyone of course until the documentation comes out so the application plus all that documentation that results in dispersements uh I would have to think would go a long
way to satisfying an auditor it does correct okay so that's that's the end of our I think our recommendations um some questions um that we had thanks for the feedback we made notes and we can continue to amend this document yeah
over the next some of us might send you notes after the fact after we've had a chance have a beer in this so okay if I may and I make one more please pose one more question that's what we're here for right um I've done a lot of research on grants as many of you have and
specifically for grants involving property purchasing or development um there's a there's some requirements like providing your property tax certificate it's kind of a standard especially when it gets into like state tax dollars like through
deed that's something that's required when you're applying for funds to develop a piece of real estate just a thought we have lots of I for one with my testimony earlier was a a real estate transaction um something to consider just to increase accountability adding
that to a requirement for property development projects just something to think about the other one is another standard um especially in the state of Minnesota is to require a certificate um showing your active registration and good standing with the Minnesota Secretary of State um we ask for it we
just ask for you to be registered um most application processes for similar grant programs just ask you to go ahead and sign into your account and print one out and include into your application so additional requirements I know um just a consideration to consider
thank you thank you all right thanks for everyone's patience as we've gone through the grant program it's an important area of of our business as you can imagine so thank you for that uh discussion item B um office
space heidi yes and it is 5:45 i don't know if you've ever had a a regular EDA meeting that has lasted this long so I'm going to go as fast as possible basically uh the EDA um leases office
space in at 425 West Highway 60 uh 61 sweet B um the EDA has a lease with uh Dasera Dasera Holdings um Jeremy is the EDA's
landlord there and um the lease uh goes through June of 2026 currently um uh we share the EDA shares office space uh with the SBDC and also the HR
and um I had noticed that there was an odd arrangement as far as how office space was paid for between um the entities and so I just threw out the simplest idea I c came up with and said
"Well why don't why don't we split the cost 50/50 with the HR EDA HR?" Um it it turns out that that's a little too simple so um H chair um uh Bill Gabler
uh has proposed uh something uh different than that and the H is going to talk about that tomorrow at at their meeting which I'll I'll be at jeff Brand is here executive director of the HA um and so we've been we've been talking uh
Peter Clissold and I and Bill Gabler and Jeff Brand about this office space situation so we feel confident that it'll be um it'll be a a an acceptable and exciting um partnership going
forward no problems there uh but the memo in your packet said mentioned the 50/50 sharing rent it's probably going to end up being more like I don't know if you if you haven't read it yet it's not 50/50 so the EDA will basically be
paying more um than the HRA which makes sense because the EDA has two people in the office and the HA has one so I'll basically we'll figure that out and let you know but I guess I I basically wanted uh our landlord the EDA's
landlord wanted just you to be aware of this and so there's uh asking permission from the EDA for uh chair or president EDA president Clissold and I to sign with uh Jeremy the EDA's landlord just so he knows that we know that everyone
knows what's going on is that okay i'd like to make a motion to uh authorize uh Director Krampit and Pleer Crystal to sign the attached with any changes that might come
i would second as as needed yeah okay next item quickly uh Cedar Grove business park entrance sign the EDA talked about this last month uh it was a it was the consensus last month that the EDA did not agree with uh funding uh any
part of a new entrance sign for Cedar Grove Business Park uh I went ahead as as your staff person and and uh went ahead and asked for mock-ups and estimates to be uh uh um requested um
just to show the EDA what a new sign might look like what the cost might be um just just to keep the conversation rolling you know forward going forward um whether this information can will be provided to the private property owners
in the business park to to figure out how they might want to um fund their new sign or whether one of the property owners wants to uh fund the entire sign and himself or whatever it may be i just
wanted to bring it to your attention and ask if there was any new or different input from your discussion last month about this sign yeah I guess I would u just take issue with one one reflection you've got there i don't think there was a consensus amongst the EDA that we were
not going to fund the sign there might have been feedback from the EDA okay individual members i happen to be of the opinion that the business park started off as a as an EDA project has we've successfully sold everything but I guess what one one piece right and uh the
community recognizes this as an EDA project and we're not 100% out of it yet in fact I think this would be a great uh you know ending a nice kota to to the uh to the business park to have
a a a quality sign that we can take pride in uh to to demonstrate what the EDA has been able to to pull off here a sign that either was or still is is a in my view an eyesore it's a bit of a disgrace frankly uh and we've got a
beautiful business park there without any sort of appropriate signage i think if I I'd like the EDA to be participating in this and the fact that you're working with these folks to do the design work is certainly part of that participation but depending on the level
of interest from the businesses within the business park I'd also like to consider that the EDA even financially participate if not all of it but uh to to a degree because I think it's it would leave the business park I think in
good hands and good shape i've Mr chair yeah i've also uh received feedback from um well business park owners and they felt uh it was a slap in the face for us to not help at least uh with that and
um and I said "Wow yeah I see your point." They just felt like for a number of the sales it wasn't an easy process and there was maybe additional costs that were not you know seen right away and um um
it's been a long process getting this developed and filling it um with many years of of downs um and so I I would agree that it would be ex I really appreciate you asking for this um and if
this design certainly matches the homes just west of there um I I I think it's fine i would request that it be expandable if another business decides to to uh join the the slate
there um and I don't know practically how that could be done but um I think we should we should make it taller um you know except for Nordic uh everybody got a pretty sweet deal on the property
which is true so you know and but I don't disagree you know there might be I mean it's only it would be three grand a p business you know if they went past you know if the EDA
participated to some level half i mean now you're talking $1,500 so maybe there's a maybe there's a sweet spot there where it's worth talking about it's worth talking about yeah i mean this this at
least gives us something to go and and talk to businesses about mhm nice work yeah i would just suggest I mean it's a great mockup and if there's a cost sharing option to this perhaps EDA funds the the main infrastructure and individual
businesses fund their individual name plates that would probably put the shoulder of the cost on on the EA but a nice little olive branch farewell gift anyway that's it Molly I don't see Molly's need
oh she didn't want one No no irony but she's on the other side of the I know still a business part i know but I I wouldn't know that you were driving up the trail you would know that she's part of the true so what
would next steps then be on this you got the mockup you're going to go back to the businesses and I could go back i last month excuse me last month I reached out and got the input I received so far but I didn't have these mockups yet and so yeah go back to the
businesses and um and I I guess um you know stating that we that the EDA doesn't really have a uh a financial structure yet or hasn't decided you know if and what amount to
be to be contributed um and get their feedback and will and whether or not they'd be open to purchase if they see some value if they see value yes okay yeah i I I would I climb with the 5050 thing
this money is not in the budget for sure so that's one thing but if if that was if we were asking them if they would contribute something like 5050 or 50 25 and then gauge their interest if you still get seven people to raise their hand and I think that that'd be more
planning forward then you know okay great so to clarify that the EDA would consider paying 50% of the sign with the whoever else wants to be part of the project picking up the other 50% correct okay if they if they show some
enthusiasm for that if they're all on board we got seven people like that then I would say yes okay i think it's something to work with go forward and you know Steve Serba does have property and he uses it too so I mean there is there is another
there's nine well Steve said he doesn't want he doesn't want a name plate okay yeah but he might contribute anyway he might yep maybe I can have his even though I don't have a lot well he's got two property he has two properties he's got two he's got the storage facility
and the He's bought a new location for the laundry so Oh he is going somewhere else he's going into the B building oh the B building good job on the signs keep moving that forward and as a reminder um or as a refresher uh former
EDA president Steve Serba this was his idea in the first place uh back late last year to replace the existing sign and so um this idea didn't come out of wherever it came from former EDA chair
Steve Serba okay finally next thing is I don't have an update on this uh this is uh Commissioner Headstrom's um update and that is the possible assisted living project and I did Did you get Have you gotten anything
from Wiffley okay good yes i just You have a blue folder there that's my I found my folder on assisted living okay and since I joined the EDA it's undetermined when that was but I I've
wanted to promote assisted living promote assisted living and we uh we got close a couple times and uh the last time partners we had we got into you know I've shared those uh those
proposals and designs and they looked around they said "I you know we we can't do it there's there's no we don't have the people and we can't hire the people because there's no housing so as I was uh awake in the early morning finally I said
"Well now we have 81 new units coming in gun View is uh we got 56 units and the the Heights development will have uh 36 uh there's a couple other housing projects are coming in all of a sudden I
think the the issue of no place for people to live has gone away and thought "Wow this is probably a good time." In conversations with you know I have a lot of conversations um there's a guy by the name of of Opitz that kind of does
assisted living he got all excited he drove up here i had coffee with him pete did a tour around and I haven't heard back but heard through my other friend that uh he was impressed here and his his evaluation was need is not in in
question i mean there's enough population here to have the need although you know having a new study would be great um so that's the genesis of that um the the property that was first looked at is over across some law
enforcement um we handed that property off to H but they still have it kind of dedicated for assisted living and you know I hope that we uh if we have a proposal from Wiffley or whoever it is to do a updated study on need uh we
could our board and and H can share in the cost of that study the last one was about $12,000 uh 10 years ago it's like half a sign that's Yeah we should we So
it's exciting thank you yeah yeah so I'm a proponent it sounds like most people are on board yeah 100% that's amazing right thank you uh committee and commissioner reports have you guys heard we heard we I don't
have anything else to add allocated more so I I've reported on the the Heights project i'm part of the real estate investment group in town which are are doing this uh we're looking at it maybe early June Brown groundbreaking uh KGM
will be up in the next couple weeks starting to clear the property uh um Charlie Lamb will be in starting to do some blasting and uh I'm told that uh in a meeting just this week that the
dynamic homes is what their dynamic home product they're going to start as they're going to start uh coming off start into their assembly line uh May 19th I think it is so then it's like a 30-day process to build those they're
going to be delivering those as they build them so I've been working with their traffic guy trying to find a place to uh These are not insignificant uh units or trucks units they're 64 ft long and from 11 to 15 ft wide uh we
have located a few spots uh and haven't perfected those yet but you know we hope to have those so by by Fourth of July you'll see you'll see uh you know those things parked around and I think August 1st they'll start uh and there'll be cement work
being done on all the footings and by July August 1st or thereabouts they'll start swinging these into place and they go up pretty quickly once that happens great thank you uh just regarding the the golf course if I may uh so the
listing went live with SPN Northco the latter part of March i think it was the last uh week in March uh the offering memorandum which I would simply call a listing flyer but it's 45 pages long so we have to say it's a memorandum
uh was shared I think with with each of you um it's worth taking a look at it's really represents I think the golf course in in a terrific light uh there have been 18 groups thus far that have showed a significant interest in looking
at the golf course uh 14 additional prospects are kind of circling the wagons a little bit they haven't um they've signed into the North Coast system but they haven't provided the background information that the the first 18 have uh so North Co is
generally happy with the level of of interest given the time of year that we're that we're currently in uh next steps and this is now being scheduled with some of these 18 are in-person visits they're waiting for the snow to
stop to stop as am I um and with that in the next couple of weeks we'll have real live prospects touring the golf course uh and so hopefully some offers resulting from that but that's what's going on with the golf course
currently okay any other committee uh of course can we hear Takenite Harbor update yeah that's that's number nine director reports that's my only update so uh the Tech Knight Harbor Committee
which is Commissioners Anderson Mills and Benson who's not here today as you know they they met and um we uh put out the RFP the request for proposals for a strategic plan for the Tachinate Harbor
site in Schro Schroeder that RFP was released on March 28th I believe the exact date was um the turnaround time for proposals was like three weeks later um it was extended the due date for proposals
was extended to Monday April 28th weeks two weeks two more weeks so basically giving more time for more proposals to come in and for better proposals to come in um Commissioner Anderson has been helping me get the
word out with different firms that might want to propose um I have received many many follow-up questions from potential proposers um and I am confident that the committee the selection committee will
have plenty of work to do in scoring proposals once they come in the door um there's a meeting scheduled for the committee the selection committee to review proposals on Monday May 5th that'll be a virtual meeting and um from
there the goal is that if if the committee is able to choose one before the next EDA meeting on May 20th then uh we would be coming to you as the EDA to to officially enter into a contract with
a strategic planner to to come up with a plan for the Tech Knight Harbor site so that's really exciting thank you that is can I can I request that we get the um proposals on a rolling basis rather than all at once
given that it's the end of the semester and May 5th is I mean just so we can read them as they come yes as they're submitted I will I would forward them on thanks um and then there there will definitely be a a I know
you're not calling it a rubric anymore but like a a scoring a chart so that the committee can score each of the proposals and are we I mean I'm assuming we're expected to have read them all before the May 5th meeting i would hope so okay yeah so that's why I want Yeah
yep i have a feeling though that most proposals won't come in until the last minute i see so April 28th that's normal i think yeah okay thank you for that uh that takes us then to the conclusion of what might be
our longest meeting in some time before I close it down I do want to um just let everyone know I won't be here uh for the next meeting which is Tuesday May the 20th but our uh vice president Commissioner Hedstrom has graciously agreed to to chair the meeting and we'll
do a much better job than I do okay so thank you for that good job and I have officially made the request with the support of chair vice chair and mayor Benson that the EDA meetings be um
relocated to the new city hall so pending approval of that uh by the folks at city hall potentially the May 20th um EDA meeting will be at Grand Marray City Hall stay tuned yes okay so with that um
I need to make what a motion to adjurnn so move okay thanks everybody reach the bladder i'll be right back oh my god yeah that's a lot of
Thank you for That's how it was received thank you that's Bruce that's your Bruce yeah i didn't know i just smart who are those guys who are those weirdos so I'm fine with this from Gabriel he says take 150 off the top
which is your desk and then split the balance so we're getting pretty close to 50/50 so I expect from him maybe I I'm not sure when he's planning on starting that but I would suggest right away
i mean unless what's your thinking it goes back to the beginning of of time no I wouldn't think so he He owes us the the Yeah and I was I was about Well on principal he owes
us and what what do we say 575 starting May the 1st what do you reckon i don't think so well this is our chance to think i literally Bruce or not Bruce oh my gosh bill just called at like 3:30
okay or whatever it was so I have another chance to So well let's just do this now to recap what is it that he owes us to show we don't have a monthly they were supposed to reimburse
i'm sorry so that's 150 a month okay so yeah okay to recap uh the 450 I'm still listening quarterly in a rears
plus 575 is that what he said yeah 575 per month thank you i bet you weren't expecting that commencing May the 1st sorry so the 450 quarter otherwise known as
150 a month in a rears he owes us that we're not really sure i have I told him I would check the first time we were plus 575 a month starting August you good with that okay i'm good with whatever but just not
what was happening before no that was seriously exactly i'm sorry oops so I'll I'll copy you on this but he's got his meeting tomorrow and so I wanted to get this to him before he's meeting and I'm going to it
too so Okay okay guess how much the the cost of that assisted living study is going to cost did I tell you no 145 oh but Bill Bill doesn't want to participate
are those guys What are they doing i don't know well you guys should find out soon uh so the meeting went well I think oh my gosh we knew that was going to happen with the uh the grants
went really well we got stuff done yeah no and it was all constructive and nice yeah really good howard howard howard so I saw this morning at the at the bakery he was meeting with
like and I just I don't know [Music] that you're playing hardc your recognition of that