All right, the time is 4:30, so I'll call the CPT steering committee meeting on September 23rd to order. Um, announcement of open meeting recordings. Any person may make a video audio
recording of the open session of meeting and retransmit the meeting for any medium subject to reasonable requirements of the chair as to the number, placement, and operation of equipment used so as not to interfere with the conduct of the meeting. Any person intending to make a recording of such shall notify the chair forth with
all documents referenced or used during the meeting shall be submitted in duplicate to the director of community development and planning pursuant of open meaning public records law. All documents shall become part of the official record of the meeting. I see no one uh recording today's meeting. So we
will move on from there. I will move on to item 1.1. vote to approve the minutes of the regular meeting April 18th, 2025. Um, I'd just make a motion to approve
with I have one amendment. Um, in the second to the last paragraph, it says councilins instead of counselor. Sorry, it's just a title. Yeah, nothing technical, but I would um make a motion to approve them as amended.
Second. I hear a motion and second. Um, all in favor for approving the minutes as presented with the one amendment to the second page. Um, all in favor say I. All opposed. So moved. The minutes are approved with
that amendment. Moving on to item 2.2.1, the demolition of 205213 Main Street. And this is under 2.2 for FY223. So, CB CDBG uh for fiscal year 2223.
Um as everyone knows that project was fully completed back in I believe mid June. Um the final payouts for that uh retainage has been fully paid out has been closed within uh Intelligants
and the POS for the city as well have also been closed out because it finished before the end of the fiscal year. So, by and large, the project is fully closed um and conversations have already begun to look towards um the private
sale because the land is currently owned through the GR. um as it's still under executive session for those um anything having to do with land sales. I can't go into too much detail in regards to um who's inquired about the property, but
you know, look forward to when the enter the closing for that and can share with the rest of the board kind of wrapping that up with the boat what happened with the property and and where it's going to and what the redevelopment purpose is. Um but just to know the redevelopment
authority is um actively having those conversations. Uh but if anyone has any questions in regards to this, it's pretty uh pretty straightforward but willing to answer anything. Awesome. No questions.
Then if no one has anything for this, then I will I'm sorry. I would only say to just keep it on the agenda. Yeah, I'm going to say keep it on the agenda until we get the full um end of the closing. All right. Um, do I have to make a motion for that? You can just say like if there's no
objection, we will keep it on the agenda. Okay. If there's no objections to that, then I'll keep it on the agenda until the closing is entered for 205 213 main. No objections. So, we will keep that on the agenda. Moving on to 2.2.2.
Greenwood Pool demolition uh/ Construction Outdoor Pavilion. Um, I'll pass this off to to Amy, uh, the assistant director, um, to kind of speak towards that. She's been spearheading this project thus far. So, it's going well. Um, it's slightly
delayed because asus abatement they had to do took a little longer than expected. They had a hard time removing some of the title. Um, but they're moving along. Um, they're just, like I said, maybe a week or so behind schedule. Um but pro progressing well
and we haven't had any major issues. Um everything's going as it should other than them not taking a little longer. Um anyone have any questions about the project or so I just um this has been a minute
since the last time we met so I just want to be sure and things have obviously moved on here. when the building the demolition is completed, the next step is to put something in its place. When is when is the next step?
Cuz that that's what we'll get questions about as soon as you know once the work visibly really starts and it's being demol that's going to be the next question from the public really and I want to be able to answer it. Yeah. So that's a good question. Um something we'll discuss a little later
on in the agenda is kind of the scenario uh we need we need a little more extra money for that phase of the project to construct the pavilion. So we'll talk about different scenarios with that and potential funding sources. Um you may remember from the previous
meeting that we had split the project into two phases. One of them being the demolition itself and one of them being the construction of the outdoor pavilion. So, as Amy kind of mentioned when we talk about the remaining CDG funds um in a couple of different
scenarios given um kind of what happens this week in regards to another one of the items that I don't want to get out of order too much um is kind of us making sure that we have the funding in place to to see that
pavilion created. So, we should have answers um really after tomorrow, but we we can talk about that later in the meeting and kind of wrap everything up because a lot of these things happen to be interconnected as certain projects come in under budget. Um most of them
actually coming in under budget. So, we have some money um uh left over in order to construct that outdoor pavilion, but we can talk about that in full. So, that the demolition is phase one. Elder really is still phase two and we're just about a week behind, you
know, due to the asbestos abatement um on phase one and that's really where it's at. But it all is continuing as planned. Yes. Okay. And I have some photos that um Fred, the vice president for um associated building records provided for tonight. So if you all want to take a look. Thank
you. Sure. And his summary of the status is in the front of that. So you can read it. Yeah. I did notice when they took the two original little Koopa off the top that but I was going to include that in the minutes of this. Yes. Yes.
Have some duplicate um that and the pineals as well. He spoke to that um and seemed confident that he would be able to acquire those as well. Yes. Yes. He's going to confirm that tomorrow, but he thought that would not be a problem.
Any other comments or questions? On behalf of the historic commission, the chair of historic commission is here as well. Say your name. Sorry. Alan Dell commission. Thank you. Chris Farah, chair of the historic.
Uh just a quick question. Amy, now that you're here, had a chance to meet with you recently. Uh you would be the direct contact person that we would uh deal directly with uh request any questions regarding moving the pool or any other block grant. Uh flight, school, street, school, etc.
Yes. Okay. Thank you. Feel free if you want to take a look at the photos as well. All right. Then if there are no objections, we can maintain this on the agenda for um our future meetings just
as we get more updates in regards to the uh demolition and um and move from there. Uh moving on to 2.2.3 social services. All social services in 2223 have all been paid out. Um they've all been the social services
have been fully closed. the status if you're looking at the status of 22 23 and 24 CBG grant funds uh Excel sheet um as you can see um all of those have been uh mixed out. So all of the youth
services, homelessness prevention services um those are all fully expanded. Um so all the social service providers are happy. We're happy, glad to get them
their uh their checks cut and know that their social services are continuing to be provided to the citizens and gardener. Um I have nothing more to add to that now that the that is completed. So I'll
entertain a motion to um place it on file. Place that item on file and uh move on from there. So moved. Second. All right. I hear a motion to place that item on file. All in favor say I. I. Can we have a little discussion on it
first? Oh yeah. Um, so thank you for doing this because I know at our last meeting there was like we talked about all of this getting this closed out. So it's nice to have this one. It's been closed out and we're done. We can move on. We won't be in this situation again in the future. But that I think that was a huge improvement from our last
meeting. So this is really impressive. I think it was great. Thank you. Just wait till we talk about our 24. That's it for discussion though. All right. So, I will entertain a motion uh or I heard a motion to place the item
on file. All in favor uh say I. I. I. All oppose say nay. Hear none. So, we will place the item on file. Moving on to 2.3.1. I'll pass this again to Amy who has really kind of revamped our
process for um social services. And this is social services for FY24 CBG funds. So we um we worked to issue new grant agreements this year that um I think more clearly spell out reporting requirements for all of the agencies we
work with and developed a new form to make it easy for them to report what they need to report and have heard really positive responses from them. Um so I'm pleased with that. Uh all of their grant agreements have been returned with the exception of one um for the gardener athletic program. We
you know send reminders. I'm sure with the start of the school year things are probably very busy. So um we'll keep an eye on that and make sure that happens soon or try to make sure that happens soon. Um GEM has invoiced for the full amount of their grant already and submitted their quarterly report that
shows all the people they assisted. So that's great. Um Voices of Truth has submitted two invoices. We've just got one this morning. They're about halfway through expending all of their funds and um seems to be going well. We want to this kind of a little bit off topic, but
next year we also want to make invoicing easier for them um with a a new form that they seem happy about. So um overall, I think everyone is pleased with the way things are going and their projects are moving along with the exception of the one I mentioned. Um
and at our next meeting I can report on you know beneficiary served so you all get a sense of who they're helping and what they've done with the money. So the the reporting actually included in the contract labels out specifically the number of beneficiaries served under
the different um LMI groups. So 80% 60 40 I believe are the three groups 8050 sorry um as the the major LMI groups. um as well as the demographic information which is are the two requirements for
EOHLC in terms of the quarterly reporting um for our social services. So unless for anyone watching, unless the social services are being provided to a um assumed LMI population such as uh
people experiencing homelessness um or people with disabilities, those are considered um automatically LMI populations. But if it's not um for some of these social servicesers, they have to actually uh get that information,
gather it, and then report it to us because HLC reports it then to HUD, which is the um housing and urban development um which is where they get the funding for the project uh for the for the um grant grants from. Um so just
wanted to make that clear uh for for the reporting that we get and the reporting that we require. I just I just have a a kind of I guess a comment on so for the social services and so this obviously is FY24. I just think it's knowing that I think it is
helpful to know that you're changing the process you know that the forms and all that stuff just because there was the backup of these forms before and so now we know that there's been something put in to remediate maybe what an issue may have been before but obviously the communication like you said and reach back out as well. I think
that's that's really helpful to know just um you know for anybody watching at home as well too. It's it's it's a good explanation I think for this to say like this was what it was. It's done and now moving forward this will make it be more efficient. And also the social services they they need the funding like that's
why they apply for it. They need it. They depend on this kind of funding. So the quicker that they can get it in a in the most uniform way possible is just it's just so important to be able to do it cuz you also want to say hey we've applied for this and you know we hope we get it but if they have a good
experience with that it's such a good reflection of what the community does to support them. So I I'm glad to know that that has changed and that they you've gotten good feedback about it. So thank you for for doing that. We don't want to run into the same situation where we get into the next calendar year and almost
to the next fiscal year um where we have social servicesers looking out and asking where their funding is, where their checks are and there being confusion on the reporting requirements, confusion on um you know sending over
the grant agreements and not understanding the invoicing requirements as well because there's multiple aspects to it. There's the financial side where we require the invoices to prove expenditure uh towards what their proposed grant agreements were, but
there's also the requirements of the beneficiary information. So there's two legs to this that we have to make sure are clear. And the fact that we are only a few months now, two or three since we've gotten the funding from EOHLC for
24 and we're already getting invoices that we can move forward with the grant payments and we're not even close to the end of the calendar year. I think just proves how clear um assistant director Yuaz has has made these these these
grant agreements. Um, so I'm very thankful for her and the fact that the social service providers have come in and said this is so much more clear. Um, you know, thank you for for putting this together. You know, it just makes
everyone happy in the end. It makes them happy. It gets their funding quicker. It makes these these updates a lot more uh positive and um it make it gives us less headaches in the at the end of the day. So, thank you for for for your work on that.
Well, and I think too, Director Stevens, when you came in, it's not you're not searching for this, but you have like a clear record. They're your forms. They're your records. You know, when you you came in, it was like, where did Okay, we have all these outstanding things. I wasn't here for any of this. Where's the record? What do I do? It just keeps everything so much more
streamlined. And especially this is the last leg of it when it goes directly to the social service because this is going from HUD, you know, from HUD to HLC to the municipality, you know. So this is this is a very uniform process and you just can't expect every person who
really needs to take advantage of these social services to have all the information about how the process works and that's your job at this level to do that. HUD and HLC is not doing that. is here for us to make sure they understand, you know, this is these we are required to get these requirements literally from the subfunding source and
I just I think that information is really important for people to have. So, it sounds like you've made that clear and um guess I've made it a really clean process. So, thank you for doing that. If there are no other questions or objections, we'll maintain this um on
the agenda as we continue to provide these social servicesers with their their checks. Um, moving on to 2.3.2, demolition of school street school. So, I know this has been
um part of our FY24 application as well as part of our FY25 for both the demolition and the plans for the um development actually on the on the site of School Street School. Um there's been
a lot of back and forth in regards to whether we were going to look towards this demolition or whether we were going to look towards a private sale. There's been a lot of interest in the community into um maintaining some of its history. Um this being one of those properties.
Um so we wanted to give this property the best chance it could uh for redevelopment outside of uh this demolition. So, we decided to put it to a public bid. Um, the bid is ongoing and
we are going to be I believe they end tomorrow at noon. So, um, in speaking with the city's purchasing director too, we did receive some questions on the RFP today. Um, by the general laws, whenever we receive questions, we have to publicly post the responses to those
questions as agenda to the bid package. That way, all potential biders are aware of those questions and the answers to those, too. Uh so depending on how those answers go, they may need to be an extension on this until the middle of October, which would require a twoe extension whenever those are done there yet, but we'll know more about that tomorrow morning once the agenda is
issued. Um but it's all in request by the other potential biders as to when whether or not that it gets extended and that process is all outlined in the laws regarding the sales of properties in the common. Was there a deadline for questions? So you have up until the deadline of the of the closing. Okay. So,
but if it's a too technical of a question that someone else now knowing that answer would then go back and amend what their proposal would be, you have to give them the opportunity to do that for the fair balance process. So given that the bid is still open, um
so we don't have a clear path forward yet until the bid is closed um of whether or not we are going to look to see these funds um reappropriated to a different CBG project. So that's kind of
the asterisk that I put aside the construction of the outdoor pavilion that we spoke about earlier and how a lot of these projects are interrelated because CDBG funds are allowed to be used for different purposes as long as they go through the same vetting as as any of these projects would. So that is
through EOCc um in regards to to their requirements um and they go through obviously all the proper city channels um that doesn't need to be said but um so if you look on again the the Excel spreadsheet the
total available amount for the school street school demo is $791,342.51 so that is in addition to the um unexpended fun available funds from 2223 uh which is $379,422
giving us a total unexpended funds um of 1001,191,43. So just something to think about as we talk towards uh one of the later items as well of the remaining CDBG funds. So, just wanted to give an overview of um
the fact that we're not sure whether or not those funds are going to be available seeing as how the bid is still ongoing. Um but if the bid does not is not successful in terms of a valid bid being put through, then we would look
towards uh the demolition uh still. So, it's either bid goes through and we are able to sell it off privately or it doesn't go through and we look towards using those funds as intended for the demolition. Um, if they b it does go
through, we will have to also look at our FY25 application because that also includes $90,000 of funds towards engineering and planning services for that property. Um, so that's just something to think about as well as we
have not heard um back from our FY25 CDBG application. Um um so the well the ironic part is when you announce that you're going to be demolishing a building and all of a
sudden people want to purchase the building. I think maybe we should use that in the future if there's a property to go make an announcement that we're gonna demolish something and then all of a sudden people are like, "Wait, I want to buy it." You know, I I it's it's I think it's going to be interesting to
see how this plays out. Like it it obviously would be great because of what's on here with the phase two of Greenwood Pool like you had said. Um it would be great for it to work out this way where we get a reputable bid that's going to be in the best interest, you know, of the city
and where that goes. But I just I can't get over the irony of the situation. It's just like so funny to me that it was like the demo and then all a sudden people were like, "Wait a minute." We're like, "Well, let's hold off. Maybe we can sell it." That's pretty neat. I want to say we've had about 15 uh companies request the bid package. So, we don't know if they'll all turn in.
So, those 15 have requested the documents that they would have to turn in if they do end up getting. Is is that like typical like of I I don't know how many of the packages are requested in this situation. Maybe somewhere. It really depends on honestly. Um on some of them when we
sold um Prospects Food School, uh we had seven um probably 12 requested and seven turned in. Um cuz you do have some that are firms that are out there that are saying, you know, my clients just ask us to go find out and find other properties. So they'll pull all bids out there that they can find and
then it's up to the clients whether or not to turn them in. So, you're going to have less than always pull um that turn in, but it really is property dependent on how many actually turn in at the end. Thank you. At least for that I have nothing more to
add but um if anyone has any questions or comments then I will unless there are any objections keep this on the agenda as we kind we hear back from the end bid and kind of decide the future of school
street school off of uh off of off the um result of that. Moving on to 2.4 for potential new projects discussion. Um this is all due to the unexpended funds that we have for
22 23 and 24 and that is the 1.191 um million43. Don't want to forget that. Um and that is with the if school street is sold. Um, we have we would have
$379,422.70 if School Street School is not sold and if we still move forward with the demolition. Um, and those funds are expended. Um, so those two kind of buckets. Um, the first one 4 point 2.4.1
St. Paul's community garden expansion. Uh this was brought to our attention from the mayor in regards to uh looking to expand the community gardens at St. Paul's Episcopal Church over on Cross Street. Um this is they the vegetables
and food produced from this garden are provided over to the gardener CAC. Um and we have checked in with EOHLC in regards to this. um and they're still kind of waging whether or not this would
be an applicable um use of funds, but um it seems like from the you know surface that it would be um an appropriate use. Um we're just giving them time to give that final determination uh for us uh so that we can have our ducks in a row um
in the eventuality that we have the the full 1.1 million um to expend. Uh but the estimated cost is only $50,150 including $40,000 to fix a retaining wall. Uh $5,400 for compost, fertilizer,
and repairs. Um and plants for the 27 garden beds um of at $200 each and $1,500 for three new garden bed frames, including frame soil plants at $500 each. and 3,000 for 20 dwarf fruit trees
at 150 each and 250 for or orchard signage. Um I've also told them that they should look towards uh a local uh beehive as a beekeeper myself. Uh but we'll see if they they include that in their next uh in their next application.
Um but this is just a potential project. I want to get this in front of everyone's attention just as we look towards expending these funds that these are some of the projects that we we're putting in front of HLC um to give their determinations so we can move forward with projects and not have these funds
from 2223 sitting around um that we're able to move forward with them quickly. Um I'll just add to that too just because um the chair said that this is something that my office brought to his attention. This is something that we had originally included in a different grant application that the city was unsuccessful in getting from the federal government a couple years ago. Um that
in talking to Father Krellin who is the pastor of St. Paul's Episcopal Church, uh there were two different programs that were being launched at the time. It was both the expansion of the community garden space that they already have existing there on the corner of Chestnut and Cross Street. This would be on the corner of School Street and Cross Street
where they currently have their natural pollinator garden land area. Um so this would be replacing the pollinator garden that they currently have. uh to provide the fruit trees uh because they only grow vegetables on the other side of the um the property where they already have their items there. Um the other uh
project that they were toying with or not is every the I want to say it's the third Thursday of the month uh they provide free laundry services for the homeless population. Uh but they said this would have the more long-term benefit for the financial investment that's made because it's something that could be used year after year after year
rather than a one time support and the funding. Um, and so yeah, just I thought it was something that when uh the director brought the extra funds issued to my attention that it was, you know, one of those we I sent the information that was given to me and then they connected with
uh the pastor of the church and that's what brought this here in front. But I do appreciate uh both the director and the assistant director getting ahead of a you know, we may have this coming up in the future. Let's try and plan B now so that we don't have to play catch-up in the end too. So I really appreciate
you guys too. So, if there's no questions or comments, then I will uh uh if there's no objections, I'll leave this on the agenda just as a potential project for us to look forward to um for the unexpended funds um as we look
towards getting the final determination for EOHLC if it's a full project. Um moving on to 2.4.2 two for 94 Pleasant Street rehabilitation from Matias Capital. I will pass that off to my
assistant director Amy to kind of speak on that. So, we were approached by Maas Companies to talk about um or they were um looking into potential funding sources for a
property that they purchased from the city right across from city hall here at 94 Pleasant Street. It was a three room. It's been used as a three room or three unit rooming house and they are exploring potentially keeping it as three units or
potentially making it six units. Um Mr. Mateas had a lot of questions for us regarding CDBG that we answered. Um you know would this be eligible? could be eligible or you know CDG funds may be
used um to rehabilitate property housing um housing developments that are owned by a private developer. Um we did HLC has a per unit limit of 175,000 per unit. So we told him about that requirement. Um we told him about the
income eligibility requirements and the 51% of the units would have to be for the low moderate income households. Um Jason, you can jump in here if I'm missing anything, but so is it just a preliminary con conversation about
possible the possible use of CDBG funds? We told them about our local process and about the process we would go through with HLC to get this approved by DM if it were to go forward. um we you know send some answers to some
follow-up questions this morning and um we'll see where it goes from from here but it was just a good conver good initial conversation about potentially using CDBG and if it would be eligible. Yeah, thank you Mr. Chairman. I will say um my office was obviously involved in
the sale of this property to Matias Capital um and I do think Manuel does have a good vision for the property based off the packet that he has here too. I think I would like some more information on what the long-term impacts of utilizing CDBG for a project like this would mean for the project as
a whole and how that fits into the city's overall goals in terms of like you said any potential income restrictions on the properties um any deed restrictions that come as a result of this. this is something that would have to be done as a subordination agreement on the deed like we do in some other locations across the city. And I think there's a couple some more info
that I'd be looking at before I'd be comfortable moving forward with something like this. And I know this is only potentially getting that info um and getting it out there as an idea, but I think as we're working through that idea process, there's some stuff that we should be checking on first. I'm not saying you're not because you are and you've already said that you are. I just wanted to throw that out there.
Yeah. No, absolutely. because we haven't worked that much with doing CDPG funds on private developments, uh, privately owned parcels and developments on them. Um, we want to make sure that we're doing everything by the books in terms of
everything that EOHLC would require from us in terms of that because whether or not it would be a completely different ballgame from what we normally do as most of our projects have to do with deal with publicly owned land. Um, we want to make sure that we're we're doing
everything uh to the tea uh for them. So, appreciate the comment and we'll make sure that we're getting that information to share about next meeting. Yeah, I I appreciate that too cuz my question is going to be how many how often has this been done in the past with city funding for a private, you
know, property and to know that there are regulations and there's different things that they need to meet. I just think it we have to we have to be careful like you said you want to do it by the book because for me there's a couple of things that just jump out looking at this you know for this the
purposes of this meeting is it it sets a precedent when you use the funding for certain things and so you have to be really careful about how you do that and then the second side of it is we have a lot of developers in the city who put a lot of you know capital and um a lot of investment into the city especially the
last few years and I just wanted to be clear about how this process works for them um for all for anyone who's coming here. But I just thinking about all of the developments that's happened over the last decade or so and and the people who are here and they're continuing to do it. I just want it to be clear to
everyone who has an interest a private interest in some type of investment in the city. So those are just kind of my thoughts on your discussion there about that is that was like my initial kind of like we got to be you know really careful about it but it sounds like that's what already at the forefront of
process for you. So, thank you. And I will uh unless there are any objections, I will read this as well on the on the agenda as we look towards getting those determinations on what information um we can disseminate for
what's required for this as a private development rather than a public one. Um, and I don't believe we had too much in terms of remaining CDBG funds and other new projects. These were really the two main ones that we were looking
to discuss and we're kind of leaving this open-ended for any other potential projects that um might want to be discussed in this meeting that might not have come across our desks. Um, but I don't know if there are any like that that we want to uh potentially bring up.
I hear none. So I if there are no objections I'll I'll leave this on as well just because you know by the next meeting we'll have a clearer idea between the the 3.7 uh or 379,000 and the the 1.1 million of how much
we'll have in remaining funds. And so keeping this as a running topic of the remaining CPG funds that we have is probably going to be useful for us in the the next few months worth of meetings as we kind of make determinations on where to allocate those funds for other projects. Um and I
believe the only thing that I kind of went out of order with was 2.1 for FY25 application. Um, the only thing I have to update for this is that we have not heard uh back from EOHLC in regards to
our FY25 application. Um, I know our um rep over at UHLC has changed um uh to um her name's Shelly from uh Charles Sanderson who was before that. So, I
don't know if that has any weight in terms of uh the delay from hearing back comments from our 2025 application, but um I'm hopeful. I think um I think there may have been a delay on the federal level getting um
what they have to submit approved by. So, um so is there So, that actually probably answers my question. So, is there I don't I just don't recall when this comes to the the council level, we just get like CDG and we do we go over
it, we review it and we So, I just I I don't remember from anything previously, but is there a certain time is it rolling? Do they let you know about your status application your application status rolling or do they just is there a certain time that everybody kind of finds out and they push that back? How does that work
in the So I was just going to say as a mini entitlement community we automatically get an aotment of funds from EOHLC every year. So there is no applica like we put in put in our application for proposed projects right um to get approval on those projects and
determinations of whether we can move forward with those projects but the the funds right but it's on like a rolling basis. Okay. So it's like per application per whatever the project is that you of the projects that you have in mind is that
in order I think I so the funding is said this is how much funding we'll get that's the rolling part but they'll let us know when they let everyone all the many entitlement communities in the state know that you have all been approved on applications. That's my question. Yes. It's normally No, you're good. I I know that I was all over the place too.
Yeah. It's it's normally mid to late October cuz normally a week or two right after the one stop grants get announced um that that happen at least that but that's what we've seen here. Yeah. Yeah. Thank you. But yeah, they approve the projects within the application, not the money itself,
right? Yeah. No, I knew as in the entitlement like I knew there was that piece of it, but just the projects itself like when can we roll this out is really the question. But thank you. Awesome. Um no objections to that. I will keep this on the agenda as well. Most of the
agenda is staying the same. Um, and I believe all that we have left is discussing the standing monthly meeting date and time. So, I don't know if this uh time 4:30 uh works for for most
people. Um, today is September 23rd. So the last Tuesday of the month um we can maintain that and last Tuesday of the month at 4:30 we can keep this as the rolling basis for the scheduling for the CBG steering committee.
Yep. So motion for the standing schedule for CG uh steering committee meetings to be the last Tuesday of the month at 4:30 p.m. Um so moved. I second.
I hear a motion seconded. Uh all in favor I against I no I hear no opposed. I hear none. So so moved. Um, I'll entertain a motion to object unless there or adjourn unless
there are any other uh um items to discuss the rest of the committee. None. All right. Second motion here. Seconded. Um all in favor to adjourn the meeting say I. I.
I. Uh opposed. Hear none. The meeting is adjourned. Thank you. Thank you.