Good afternoon. I'd like to call to order the Human Services Advisory Commission. Could we start with a roll call, please? Chair Lurie? Here. Vice Chair Cooley? Here. Commissioner Zheng? Here. Commissioner Shear? Here. Commissioner Hill? Here. Commissioner Roe? Here. Chair Lohrey, you have a quorum. Excellent. This is a time reserved for public comment. Public comment is limited to nonagendized items, and speakers are limited to three minutes per speaker. Do we have any written comment cards?
Chair Lohrey, we do not. Alright. So moving forward, we all have the January 22 regular meeting minutes in our packets. Packets. Could I get a motion to approve them? So moved. Second. And a roll call. Chair Lohrey? Yes. Vice chair Cooley? Yes. Commissioner Jen? Yes. Commissioner Hill? Yes. Commissioner Roe? Yes. Commissioner Shearer? Yes. Alright. We are going to have our first agenda item is a public hearing on fiscal
year twenty six, twenty seven, CDBG action plan and home allocations. Chad, I believe that's you. Chair Lohrey, members of the commission. My name is Chad Booker. I am not Armando Olivares. Unfortunately, he is out sick today, so I'll be covering for him. So this is a, public hearing for the Community Development Block Grant Funds annual action plan for fiscal year twenty six, twenty seven. Today, we'll be going over the funds the City of Scottsdale estimates that we'll receive
through the CDBG program and the Home Investment Partnership program. I will also cover the proposed act services, activities, and program the city would like to fund through the allocations to be received. In addition, I will provide information regarding our public comment period and, additional outreach we'll be doing for, soliciting public comment through Scottsdale Speak Up. As a condition of receiving federal CDBG and HOME funds, the US Department of Housing requires its grantees to submit a five year consolidated plan.
This is a strategic document that outlines how we, as a local jurisdiction, will access their will local jurisdiction will assess their housing community development needs and plan for the future. So we're mapping out consolidated plan maps out our five year plan. And then following each consolidated plan, there's an annual plan for each of those five years. So we are currently following our consolidated plan with the activities that we'll be mapping out for this year. So we estimate we're going to receive approximately $1,056,000 this year in, CDBG funds.
With those funds, the type of activities that we can, utilize them for are public services, housing rehab, acquisition of real housing real property, public facilities, economic development, planning and administration, and it can also be used for, the removal of slum and blight. Unfortunately, we don't have much of that here in in Scottsdale. The City of Scottsdale proposes that we use the funds for the following activities for CDBG, public services with senior programs and also funding nonprofit agencies as well.
Also public facility improvements and housing rehabilitation and planning and administration. In addition to the CDBG funds, we are a part of the Maricopa Home Consortium. Through that consortium, we do receive a entitlement. This year, we're expecting about well, we know it's $293,000.975. And with that program, home program, it can be used for various things in regards homeowner rehab, rental acquisition, new construction, rehabilitation, home buyer assistance programs, new construction for home
buyers, direct assistance for home buyers to purchase housing, and tenant based rental assistance. We are proposing to continue funding our tenant based rental assistant program. We're in our second year now and, about to expand our first allocation. So we'd like to, use this allocation for the same program as well. So as a requirement for the annual action plan, we do have to have two public hearings that coincide with, public comment periods. Our official public comment period began on January 28 and concludes today with this public
hearing. We will have another public hearing on April 22. We are proposing that's the at the same time, this will be brought to council for approval for our annual action plan. With that, there will be a thirty day public comment period period prior to that public hearing. And in addition to the public hearings, we are also in public comment periods, we are looking for, feedback from citizens through the portal on the city's website, which is Scottsdale speak up.
There are surveys on there asking, what areas of need people are looking for, and they can rank them. And then there's also a comment section where they can just basically say what they think about the plan. So we'll utilize that as well moving forward when putting together our annual action plan. That concludes the public hearing for the 2627 annual action plan. Do you have any questions or comments? I I'm certain we will. Before I look to my left and right, what is the date that the action
plan will go to city council for approval? Right now excuse me. Chair Lohrey, members of the commission, right now we are set for April 22. Okay. Thank you. Looking to my right, nothing. Looking to my left, vice chair quoting. Thank you, chair Lohrey, and thank you, Chad, as always. So, relative to the, CDBG funds, in that we anticipate getting the million 56, if we don't, are you do you look at each of the four categories that you
narrowed it down to, public services, public facilities, improvements, and housing rehabilitation and planning and administration? Is it broken out into, like, percentages then that you would dole out, say, if that if that amount were to change any, like, if they were to double it, kidding, or if they were to give us less? Vice Chair Cooley, members of the commission, some of the activities are mandated through regulations on the amount we can spend. Melissa will be covering this here in a second, but certain percentages can can only go to certain categories. So, with our proposals, we would just, percentage wise, based on the allocation, just bump
everything down with the same ratio. Very good. Thank you. K. Seeing no other questions. Oh, actually a couple of follow-up. We're we're in the middle of a five year plan right now. What what were the years covered by that five five year plan? Chair Lohrey, members of the commission, they cover this is the first year of the five year plan and it goes through 2030. Okay. And of the, home investment, how much of that is allocated and used for tenant
based rental assistance? Chair Lohrey, members of the commission. Here in Scottsdale, we are proposing and we are currently using it for 100% of the the allocation. We do get a small percentage of that that we can use for administration, and that's for staff working on the, this case management and client files. So, typically, out of that $2.93, 17,000 of that would be administration and the remaining would go directly to rent subsidies and or, background checks for, potential clients seeing no other items of discussion, move forward
with the 2627 community development block grant set aside request. Melissa McNeil? And Chad, I guess you're sent sent down for this one. Good evening, chair Lurie, members of the commission. I'm Melissa McNeil, and I work at the Housing and Community Assistance Office. This evening, I'm going to present to you the proposed set aside for fiscal year twenty six, twenty seven for the, community development block grant and the home investment program. The anticipated funding is as follows. For fiscal year twenty six, twenty seven, we have, for CDBG, $1,056,000.
The estimated program income is $58,000. Admin expense, $222,000 with public services at a $160,000 and then the reprogram funds of $350,000 and that's all for CDBG. Moving to the right, the estimated home funding is 275,000 with the admin, cost of 17,956 with an allocation of 269,000 for that.
So for the set aside for CDBG, we're looking to set aside funding for the housing and, rehabilitation programs, public services, to include senior excursion program, non public services, so for public facilities, within Scottsdale. And then our home program is gonna cover the the expenses are going to cover the tenant based rental assistance program. So for the housing rehabilitation program, the CDBG funding will support three the three programs,
the major housing rehabilitation program, roof repair and replacement program, emergency repair program. And the purpose of these these is, to improve the lives of Scottsdale residents through the administration of the CDBG block grant funds to provide safe and sanitary living conditions to low and moderate income families. And this enables them to be able to stay in their homes. As a recap, I think you guys most of you have heard presentations about the
three programs. So for the major housing, rehabilitation program, the goal is to provide cost effective, energy efficient improvements to the home, repair or replace structural deficiencies, and provide modifications for elderly and disabled. Through this program, it, is a deferred loan. The maximum amount on the loan is $80,000, and it's forgivable, after three years. And in that meantime, there is a lien put on the property. So if it's sold or change of ownership, then, we are notified about that.
For the roof repair and replacement program, that grant is up to $20,000. And this is for repairs or replacement of limited to leaking roof systems, deteriorated or structurally dangerous roofs, in a resident's home. The emergency repair program, it's the maximum is $10,000 annually and that's on the fiscal year. So, a resident can apply for the program more than once in, the fiscal year,
but the maximum is $10,000 that they are able to receive for, their home. And those issues in their home are anything that affects the immediate livability of the home. A lot of times we we see, lack of running water, electricity issues, and heating or cooling. So for those three programs, a major housing rehab program, we're asking for $280,000 to cover that for the fiscal year of 2627. Roof repair and replacement, 130,000. And emergency repair and replacement program, 210,000.
So for our outcomes, for unduplicated households receiving services through these three programs, we have a total of five through the major housing rehab program, 10 homeowners for the roof repair and replacement, and 48 for the emergency repair program, totaling, 63 total Scottsdale residents to be served. For our public services, this program is a senior excursion program. Through the Scottsdale senior centers are committed to enhancing the quality of life for older
adults in our community by fostering social connection, promoting mental and physical well-being, and reducing isolation. Our proposed program seeks funding to support transportation services transportation for transportation for seniors to attend group trips organized by the Scottsdale Senior Centers.
These excursions may include cultural events, nature outings, educational tours, and wellness activities throughout the greater Scottsdale area. The contracted services will support the trend the cost of the transportation for these excursions, and the anticipated outcomes and contracted services. Those expenses, will cover the excursion program looking at to serve 200, seniors throughout the year, and then, 12 bus trips.
For the non public services, we are looking at public facilities. So for projects currently in consideration, we have the youth and family services resurfacing of the Granite Reef parking lot, And for the resurfacing of the Granite Reef Parking lot, we did receive yesterday that we were notified the funding for the parking lot has
been secured through a different source. And that's due to, community safety and a quicker response, those getting the funding for that project. The proposed set aside for fiscal year 2627. So for the major housing rehab program, it's 280,000. Roof repair and replacement, 130,000. Emergency repair program, 210,000. So the senior excursion program, 12,000. And public facilities at 350,000. So just because the senior, parking lot at Granite Reef Senior Center has received funding
somewhere else, we are go in the talks with other, facilities that we could do upgrades or work with throughout the city to use that those that funding also. For the, tenant based rental assistance, a lot of you should be familiar with the tenant based rental assistance. The clients are referred to, our agency by the senior centers. And once enrolled in the TBRA program, residents are required to participate in case management, through the senior centers, either Granite Reef or Via Linda.
The tenant based rental assistant is to assist Scottsdale residents that are 62 or older and are cost burden for their rent. For this, there is an allocation or request for 293,000 for the TBRA program. The anticipated outcomes and contracted services for the TBRA program, there are 15 households that are funded or their rent is paid paid for a two year period.
And then for the 12 background checks, those are out that out that funding is allocated depending on the need of the program. Do you have any questions? I'm certain we do. Commissioner Chung. Yes. Hi. Hi. So in summary, we have incoming money of $1,056,000 and 275,000. Correct. And then we're setting aside 1,000,080. Is that what I understand?
Maybe bringing up that The second slide. Yeah. It's a combination of, the estimated program income plus the estimated CDBG income. Oh, add those in? Yeah. And then this is all, So on slide number two Yeah. So you add all those numbers together to get the total amount of monies available, less the admin? Correct. Okay. So hold on.
One zero five six So the determination of this was, an estimate made, during the NOFA, when the NOFA was published, and that was back in August. Okay. Chair Shearer, Commissioner Jones, members of the commission, Chair Lori. Man, it's been a while, hasn't it? Members of the commission. It's okay. So in in in addition to the estimated allocation, we do estimate that we're gonna receive $58,730 of program income.
And additionally, we have available $350,000 of reprogram funds that we can also use. So we're looking to set aside these funds for this year's annual action plan for these particular programs. So it's not only the allocation, it's it's other funds that we have available as well. Right. The ones described right there? Yeah. Right. So when I add up all of those numbers, the plus and the minus, Are
you are you including the reprogram funds at the bottom? Yes. So the so the admin, the one sixty so altogether, 1,000,007. So when we add that and then we include the reprogram funds, we'll come out even with the the one eighty with some unspent as well that we'll reprogram from next year. Okay. So where do you get that number from? I I don't have it right here in front of me. I I I can pull it up right if you give me a couple minutes.
Okay. Yeah. Let's do that because we don't wanna agree to hold back more than we're getting. Yeah. Understandable. Can can you explain, Chad, the the what the reprogram funds constitutes? What makes that makes up that 350,000? Chair Lohrey, members of the commission, those are funds from previous funding years, cumulative. I can't tell you that the food bank project from last year was under contract
prior to an environmental review on unbeknownst to us, so we weren't able to apply those funds, our CDBG CDBG funds to that. And then from, previous fiscal years we had another public facility allotment of 100,000 that we did not, have a job for at the time that was also unused. And then, with some of our public service projects, some of our nonprofits don't spend or or request all the money that that they were awarded.
So those go back into a pot as well. We had a streets project approximately two years ago that we awarded through the commission $450,000 and that project came out to approximately $297,000 So there's, there's always some reprogram funds that is back far as three or four years that that will pull back into the to the to the award process. And and once it's been received from the federal government, city?
Chair Lohrey, members of the commission. We have the we get reimbursed for it. So it it's in a, separate locks account. And and when we do our reimbursement, it comes out of that and comes back to us. It's also tracked at a federal database. So we have the funds available to fund the specific activities, and we fund them at the level that we have awarded them. And then we draw off of them and get reimbursed for them. So they're not sitting in a Citibank account. No. But they are sitting in a in a federal bank account.
Lots. Sure, Lori. Members of the commission. When CDBG funding is awarded, awarded, it is available to the city for a period of seven years, for it to be fully expended. So if projects are not, fully funded or if, like Chad explained, the nonprofits, are not expending all the money, we do have seven years from the date of the initial award. So we do not strive to have reserve funds. Let me put that out there. When we make awards, we would like it to be fully expended. The streets project was definitely an unexpected surprise, opportunity to, provide services to other low
income families and support the public through that. Is there ever a risk that Congress could pull that money back? Chair Lohrey, members of the commission, it is appropriated and and adopted by law when they adopt their federal budget, so they cannot. So I I readded my numbers. Everything on that screen totals 1,070,909. And that's looking down the left column.
Right? Every single number on that screen. So if if I interpret this correctly, on the right side, that's home That's separate. Is it not? If I can, mister chair and Oh. I well, I I I don't know if that's necessarily the split or not, because at the at the very bottom of page 13, we see a thousand eighty three twenty four. So I don't know if they're supposed to jive or not. My my question was gonna be relative to while, Tibra does show 02/3975 on its
slide, that number is not reflected under the home at all. So I don't know if that's supposed to be there. Yeah. Vice chair Cooley, members of the commission, the allocation for the home that is incorrect, that's that that should be that 293 number. And the the numbers from home are completely separated from the numbers from CDBG. Okay. So when I add the CDBG column, that totals $1,082,006.00
6. And I think what he's proposing to set aside is $1,000,083.24, which is on slide 13. So, essentially, the whole amount would be set aside. Keep me honest on this, but the set aside does not include the 160,000 that we will we will allocate to nonprofits? Chair Lohrey, members of the commission, a public service project that, Melissa brought up for
senior excursion program is being reduced from that 160,000 to for an internal program. So We are keeping $12,000 in house for specific programming. Out of that 160,000? Which we did two years prior when we created a senior services case worker. Okay. So can He's got the numbers up. He's going through them right now. Okay. Okay. So just to review, we do have the 1,000,056, then we have the, 58,000 in
program income, the 350,000 in reprogram funds, which is $1,465,187. And then what are the two negative amounts of two two two and one sixty? Don't they come out of that? That that comes with admin, administrative. Commissioner Jeong, are you subtracting the ones in parenthesis? Yes. They should not be subtracted.
They should be added. Okay. Correct. So that okay. So the total is $1.00 $5.06 $4.05 7 plus $58.07 30 plus an admin fee of $2.02 2. I'm reading off of slide number two. $5.81 plus Could we go back to slide number two, please? The $1.06 plus $3.50
equals $1.08. 1,800,000.0. That's right. Oh, yeah. So if I the admin fee instead of deducting it from the $1.05 $6.05 4, I'm adding it, and then I'm adding $1.60. What so I'm trying to get to the total amount of funds that you have available in the CDBG fund area. On the left hand side, it should be the estimated CDBG is what we're anticipating receiving Mhmm.
Plus the program income that we received from Hirsch Academy, plus reprogram funds. And the admin and public services are related to what? It their items, subtraction. So you're adding the 1,000,056 plus the 58 plus the $3.50. That is the total funds that we have available. Once those total funds are added together, then we will subtract our administrative costs of
20%. Then we will subtract the 160 for 15% because we cannot exceed those caps. Okay. So what I see now is the estimated income for CDBG is 1.56, the 58,000, and the $3.50 Correct. Which is 1.65. I subtract what you will be spending on admin and public services. Correct. And then from there, the rest of the funds that are remaining are allocated allocated
to the housing rehabilitation programs, that Melissa discussed during the presentation, the three major programs that we have, which is emergency repair, roof repair, and green housing. And then we also set an additional piece of that one point number that you got, for public facilities. For facilities projects such as Yushen Family Services with their relocation, possibly additional projects at Vista Del Camino, There might be an additional project at Granite Reef as well with regards to replacing their front desk.
Okay. So Does that make more sense and help clarify or are we Yeah. So Okay. Back to my original statement, if we total those column in CDBG, that's one point, you know, deducting your admin and public services. That's 1,082,606, and your proposed set aside is 100 or $1,000,083.02
4. Is that correct? Yes. On page 13. Chair Jones, members of commission. Yes. That is correct. Okay. So we so what is before us right now is we're getting an allocation of one million eighty two thousand six zero six, and the proposed set aside for staff's purposes and their recommendation to us is $1,080,324.
So there is not a fund that's coming to us to decide where to allocate. Well, and and I'm glad we brought it around to that point because I'm I I think perhaps my confusion is the set aside amount that I thought we had for for the for the the, for for the nonprofit agencies was a 160,000. Chair Lohrey, that's correct. However, the city of Scottsdale does have the the right to retain some of those
fundings for public service programs, which we are coming before you tonight to seek permission to use those. We're asking to set aside 12,000 of the 164 nonprofits to the city of Scottsdale for an internal program instead of funding externally. The externally. The the difference between $1.60 and 12,000 will will go out to the nonprofits. The remainder of that will stay the 12,000 will stay internal for public service programs. Could project directly.
It has to come out of the 15% allocation. Mary, is that $12,000 number because under the home column, we come to a negative $11,006.97, and you're trying to make that whole? HOME and CDBG are completely separate. Right. But that's that's what my question is. Is that where the $12,000 number comes from that you're looking for? No. The $12,000 is an application that was submitted by city staff requesting $12,000 as part of the NOFA.
A city application was received, and we have a right to pull it out and set it aside and not have Human Services Commission score it. Okay. Then and that makes sense. And it's just it was coincidence that the numbers were so close to it. Correct. But, so I guess the other question I have is under the home column, we come to a negative. The estimated home funding is $2.75, but our reductions for admin and allocation are larger than that. So is that normal? Chair Rowe, members of the commission.
The on that first slide, that is a typo. That should be the two ninety three. They're exactly the same. That $2.93. That's my fault. I apologize. Oh, alright. I strike the question then. Thank you. I I think what in my mind what this boils down to is where do we better serve the residents of Scottsdale with the excursion program and the outings or the agencies that we could possibly fund with that additional $12,000 which until we I
I think until we score those I'm not confident that we know the answer to that. Yeah. Mister chair, let me just ask a follow-up on I mean if if this goes forward tonight with our okay, are we locked into that allocation? Or when we go through and see the the allocation or the request nonprofits, can we make an adjustment and hold this program up against the other requests?
Chair Lohrey, members of the commission, you have a right to table this item and bring it back at a later date for consideration. That is the option that I would suggest if that's the route that you're considering, and we can do a a set aside discussion, the same night, as the formal recommendations, proposals are proposals are from CDBG that we're wanting to award and the value
that they bring to residents versus the excursion program? Well, chair Lurie, one oh, go ahead. No. Go ahead. I do what I'm understanding is this is how staff is proposing to use these funds, and I think they do an excellent job of managing these funds in these programs. So, I am supportive of this proposed set aside. Just now that I understand what's coming in and what's being asked for.
Mister chair, let me just I may confuse this even more, I don't know, but, I am grateful that staff is bringing forward funding proposals for our internal use. I have always been an advocate for that. However, if a nonprofit brought forward a request for $12,000 for transportation for a senior excursion program, I don't think it would fare very well because I think the nonprofit
needs that we see are, more direct service based. I know in the past we use some of this funding for a case worker at our senior center. That is the kind of use of these dollars internally that I really like to see because I know our case management, demands have continued to grow and I really think that our senior center staff does an amazing job, but they're also stretched pretty
pretty thin trying to deal with case management issues. So comparing those two, I mean, I like case management but I also have to say back to my original point, I respect staff and I want staff to continue to bring forward creative ways to utilize these funds, but the senior excursion program, while it's very consistent with our strategic plan and emphasis on senior services, may not rise
as high in our minds or at least my mind as some of the other nonprofit services that we may see. So I would like to weigh this against what else we receive and make a determination at that time, if that's possible. Chair Lohrey, members of the commission, you're gonna be comparing homeless service programs to seniors because this is CDBG funding, and CDBG was set aside. Now staff still has the right to take and set aside internal outside of the
NOFA. So you are going to be comparing a senior excursion program to homeless services that are in the community. Please understand, and I'm advocating on behalf of my staff, that these are seniors who are socially isolated and could benefit from a trip. They could make connections and develop supports in our community that may not may may increase their livelihood and longevity of their life through social connection, and it meets a social determinant of health. I appreciate that advocacy. Mary, you know, I I I really do.
Here's my bottom line. If this program is so essential, then the city of Scottsdale general fund should be putting $12,000 on the table to fund transportation for this program, you know? And and that's my irritation is through the budget process, I mean, the city will be happy to spend dollars that come to us from external sources. But if this is important, we ought to be spending $12,000 of city general fund dollars to to address needs for our seniors.
Thank you. I I believe we need to take a roll call on on this either Chair Lohrey, you'll need a motion either to table it or to make a decision. Okay. I just need further clarification. What does table it mean? Help us understand what If you table the item and request the item to be returned, you can make a decision at a later date. Not necessarily commingled with the other evaluations? No. We will bring this item to you. March 12 will be which is the same night as formal recommendations. Got it. Thank you. And and from where I sit, I'd I'd like to I'd like to propose that
we table this and bring this back after we see what we're dealing with from CDBG funds, through the NOFA. Is that a motion? I no. You can't make one. I can't make a motion. Sure. Laurie, could you kind of stay tuned so I look up open record laws just to make sure we're making the right motion. Hold on. And is it possible to make a motion to approve the set aside for everything but the senior excursion program? Chair Lohrey, members of the commission, that is also an option.
Chair Lohrey, members of the commission, open meeting law tabling an item officially is postponing it to a later date is a permissible action provided it is done in compliance with agenda and notice requirements. A public body may only discuss, consider, or make decisions on matters listed in the agenda, but this topic if the topic on the agenda, they can vote to table it, postpone it, or take no action. So if we table it, we're tabling the entire set aside request. Sure, Lori. That is correct.
Could I give also do something called a renoticing. If an item is tabled to a specific future date and time, that action must be clearly stated, and the item I other. I'm not sure what to motion now. There's so many options. Mister chair, I I'm just gonna speak to again the quandary we're in. I Mary made a very strong pitch and I think this is part of the
issue. We review very in-depth proposals from non profits and we had a one line on a screen tonight. And Mary elaborated on that and I appreciate that very much because that gave me a, I think, a greater understanding of the importance of the program as being broader than just, you know, taking seniors to events. I mean, I think there's a there's a social, educational, and also hopefully an opportunity for seniors to become better versed in programs that we can provide them beyond the
excursion. So I even though I have concerns and I've made my pitch that the city should be spending $12,000 if this program is necessary, I I don't wanna I don't wanna quote, set aside the set aside decision tonight. I I feel like there's too much good, housing rehab programs are outstanding. They are the vast majority of the dollars we're spending. For public facilities. I know we still have some potential there.
I am hopeful that the food bank is fully equipped and we don't have to go out and raise funds for additional amenities relative to the food bank. And I'm hopeful that our shower facility that, our day relief center can use is up and running and is working well. And if not, some of those dollars could go that way. So from my perspective, I'm not gonna quibble any further about a $12,000 program.
And, I think Mary from my perspective got me over the finish line with the concern that I have regarding, again, city general fund dollars need to be invested in social services at a greater level than they currently are. That's a good point. Thank you. Other comments before we get a motion? Would you would you care to make a motion? I would move that we authorize the, set aside proposal as brought to us this
evening by staff and as outlined, in the details that we received with no changes. Seconded. And a roll call vote. Yes. Vice Chair Cooley? Yes. Commissioner Jeong? Yes. Commissioner Hill? Yes. Commissioner Shear? Yes. Commissioner Roe? Yes. Next step is fiscal year twenty six seven funding process. Chad shared a document with us by email with responses to our questions, and I think you're gonna share and talk about those.
Chair Lohrey, members of the commission. Yes. So, the documents or the responses were due today at 10AM. So, we weren't able to agendize a presentation for this, but I just wanted to kinda give a brief overview. So the, questions were due to, to staff, if you had questions for the commissioners on January 30. We we extended that deadline to, February 3. And then after the deadline, we emailed them off to our our agencies that were that that receives questions, and they had approximately eight days to, put together their responses.
So there were 14 programs that had questions asked of them. Some of those programs were to be or proposed by the same agency. So there are there were a couple agencies that got questions for, multiple programs. The theme of a lot of the questions were, collaboration, which I appreciated. So so a lot of the questions were there. Some of the ones, I would say might wanna take a closer look at is
just, affiliation with, how some of the, nonprofits that are doing partner agencies in CDBG, how they are actually affiliated. I will I I would recommend looking over those. Those those are kind of the the key points from the entire process. I I'm happy to go over if there's any questions in in the the document I sent. Or if you haven't gone through it, I can kinda go through and pick out some and and review them now, but you all do have the document. I just kinda wanted to give a a quick overview of the process.
Chair Lohrey, yes. Chad, if if you don't mind, I I didn't realize that it come out today. So, yeah, just quick over overview, if that's okay, would be swell. Yes. No problem. So, so for CDBG, there was questions for New Leaf in regards to, partnerships and collaborations with, Paiute Neighborhood Center and, Paiute staff. That it's a very lengthy explanation, so I'll let you guys go through that. There's also a question for a community house and and if they'd be willing to
partner with, Vista del Camino, and and what what they have going on there. So they do have a, as of right now, a day relief center there with, Phoenix Rescue Mission. For CAS, it was, again, a collaboration a potential collaboration with Vista Del Camino and Community House was asked. And then there was also, some some real questions about, how successful are they in obtaining, clients that that that come from Scottsdale, and they have a a very lengthy
answer for that as well. Family Promise again, it was questions about collaboration with, not only Paiute Neighborhood Center, but Vista del Camino as well. And you can jump in anytime, Roger, because he knows these questions better than I do. The, Scottsdale Recovery is one of the, agencies that submitted a a partner partner, collaboration, partner agency for CDBG. So they asked the relationship between the two, nonprofits that they they put together to
for that proposal, and they explained that in the, proposal. And I I do wanna comment at this point that with that collaboration, they're entitled to submit for 80,000 Yes, sir. Instead of 40,000. And and I had asked that question and, noticed from the response that while they state that they're independent agencies, they share a centralized financial management function. And then they have separate EINs, and so they they do qualify as two separate
agencies. And, you might see And, another proposal as well for the Valley Valley Beach. Correct. Valley Bay, Midrush. So there's there's just some really good questions and, some detailed responses, so I I definitely recommend you take a look at that along with taking a look at some of the staff comments that we had for those agencies as well. Thank you very much. Miss mister chair, Chad, remind me again, I get confused because it's not a 100% of the funding categories that require us to give, to recommend funding them in a
whole amount, what they requested. Is CDBG one of those categories that or do we have some discretion on an agency that is requesting 80,000 not to provide the entire amount? Commissioner Shear, members of the commission, it's, CDBG is excluded from the 100% funding. So that it would only be, general funds and, Scottsdale Cares. Very good. Thank you. Other questions, comments on those questions? Questions on the question? I just have a comment, Chad.
I thought you did a fabulous job with these answers putting that all together, and I have a feeling some of it was done burning the midnight oil since we're only a couple days past everybody's deadline. So I thank you for everything you did to make that such a comprehensive, summary for us. Chair Rowe, members of the commission, Melissa McNeil did all of it. So I kinda gave her a little directions as she took over. So, all that praise can go to her. Great collaborative effort there. Thank you, Chad and Melissa, for all your work on this.
And I will remind commissioners that our now that we've got those responses, our final scores need to be input into Neighborly by next Thursday. Yes. February 19. Yes. And, our plan is to have the results, or in order filtered and, delivered to you by the following Tuesday so you have something to look at prior to your funding discussion on the twenty sixth. And and during that funding discussion, I will need to hand the gavel over to
vice chair Cooley and recuse myself from general funds voting. Will you then go into the cone of silence or just sit here? I think I'll just go around the corner. Okay. He's going in the bear suit. Alright. With that said, any other questions or comments for Chad? If not, any future agenda items that we want raised and addressed? I have one. It may just be a question for Mary. It may be in your next director's report, relative to, the senior expo results, which I attended yesterday.
It was I thought it was a huge success. A lot of people there. A lot of, vendors as well. And then I don't know if there's any, anything to to follow-up with relative to Parana Del Sol, but, I had a heck of a time, and I wanna I wanna thank Chad for giving up the bear costume. May may not have worked out as well because I was the slowest bear in the parade. But I I enjoyed it, and I'd do it again. Is that a heck of a good time or a heck of a bad time? Heck of a time. Now I'll leave it up to you. No. It was great.
It's great. Comment about that. Uh-oh. I I'd like to say to Mary and to Lee that I especially enjoyed the video of them dancing together in the street. Chair Lohrey, members of the commission, that was actually Chad. Yeah. I can't I can't keep a beat. Where where where could we find that video? Chair Lohrey, members of the commission, it is on, Scottsdale Human Services, Instagram, and Facebook. K. Duly noted. We'll take a look. With that, could I get a motion to adjourn? So moved.
Seconded. Alright. And a roll call. Chair Lohrey? Yes. Vice chair Cooley? Yes. Commissioner Shearer? Yes. Commissioner Roe? Yes. Commissioner Zheng? Yes. Commissioner Hill? Yes. We are adjourned.