Good evening, everyone, and welcome to the Ann Land Bertha Hinchel Memorial Fund Commission meeting.

Today is Wednesday, April 29th, 2026.

Time now is 5 32 p.m.

The meeting now is called to order.

Yes, thank you, Chair.

Members, if you please unmute your microphones.

Member Coletto?

Here.

Member Contreras?

Here.

Malik.

Here.

Member Brown.

Here.

Member Stevens is absent.

Member Ubog?

Here.

Member Seymour is absent.

Member Beckman is absent.

Member Rule is absent.

Vice Vice Chair Smith.

Here, except I don't have a microphone.

I just looked and there's nothing here.

Oh, okay.

We will ask I'll just swipe this one.

Yes, if you want to just move move over to your left.

Sorry about that.

Thank you.

I'll just disconnect it.

Or if you'd like to just move to the left.

Okay, that works too.

Um, and Chair Ellis.

Here.

Thank you.

We have a quorum.

I would like to remind members of the public and chambers that if you would like to speak on an agenda item, please turn in a speaker slip before the item begins.

After the item is called, we will no longer assess speaker slips.

You will have two minutes to speak once you are called on.

We will now proceed to the land acknowledgement and the pledge of allegiance.

Please, if you're able, um rise for the opening acknowledgement in honor of Sacramento's indigenous people and tribal lands.

To the original people of this land, the Nissan non people, the Southern Maidu, Valley and Plains Me Walk, Pet Pet Wing Peoples, and the people of the Wilton Rancheria, Sacramento's only federal recognized tribe.

May we acknowledge and honor the native people who came before us and still walk beside us today on these ancestral lands by choosing to gather together today in the active practice of acknowledgement and appreciation for Sacramentals indigenous people's history, contributions, and lives.

For the Pledge of Allegiance, I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands.

Are there any commissioners who wish to speak on this item?

Thank you.

Okay.

Aye.

Any opposed?

Any abstain.

The motion passes.

Okay.

Moving on the agenda, we're gonna move on to the consent calendar.

Item number one.

No, I'm sorry.

We're gonna move on to the discussion calendar.

We're on item number two under the discussion calendar.

Um, is there a stealth staff presentation?

Yes, there is uh welcome and hello, members of the commission, uh city attorney and staff.

Um so today I want to present to you on the grant management system since we're going to be talking about uh the grant process documents and everything related to the grant application for next year, 2027.

Uh so City of Sacramento as of uh December of last year has moved to all grants to this platform named the grant management system.

Um Land Birth Hanshill Memorial Fund will be doing the same going forward.

So we'll be using a different system than what we than what we have used in the past.

So the grant management system or GMS for short, uh is the city of Sacramento centralized end-to-end platform for creating, administering, applying to reviewing and managing city uh grant programs.

It standardizes how grant opportunities are published, how applications are submitted, uh how reviewers score and evaluate them, and how staff track awards and reporting throughout the full grant life cycle.

It can be accessed by visiting uh grants.gov, GOV.

Um, and then the thing about it is uh it makes things more consistent for applicants and predictable.

So in the past, if different departments had grants, unless a specific organization was already in contact with that department, it would be difficult for them to find out about uh grant applications that were open.

GMS just puts everything in one place.

Um so no matter which department they apply to, applicants know where to go, how the application works, and what to expect.

It creates less uh administrative burden as applicants can track applications, they can upload required documents, they can respond to checklist and receive communications all in one place without having to navigate multiple disconnected systems.

So moving from the application to their uh cloud services and email, etc.

Um there's clear requirements and guidance, so there's uh we're standardizing forms, tool tips, program guidelines, etc.

Um, to reduce confusion and to help applicants submit accurate and complete applications, and also just improve transparency and fairness.

Standardized scoring, uh blind review options, and consistent evaluation processes help ensure that applications are reviewed objectively and equitably.

So you'll uh you'll all have access to the scoring platform.

Uh, we'll be sending you uh training on this uh in the near future.

Um this just allows uh applicants to be able to apply to multiple grants from from one place.

Um so this is what the grant management system looks like.

GMS.

Uh community organizations or members uh create an account, and then they can see grant opportunities in there.

So they would click right there where it says grant opportunities, and that will take them to this page that will show them what grants are accepting applications.

Now, this screenshot was taken uh a few weeks ago, so some of these applications may have closed since I I took this and prepared this presentation.

But uh the neat thing about the system is you can see there's different uh departments that had applications open at the time.

Also, if we're accepting applications through other methods, other systems, they are also listed there.

So you as an organization can't see all the different opportunities we have.

And if there is a grant that is coming up in the near future, it'll be listed at the bottom where it says upcoming grants.

So it is really neat and accessible, and it allows, like I said, organizations to just be aware of everything happening or as much as possible from one place.

Um for this uh new system, what we've been encouraged to do is to publish the grant application ahead of time.

This is just a mock-up.

It is not actually published yet.

But the idea is to publish the grant maybe a month before the application opens so that uh organizations or entities interested in applying have an opportunity to look at requirements, gather those requirements, and start gathering information for the application ahead of time.

Um so this system allows us to do that to publish the application.

They still are not allowed to apply.

As you can see, uh up there it says the opportunity is coming soon, but applications are not being accepted.

So again, to create a more um uh equalized uh or equitable uh approach to grant making, right?

We're allowing people more time to see the opportunity, gather what they need, and they could do this um through the GMS system.

Any questions?

Commissioner Smith.

Ours installment, our application form as we've as we've decided what it's gonna look like today.

Um will it look just like that, or will it be tweaked to fit inside the system somehow, or what is what is it gonna look like to our applicants?

Are they gonna see something they've never seen before, or are they gonna see something that looks familiar to them?

So if let's say we were to approve the exact same questions we've used in the past today, it would look pretty similar to what they've done before.

The website will look slightly different, it has checklists.

So let's say one section is asking about um finances.

It'll be one section for the finances portion of it, and then that'll be a checklist.

They'll complete all those, they can save it and continue later.

So let's say they don't have access to finances, they can complete the portion on um past history, for example, or what services they they uh provide.

So they're able to complete sections at uh at different steps of the way they can save come back, which in the past I don't believe they were able to do.

They had to complete the application at once.

Um, but now GMS allows them to save it.

But the questions will remain the same.

It will look slightly different, and in the August presentation, based on what the discussion today, I'll actually bring the application so you can see what it's gonna look like for the public.

That's great.

Thank you.

Any other questions?

I have a question.

You mentioned scoring.

So is the scoring going to be the same?

Yes.

Uh again, so basically everything we've done in the past is just getting imported into GMS.

It's going to look different.

So for you as commissioners, um, like I mentioned earlier, you're going to receive a training.

Uh, we're gonna send you a tutorial.

Uh basically what we do is we load your information in the system and we uh register you or sign you up as panelist, and you're gonna get an email invitation letting you know hey, you're being invited to score applications for the L and Bertha Henshell Memorial Fund, 2027 grant cycle or whatever year it is, right?

Uh then you need to accept, and then when you log in, the GMS is going to look exactly like what we saw, like what it looks like for the um organizations, but you're gonna see my panels, and then it's gonna show you okay, these are the applications I need to score.

When you click into each organization's application, you'll be able to see all the information, all the documents they've uploaded, again, everything in one place, and then it asks you the different questions that we usually score on, right?

So alignment to funding priorities, and then you'll be able to enter your different scores.

At the end, GMS just calculates all the overall scores, it ranks it for us, and it does everything automated.

Um we can uh after you score online, then take the scores out and put them in the form that we've used in the past.

If that's what you decide, that's what the discussion is about today.

Um, but we can just move completely to GMS and uh you know use that uh for scoring.

That's what we've done for other grants.

So in our meeting, if through asking questions and that kind of thing, we decide we want to raise or lower a score, we can still do that that day.

Correct.

We would just need to make sure you have access to the system if we want to do it all in GMS.

Otherwise, we can have a printed copy like we've done in the past, and then after the meeting, I would go on and update your scores in the system so they reflect what we discussed in the November meeting.

Correct.

Commissioner Stevens.

Um thank you.

Um great presentation, chatwall done.

Um my question is when we do enter the score.

Uh-huh.

Are we going to have a notes filled if we have a question?

Will it only be the numeric score?

Would it only be the numeric score or we'll be able to add notes on the side?

I believe at the moment it's just a numeric score, but you can't keep uh notes on the side.

I can ask our grants team to see if it's possible to add a notes uh option on there.

But I don't have the answer yet.

And um in the you know, once we finish the numeric score at the bottom at the end of the scoring, are we able to put notes there?

Yes.

Okay.

We have how will we get access to those notes when we like do the in-person if we have questions to ask.

Do we need to bring our own set of notes from those notes?

Or is it something that can be just like given to us?

Um both, right?

So it's gonna depend on the availability of.

I don't know if we can have some sort of device where you can be looking at it or you can be logged into your own uh account.

If not, what I'm going to do basically is what we've done in the past where you submit your stuff online and then I print it out for you and I have it for you at the meeting, right?

In paper.

Um, and I'll be basically extracting your notes from GMS, putting them into a spreadsheet, like we've done in the past, and then um providing them for you at the meeting.

Uh, this is a fairly new system.

It's still sort of in beta phase parts of it are.

Uh, we've been working with it for a couple of years now.

It is a lot better than it used to be, but there's still improvements that need to be made, and if we find that that is one of them, I'll make sure there's a way to bring you your notes so that you can have them available at the meeting.

Commissioner Stevens.

Okay, with that said, um during the last um sorry, during our last session when we were giving out the grants, um, I noticed that there was a lot of um different way people came up with their score.

I believe in hindsight, if we would have had an opportunity to discuss how they came up with those scores or what they were looking at, because I personally didn't know that I can go and search that out, search this out, look at this, look at that, and that probably would affect it the way I was scoring.

With that said, um, as he mentioned, will we have access to our notes?

I want to know will we have access to the commission's notes so that we can see how they're basing their assessments, how they're basing their score, or is there a session to where we can have where we can discuss that?

I don't know.

I'm still new on the on the on the uh panel, so forgive me for all the questions, but that is one of the things that I noticed at the last time we did the disbursements.

Yeah, so per GMS, you're not able to see other per other people's uh information, right?

So it's just um like a blind panel, you enter your scores and it's it's tied to your own login information, so I would have to give them access to your login so that they can see them.

So to answer that note, you cannot see the other commissioners' uh scores and notes to see how they're scoring.

That said, in today's uh item, we do have the scoring matrix, which is what you base your scores on.

So it will tell you if it aligns loosely, it's like a zero to a two.

If it's um, you know, uh it it it gives you their uh different levels of alignment or answers to each question and how you would score it based on that.

So we do have a matrix that we're gonna be discussing for this item today.

I'll I'll also add um if you wanted to see the commissioner's notes prior, we'd have to publish it with the staff report.

So we could compile all the commissioners' notes and put it in the staff report for you to review a week ahead or so.

Um it would just be published publicly.

So you know if you want to put notes in there and if you do want to review them beforehand, they will be made public.

I just think that if we're truly doing the work of the community, that sometimes um collaborating or having conversations.

I know that conversations can only go so far.

Uh but I just think that um education on how people are coming up with their scores would be truly helpful to the process.

Yeah, I would definitely encourage commissioners to talk about how they went through the process last time when we're going to the scoring matrix to give some insight and how everyone individually is scoring.

Yes, ma'am.

Thank you.

I I personally would not advocate for everybody seeing my notes because I write really cryptic notes on the pa on my scoring thing.

Um also that's part of what's supposed to happen in the November meeting.

If somebody scores a zero and somebody else gives them a nine, you could ask the ask that person that gave that score because you can see who issued the score.

I gave them a zero on this one.

Can you help me understand why you think they deserve a higher score?

And you can have that discussion.

The issue is we can't have discussions amongst groups of us, because all of our discussions have to be done in public under the Brown Act.

So we're very constrained about the kind of conversations we can have outside of these meetings.

That's part of the reason why we have that scoring rubric that that helps you read that part of their um application and then look at okay, this is what we're looking for, this is what they said.

Where does it fall in that you know, zero through nine score?

But that's why we have that is to help commissioners make that connection and make that evaluation because we can't talk about it outside the meeting.

As I can appreciate your response, I'm gonna respectfully disagree, and I'll just leave it that way.

Thank you though.

I think also GMS uh has the option of let's say the scoring question for you is talking about um location, right?

Geographic location, you can tie it to a specific question so that when you're scoring that you know exactly what answer they gave to that specific part of it.

So it will show you what the applicant said about that specific uh question.

Um quickly, I'm gonna jump in here um with the clerk's office.

Just a point of logistically, if you wouldn't mind um cueing up on your screen so that chair can call on you so that one we can keep track, but also for the recording.

Thank you.

Haley, can you just um briefly instruct commissioners on what that means to Sillyana?

So on your screen, if you tap on it to wake it up, or if you have the presentation open, if you tap on it one more time.

And then at the top it says request to speak.

If you would like to speak, you can click request to speak, you'll be added to the queue.

The chair will then see your name and call on you to speak so that we can keep in the order, and then the recording for the video will have your name on the screen.

Are there any questions?

Okay, and if you have any issues technically, um, you can click the little uh question mark at the bottom right and it'll let IT know that come out and help you.

Okay.

In the topic of GMS, do we have any more questions about that?

Okay, I will pop my uh information on there for the public to see for questions in regards to the Anland uh application and land and birth and show memorial fund application, um, and then where they can find information about it online as well.

Thank you.

Well, I'm gonna go back and you know, ask the clerk are there any members of the public who wish to speak on this item.

Thank you.

I do not have any speaker slips for this item.

Okay, thank you.

Okay, continuing on with the 2027 grant cycle dates, forms in process.

Resident Ellis, I have a I have a request to speak.

Okay.

I have a question for uh Harbine.

Um can you clarify whether or not what I said about where these can discuss on the meeting?

Okay, so you see it in the interpretation speaker.

Hi, good evening everyone, Herve Eden Gill with the city attorney's office.

Yes, we should not be having um communications of this body outside of body meetings.

That's kind of like the short answer for it.

What we are trying to do is avoid hub and spoke communications, Daisy chain communications, because any business of the body we want it to have in open and public meetings.

Thank you.

Okay.

Okay, Commissioner Stevens.

Thank you.

I just want to give clarification.

Um I understand the Brown Act very well.

Um the question specifically was could we the commission not individuals meet to talk about how responses are given?

My question still stands, but I will wait for the matrix.

Um I am very well educated in the Brown Act.

But my question is can one of our meetings be used to have that discussion so that when we're sitting in front of the public, we don't look ill-informed when we're doing conversations about their grant.

Sorry, this is really awkward with this very large mic, so I apologize with it moving.

Um, yeah, so kind of like a two-parter, the way I was understanding it was like, can we have conversations outside of publicly noticed meetings, which I would ask you not to, so we don't violate the Brown Act.

Um, and in terms of whether you as a commission want to discuss matrix and grading and how you do the scoring within a publicly noticed meeting, that would be fine.

I believe the procedure for that um would be with our staff, our staff to the commission as well as putting it on an agenda.

But I do believe on this item we have um the item that you're currently discussing.

There is a motion to discuss the grading matrix and the rubric, but I know that Brian and Renee can speak to that, and I'll turn off this very large mic now.

Thank you.

So, yes, we will be discussing that today, and then we have a meeting also in August.

If we need to pick it up again in August, maybe we can get that on the agenda.

We could just see how that goes.

Yes, ma'am.

Thank you.

Okay.

Okay, well, we all have our packets here for the application process, and the first item in the packet is the um community needs assessment for 2027.

Um the Sacramento Community Needs Assessment is a collaborative focus where major hospitals they partner with nonprofit organizations to identify prior prioritize and address the community health needs.

So we can use this as a guideline for our funding priorities.

So right now, our funding priorities are food, shelter, and transportation.

So I had an opportunity to look at um look at the uh community needs assessment, and what I found was mental health was a big one as well.

So it is my understanding that if we wanted to, and I just need clarification, if we wanted to add mental health or just leave it as is according to our charter, I think we can add an item or pull a funding priority.

So I just want to make sure that everyone has an understanding of what the community needs assessment is, and it's like a guideline for our funding priorities.

We can leave the funding priorities as is, or if we want to add a funding priority, we can a staff person, Brian maybe or Renee, tell me if that is correct as far as adding to the priorities if we can.

Yes, you can uh remove items from the priority list, or you can add items as the commission sees fit.

Yes, okay.

So one of the things like I've mentioned was mental health.

Um we can vote on it, but I would like to put it on the table to add mental health as one of our funding priorities.

Do any other commissioners have a thought about that?

If I may, through the chair, um, if we add a component for mental health, can we please add an item for how um that works with assisting and aiding the destitute men, women, and children for the city of Sacramento?

As you all are aware, the Wills and Trust for Ann Land and Betha Bertha Henschel describe that the fund should be used to help the destitute.

So if there is an emphasis on mental health, I ask that we do a tie-in to showing how it is assisting and aiding the destitute.

Thank you.

Okay, I just see it as this uh the funding needs.

This assessment said that there is a need for it.

So I guess I'm not quite quite understanding how.

I mean, people like homeless people may be in a crisis as they're getting food, they may need some mental health services as well.

So I'm just thinking is it as a wraparound service?

I mean, we do include wraparound services, so that is how I'm looking at it.

Sorry, this is so awkward.

Um, I feel like I'm like doing a Vegas show with this.

Uh no, that would work.

We just want to make sure we're staying within the trust and will guidelines.

So if you do wraparound services or if you have some sort of discussion or sentence on how it does aid the needy, then that is perfectly fine.

Okay.

I would like to hear from fellow commissioners on how they their thoughts and their thoughts about it.

So I think next in the queue.

I'm sorry, I I I deleted it.

So what's your last name?

Commissioner VR.

I was thinking with mental health services, I feel like that would be included within the wraparound services, so it wouldn't need to be added as like an additional funding priority.

We can just like wrap around services.

I don't know if I've gone out and and or saw any proposals, and maybe they have been there.

Um, which that they said they're including as part as the grant mental health services.

So I could be mistaken, but um so what I'm hearing is you don't think it should be added as a funding priority.

You see it as already as part of the wraparound services.

Yeah, yeah.

Like I don't know if we can change like the well, maybe not change it, but just say maybe on a personal, like as your grading, like, oh, this includes it, so maybe as a wraparound service, you want to rank it higher, but like not necessarily putting it as okay on put it on paper as a wraparound or as as a funding priority.

Okay.

Um sorry, were you done?

Okay.

Commissioner Seymour Hi, thank you.

Um I like the idea of adding mental health to the uh funding priority.

It is a wraparound service, but I do like the idea of maybe specifying it or making that a specific funding priority.

In addition to that, I'd like to I guess petition to add youth services to the funding party, only because of in my work outside of the commission.

I'm noticing that we have more homeless youth in the city that are experiencing homelessness or addiction at earlier ages.

Uh so that's something I'd like to maybe add as a funding priority is uh specifically for youth wraparound services or maybe programs that offer youth housing specifically.

I know it gets pretty tricky, but I think it's worth a shot.

Okay, thank you.

Commissioner Smith.

My question about specifying mental health is that that's usually a person giving mental health services to someone, and we traditionally, and it goes it ties back to the reason that we exist, um, don't fund staff costs.

And mental health in general is a staff cost.

So when we fund people like um the uh St.

John's program for real change, that includes it's housing, it's job training, but it's also a lot of wraparound services.

Education, transportation, mental health services, that kind of thing that are all included in the services that are provided at that site.

Um I think uh WEB is similar.

There's several that we fund that are we give them money for food or for you know rent support, but they also for their residences provide those wraparound services, and it keeps us out of then funding a mental health counselor, for example, which we typically don't fund people.

We fund food, transportation, housing, that sort of thing.

Okay.

Um so that's my my two cents about adding it is I think it needs to be connected to a basic human need for people who are destitute in Sacramento County.

And as a standalone, it's I think it goes better with other things that we do versus having a standalone because then how do you measure that?

Thank you.

Uh Commissioner Yubog.

So I agree with everyone, everyone's thoughts that mental health is a very big issue right now, but I'm also understanding that mental health is a professional, at least my understanding.

A lot of these nonprofits, are they equipped to you know the smaller nonprofits that we funded the ones doing you know after school programs?

Are they equipped professionally to provide mental health?

So I I really agree with Commissioner Smith on I don't think it should be a funding priority, but somehow maybe part of something.

Okay, thank you, uh Commissioner Yubog.

Commissioner Seymour.

So with funding mental health as a priority, that that does make sense.

If we were trying to limit uh if we were trying to basically limit it for funding a mental health professional, so if we do add it to the funding priority, is there a way to maybe specify where we're funding things specifically like the cost of treatment for the individuals or the families or groups that are receiving mental health services and funding things like medications?

So focusing less on the side of funding uh mental health staff or professionals for these on that for these organizations or staff costs, but making sure that we're still providing some sort of means of funding for the actual mental health services and treatments themselves, not the staff or trying to fund programs that may be unqualified to provide those services.

I don't know how that would work, but there's a way to maybe specify that if we do decide to make it a funding party, that probably saves us a bit of a headache.

Thank you.

Uh sorry, hi.

Just to speak to that, I think um one thing to consider is the average award amount, right?

For our grantees is around eight to ten thousand dollars.

So while I think it would be more effective to specify tools or resources or medication, for example, it might not be worth the bang for your buck to to do so.

Um, just to put that out there.

Um so just something to consider, but you could do it, you would just have to be really specific in the application.

Like, what are you doing that is not staff services that will provide mental health resources or tools to youth and families or whoever well I don't see any more uh commissioners on the queue to have uh oh you are I don't see it.

Oh, okay.

Go ahead, uh Commissioner Contreras.

No, my my question, I agree with everybody about the mental health, and because it's a problem here in Sacramento, but my question is more of a uh point of just clarification to me.

Because on the it says here on the community needs estimate assessment for 2027 review, on the very bottom, it already says Sacramento County Mental Health Service Act.

So what's the difference?

What does that mean that we're you know what what we're talking about now doesn't align with the Sacramento Mental Health?

This is this is from my understanding is just a report from the Sacramento Um County Mental Health Services, how they are compelling their information about the status of mental health in the city of Sacramento.

That has nothing to do with our fund or IN what we do?

Yeah, that's correct.

So um sorry, all I mean.

Uh so the the county every year, like all counties, they get the millionaires tax for for mental health, and they have to uh produce some reporting around it, and I think um the staff just gave it to us as another data point on um on needs in local needs.

Um but that that's a that's a county report, so it's a separate for a separate fund than ours.

Okay.

All right.

I'll figure it out.

You know, um to the chair.

My my other thought was um if we did want to um you know maybe specify or call out mental health somewhere, you know.

I think as one of the other commissioners said, hey, I I consider that part of wraparound services, but maybe we want to say wraparound services such as mental health or including including mental health services so that our um grantees kind of know that and so that it's it's clearer to the commission and and the public.

Thank you.

Is there any further discussion?

Commissioner Smith.

So Naveen, is there any Harvey?

Sorry, um anything in the Anline and Bertha Hanshell fund establishing documents that addresses that might help us address this or clarify it for us.

Um I don't know if there would be anything within the wills or trust specifically, but if we go to Sacramento um City Code section 2.64.020, which is the authority for this commission.

Um that basically just discussed and as well as the powers um and duties.

That essentially just says that this commission will administer and disperse the income of this commission and memorial fund for the benefit, aid and assistance of the destitute people of the city in such manner as deemed proper and beneficial.

And so that's why I was adding that if we do want to include a funding priority for mental health services or mental health care, that there is some kind of hook to say that it is for the benefit aid and assistance of the destitute.

Okay, so what I'm hearing is that there is a consensus regarding mental health, but how we will implement pretty much a consensus about there's a need for mental health services, and to it was my understanding to possibly include it as a wraparound wraparound service is specify mental health.

That is and I think what should we should do is define wraparound services, maybe in this document agree on what wraparound services are because you call out mental health, then what about things other that things other than mental health that we've always considered wraparound services, like counseling for victims of violence or those kind of things for I'll go back to the St.

John's program for real change that has counseling for women who have been battered, and for kids who have seen their one spouse batter another spouse, um education, job training assistance, that kind of thing.

Those are all wraparound services that aren't just mental health, but they include mental health.

I'm not against mental health at all.

It's a definite need in the community, but historically we've focused on basic human needs based on Maslow's hierarchy of needs, um, which basically is food, clothing, shelter, a feeling.

I don't I don't remember them all.

It's been too long since I've read that.

But when this was developed, this this idea of looking at these community assessments and determining annual funding priorities, because I was part of that eight years ago, um it was basic human needs.

Um it's not for people who are not able to meet their minimum subsistence needs or lack access to assets needed to escape from poverty.

Um so anyway, I I'm I'm okay with it being a part of wraparound services.

I'm concerned about calling it out because it makes it sound more important than the other wraparound services, which is or the other types of services for like food, shelter, clothing, um, security, stability, that sort of thing.

Um that's that's my point.

Okay, I I I do understand your point.

Um, but I do think that mental health is a basic need in we'll take a vote a vote on it just to see, but I do feel like um it is a basic, you know, times change.

I just feel like it is part of the the basic need, mental wellness is huge now.

Um so if we agree to a corporating in as a wraparound service, I will be okay with that.

I'm just one oh okay.

Commissioner Malik.

Yeah.

I'll unmute it there.

Perfect.

Um I think the discussion we've had here is really important about mental health, and I think we all are on the same page that it's going to be a really important priority as we're grading the applications that come in for this cycle.

I I think I was going to echo some of Commissioner Smith's thoughts on specif the specificity within wraparound services.

I almost say, like, if we call out mental health, there's so many others like youth services that I would want to include.

And so to almost avoid the exhaustive list within the funding priorities.

I think wraparound services leaves some wiggle room for the uh organizations that apply to get grant funding to determine and let us know what those wraparound services that they provide are versus them trying to you know meet the criteria that we're specifying when they might not actually adhere to that funding priority and might have something else that's equally as important.

And so I think I almost wonder if it might be helpful for when we do end up grading these and scoring them with the matrix that we're deciding today, that we keep like the mental health services, youth services, all these in mind, so that like I know personally when they're if it if there's an organization that specifies mental health and shows um you know how they're going to use the grant money to address that.

I know personally I'm going to be scoring them higher because I do think it's a basic need.

Uh and so I don't want to limit ourselves to calling it out within the wraparound services, um, just because I think a lot of the, for example, housing advocacy organizations that do this work are really already pretty focused and have a good understanding of you know mental health needs, youth services needs of the populations that they're interacting with.

But I'm always happy to defer to anyone else if um we think it would be really helpful.

But just wanted to add that in.

Okay.

Thank you.

Uh Commissioner Seymour.

So it sounds like we're on the same page, but what I was kind of curious about is maybe the idea or the possibility of putting in the agenda for the meeting in August, uh, some more focused time to discuss things like funding priorities, but then also kind of talk more about like wraparound services and maybe things that traditionally haven't included in wraparound services or just things that we're noticing that are becoming more of a need within the city of Sacramento and how it apply to the work of the commission.

Just that way it gives us more of a cushion to talk more about it and then brainstorm.

So I was gonna see if it was possible to like add that specifically to the agenda for the upcoming meeting in August.

Commissioner Coletto.

I was gonna uh propose a compromise.

So um what about you know uh housing with a focus on services that pair housing with wraparound services that support physical and mental well-being to try to give us the flexibility while also calling out um what some of those wraparound services would support.

What did you say again?

Physically, and I'm writing it down.

Oh, just adding at the end uh that support physical and mental well-being.

Okay, thank you.

Commissioner Stevens.

I agree with uh Seymour, sometimes taking a step back and then really thinking about our purpose because we need to make sure that we stay in alignment with the ANLAN reason for the funding.

Um, and I think that we will do ourselves a great disservice by just rushing to let's just do this without going home, thinking about it, coming back to the meeting, and being prepared to have a true discussion, maybe come up with some samples of wording on how it all ties in to present so people when they are filling out the applications, can make sure it's something that they can do because not only do we want to make sure it's something they can do, but we have to make sure that they um they have some measurable outcomes, like what will be their measurable outcomes to show that they did the work, and that's something that not only do we want to add it, but we need to think about the measurable outcomes of from what they're doing.

So I'm in agreement with why don't we make it an agenda item for August to come up with the right verbiage.

Okay, uh, thank you.

Where I'm at right now, because we're spending a lot of time on this one item.

Oh, I'm sorry, I see uh Commissioner Smith now.

Go ahead.

I have a question for staff.

Um, we we are scheduled for four meetings a year, and it's my understanding that we have to approve these things in this meeting in order for them to go out to the grantees so that they can apply and get their applications in timely.

So when we meet in November, we have complete applications.

So I I believe just from looking at it from my history that we have to make these decisions tonight.

That's the purpose of the meeting, so that these documents are ready to send out to our grant application, our grant applicants.

Uh yes, so the goal is to pass the motion with some of the updates that you'd like to be included in the 2027 application.

Uh, I know last year we did it in August.

We were a little bit behind on that, so we're bringing it back to our normal schedule of having it in April.

Um, so ideally we would like to have this implemented, or we would have the feedback and pass the motion of what you would like to be included in the application.

Needless to say, um, you do have the option of us taking the feedback, maybe including uh Commissioner Colto's um, you know, change of language to move forward and bringing it back for a final look and pass the application at that point, right?

So you have a little bit more time, um, I would say with minor edits, and you would have to trust that we as city staff are gonna capture those and implement it into the application, right?

So option one is we move forward with the language proposed housing with the focus on services that pair housing with wraparound services that support physical and mental well-being.

We'll include that in the application, and we'll move forward.

If you wanted to have a second look at it, technically, we can bring it back in August to see if you want to adjust it.

Additionally, I would say if you go with option one, I don't think um, I think you do have room to start this discussion if you want to look at the full scope of um, you know, what the intent of Ann Landabertha Henschel is in August to start those discussions earlier for fiscal year 28, if that makes sense.

So maybe we've we find this happy medium today, right?

And that's how we move forward for fiscal year 2027.

Um, but I think then we can still have a discussion in August that will lead into our fiscal year 2028 considerations because we'll be talking about this a year from now in April doing the same thing.

So maybe you do need two discussions to do so.

We can facilitate that in August if you'd like.

So I think I presented three options there, but that's just my two cents for city staff.

Can I just add for context?

Our August meeting is scheduled for the 26th, August 26th, and as of right now, the application is scheduled to launch August 31st.

That's when it would open and we would start accepting applications.

So we would only have about two business days to make changes before the application opens.

Not saying it's impossible, but I just want you to have all the information um so you can make an informed decision.

Thank you for that.

I like to I like I like the suggestion of adding physical and mental well-being and moving on.

I think that would encompass everything as part of this conversation today.

Okay.

Um do I just keep moving on until at the very end I make a motion on everything we discussed.

Okay, so let's move on to the application, the 2027 grant guidelines.

Okay, before you and your packet, you have the grant guidelines.

Um Brian has highlighted some dates and some other things in the application for us to take a look at.

I know that I have some questions, so I'm just gonna go ahead and start.

Um the highlight where it says Friday, first page of the application, where it says staff will provide notice to application applicants to submit any missing documentation by Friday, October 9, 2026.

Well, you know what?

I'm sorry, I skipped.

Let me go back.

Let's start from the beginning.

The online application, just look at the date.

Let's just take everything.

I apologize for skipping over.

The due date is Monday, August 31st, 2026 at 8 a.m.

And then the online, that's the date, and then the application deadline is Wednesday, September 30th, 2026 at 3 p.m.

Do any uh commissioners have any questions about the deadline date?

O'Brien, did you want to speak on your deadline date?

Um, historically, uh well, two years ago, the commission asked for more time to score the applications, uh, because they used to only get two weeks to get through 900, a thousand pages of the applications, right?

So we last year we moved it to one month.

If we make the application due on September 30th, then that gives you enough time in the month of October to go through all the applications so that you're ready for the November meeting.

So I have a question about the October 9th date.

There isn't a time.

Do you need a time for that, or is that just close of business on October 9th?

Uh we can add a time to that.

I just wanted to know if that's works since you're going to be collecting everything.

By close of business on that day, that would be when I would need everything submitted by the agencies so that their application is still considered.

Okay, trying to keep my notes here.

So what you're saying is you will add close of business to this part here.

Correct.

Okay.

Bear with me, I'm just writing down notes.

Close business.

Okay.

Let's move on to the next page.

If anyone doesn't have any questions, we have some more highlighted dates.

2027, 190,000, and then the 8,253.

Um I have a question about the 190,000.

That is, I think, what we had last funding cycle.

How do we know that's the same for this funding cycle?

So the reason why it's highlighted is because that will be updated for the August meeting with the final number.

We'll have the presentation from the budget uh is it budget?

Okay.

Treasurer's office who will come and give us the actual numbers, and this will be updated.

So this is just what we had last year.

Uh, the average is actually what we used for this year.

That's uh it went up from the previous year for this year.

The average uh amount is 8,253.

So that one is correct.

Okay.

So going back to when will we find out what this number you're talking about at the funding meeting?

That's when we're going to at the August meeting.

Correct, before the application goes live.

All right.

The next thing.

The third bullet point where it says required online application attachments.

If you go down to the third bully bullet point, is the very last sentence.

There's no charge for nonprofit organizations as the revenue counter is currently closed to walk in excuse me, walk-in services due to COVID-19.

Does that still apply or can it be removed?

That can't be removed, yes.

Okay, just bear with me.

I have to when we get ready to call the motion to have this.

Okay.

Um it will be updated, but they are closed Mondays and Fridays, and they have certain hours a day, so we will put those days down.

Okay.

Okay, moving on to the next page.

We have some more highlights there.

Um I'm looking at the date funds available that last highlight says December 2025.

If we can get that updated, and what will that date most likely?

Um it says written notification of the commissioners, commission's decision will be emailed to all applicants on or about December 12th.

Yes, so that will be updated to December 11, 2026.

Okay.

Can we go back to that first date, January 1st, 2027?

It says grant funds are expected to be available to successful applicants on or after January 1st, 2027.

Um I know the office is can you explain that date?

I guess I guess I'm a little confused.

Could it be like no later, like the January 15th, or why is that January 1st date there?

It just means that funding it's available for that grant year and not before, so like December.

Um we still need to have a fully executed contract to process payments.

So we don't want to say by January 15th, because if they don't have in the fully executed contract by that date, then we wouldn't be able to meet that deadline, correct.

So it just gives us we room to pay them after the first of the year, which is when the year uh when the contract becomes valid.

All right, moving on to the next page.

Um I just had a thought, it's just a thought where the contact information.

I just wanted to know what was um everyone's thought about adding a website there.

I just find it helpful, like when I'm researching um the different organizations trying to find out more information about them.

I like to find out you know more about them by going to the to their website.

So I was wondering if we could add like a number five and say website.

Yes, we could.

We'll just have to make sure on our end it's not a required field in the case that the organization does not have a website.

So we can add it.

Um we'll make sure it's doesn't have to be a required field because if it does, we'll just say put an A or something like that and make sure we can do that logistically on our end.

Yeah, thank you.

Okay.

I think that completes the application.

Oh, I'm sorry.

Commissioner Ubog.

I'm wondering if we could add to the guide to the grant guidelines.

Um I came across a situation when I did my visit to the site this year.

The um they didn't know that they were required to submit a report.

Um so I'm wondering if we could insert that in here somewhere.

Is it there?

Should we submit annual votes?

Okay.

Then never mind, it's right here.

It's also in the grant emails that they get they get it like five times.

It's it's just there's a lot of turnover with the nonprofits, so someone who started the grant might not be the person taking over at some point.

So if it's just all in one spot, then I just want to note we do send them notification 15 days, seven days before the reports are due so that they're aware.

And then when it's due, and if they're late, then when they're late.

So moving on.

Oh I'm sorry, I can I gotta keep watching it.

Commissioner Stevens, I'm sorry.

Um is the notifications listed in the application or the guidelines that how many times a no kit or how the notifications happen so that the organization is aware of how the you know when to expect these notifications, um, so they'll look at it to uh look at it also because some of the emails may be going to people's spam, so they should know a we should be getting an email in two weeks, so make sure we check in all areas of our emails to make sure you're getting them timeline of notifications listed in the guidelines.

So we don't have like a notification schedule on there.

Um GMS does it automatically, so it'll that'll they'll be automated and it'll be constantly reminding them that uh it is due.

Can we ask um within the application an alternate email address as well, so that more than one person is getting the um the email?

Because I was kind of disappointed to notice last year when we were doing the disbursements, how many people were missing on that day?

And I'm wondering is the emails only going to one source, and as she as the other commissioner noted, there's a high turnover, so maybe that person didn't forward that information.

So if we can request an alternate email address or alternate contact, we can make sure that the information is being um communicated outward.

Um what I did notice on the application that may be an alternate email.

Because they do ask for two email addresses, the primary grant contact and an authorized representative.

So I'm seeing two email addresses.

Do you think that's not enough?

Or you're asking for a third or in all honesty?

I would just leave it as a another option for someone because I know that when I was trying to reach my um site person, there were three turnovers, and I had a hard time trying to find a person that's now in place.

So the more information that we can get up front, the better.

So even if we ask for their board of directors, you know, the president, the treasurer, the admin, you know, we now have a list of alternate ways of because we me and Brian literally had to dig to find the person that took over.

So um, and this is in the Justice Department.

So um just it would help.

I know that when I go out, you know, we we list the board members, so maybe we list the board members, you know, the president, the vice president, the it sounds a lot a lot a lot of work, but again, if we're really trying to get a hold of people or know who's who, this is a great way of doing so.

I think if the commission agrees on an adjustment to the application to say primary contact and add an alternate contact, Brian, correct me if I'm wrong in GMS, we could add that.

Maybe it's something you propose um to the commission chair Ellis for you to include an alternate or not.

Okay, but okay, I see primary grant with an email address, authorized representative with the email address.

I just want to make sure I'm understanding.

So you want to add alternate a separate line saying alternate email address.

Yes, okay.

Commissioner Smith.

So I I understand I've had the same problem trying to locate somebody at an organization that had a lot of turnover.

Um who do we send the emails to now?

I think that's a good place to start is understanding what the current process is.

So when you send these emails out saying, here's this, we need this back from you.

Um who do you send it to?

The grant contract or the authorized representative or both.

So all emails go to the grant contact.

The authorized representative is only contacted for signing the contract, so they only go to primary grant contact unless they're the same.

It sounds like maybe we need to either ask them for a secondary grant contract contact email, or give them the up the opportunity to add their authorized representative in number four to add that email address to the notifications.

So which do you think would work better?

I think we could include both and just not make the alternate required so that if they have an alternate, they could add it, but if they don't, there are some where the authorized representative is the same as the grant contact.

So we can add an alternate just as a third person and just make sure that we're emailing all three every time we email them.

So that will be an alternate name and address.

Correct.

Correct.

An email address.

Okay.

I think that would be helpful given like Commissioner Seymour talked about the turnover.

I also had a comment on questions four, five, six, and seven.

Um ten and eleven.

Um those are not worded as questions, but the sentences have question marks at the end.

So we should either word them as a question or we should take the question marks off.

So you notice they say like describe how your program objectives align, that should be a period, or what are your program objectives and how do they align, and then that's a question.

What numbers were that again?

Number four, four, five, six, seven, nope, not seven, four, five, six, and you're right.

So four and five.

Let me look.

I thought there was one on ten or eleven, no, ten or eleven are okay.

So just four and five.

Should just be unless you want to make updates to the application questions.

I think an easy fix is for us just to add a period.

Yeah.

Right.

No, I'm not saying change the questions.

I'm just saying swap the question mark for a period.

That was my only comment.

Thanks.

Okay.

Okay.

Um, I want to push matrix to last and move on to the pre-meeting score.

Um I just saw these these names here, and I just wanted to make sure that this was just put in as a draft because I don't see all the commissioners' names here.

This was just noted as a draft.

Okay.

Yes, that's correct.

This are all drafts, and they will be all updated for the August meeting.

That will be the final version.

Final in August, okay.

Okay.

Now I'm gonna go back to the matrix because I felt like that was matrix.

Okay, I'm gonna go ahead and start this, and then we have our historian Commissioner Smith.

Uh okay.

So the matrix, it was designed to evaluate uh specific criteria using a numerical system.

It primary the primary purpose was to remove um bias from the selection process to ensure a consistency in the evaluation process.

So as you're reviewing the applications, you will use a scoring legend and you assign a number to that.

The scoring legend is at actually after the summary matrix.

Somehow it's they're not in the right order here, but there's a scoring legend that's the third page of the matrix.

So it's like this.

Yes.

So before you, you have the matrix.

And then there are like, I think there's 11 categories.

So as you're looking at the application, you're going to be looking at the matrix and see if the applications are in alignment or not in alignment or moderate alignment with the um application.

Each one of these, I think, for the most part is self-explanatory.

Like for number two, where it says fit with the Anland Birth and Hinchel fund purpose.

Well, we know what the purpose is is for destitute men, women, and children.

So if we get an application that's for I don't know, spaying dogs.

Dog biscuits.

Yes, dog biscuits.

Yeah, we know that that's not in alignment with our funding purpose.

Um, do anyone have any questions?

I said, the founders actually line up with the questions that are on the application.

Commissioner Smith, can you put yourself on cue for us so we can track?

Thank you.

Oh, it shows I'm the current speaker.

Okay.

Go ahead.

Okay.

So we have one through 11.

I hope everyone had an opportunity to look at each one.

Do anyone have any questions as far as what do each one of these means questions?

Okay.

Well, I guess the matrix.

Oops.

Commissioner Stevens.

So as an administrative person, my thing that I would like to when I'm a sitting at home scoring everything, um, I have a staff request.

When you send the packets out to us, what will be helpful if the matrix and the matrix is included in the um in the packet?

Okay.

When you include that matrix in the packet, make it a fillable document.

Why do I want that?

Because if I'm doing everything online on my computer, I can research, do what I need to do, go point that in, save and close, go to the next one, save and close, go into the next one.

These anything that I state today is all office clerical administrative things.

You guys do an excellent job.

Um, I just think that for us as commissioners, which time is very tight, um, these little small uh conveniences are big conveniences to help with the process.

So we can make this make these documents fillable, like the the big document, the one the at the back, this will be so easier.

I made it fillable for me, but I'm quite sure if the other commissioners have that, it would make life just a little bit easier for us to administratively complete what we need to get done.

That's my first thing, and I'll be quiet.

So if you want to comment to me on that.

Yeah, I think we can do that.

Um, just so you know, it's gonna look a little bit different.

So we can provide the tools, the matrix as a fillable um sheet and the scoring sheet as a fillable sheet.

Just know you're not gonna be receiving the applications in a packet anymore because you'll be doing it through the grant management system.

Got it.

Um, so we can provide you that tool, you'll just have to make sure you put it in the grant management system, which you're already saying.

Um I just want to make sure I clarified that.

So, yes, we could do that, but you won't be receiving the application separately anymore.

Okay.

So I'm sorry if I missed that earlier.

I apologize.

Um, so that's that was one of the biggest hurdles that I had last year, is that I said, you know what, Kim, make this a fillable document, and each one of the applications I I did, I had if I went to my computer right now, I have a fillable the application, the villable the application, just to make it easier for me to track and complete the process.

hurdles that I had last year is that I said you know what can make this a fillable document and each one of the applications I I did I had if I went to my computer right now I have a fillable the application the villable the application just to make it easier for me to track and complete the process um and now that I've I feel like I'm a small veteran uh um watching the whole process come through was a huge um learning experience and I would just hope that in August we can just run through it again to make sure that it's not even just that we understand the questions but how the questions apply according to the Anland grant so but I will be quiet and say thank you that was it for me okay um Commissioner Yub I I'd like clarification on something that I came across last year when I was looking at um the nonprofit or whoever the application and I I would go to their website and the first thing that I would look for is their office because they have to be in Sacramento.

But then the the some of them said well yes we're in Elkrove but we piggyback on services with someone in Sacramento is it their office location that matters or only where they're providing services for me I like to see where they are providing services you'll get a clearer picture of what's going on where you can see and talk to you know people that are overseeing the program or sometimes they even talk about I talk to people that are part of the program so for me as I go out I like to go and see where the services are being rendered so it doesn't matter if an organization is based in Elk Grove as long as they're going to provide services in Sacramento?

Yes I mean I know it says the city of Sacramento but if there is an organization in El Grove and then the services the funds are going to like a I don't know a food bank let's say the corporate is in El Grove they have a food bank in Auburn and you got a food bank in Sacramento and since this within Sacramento yes we would go ahead and accept that application and fund because they're having services in Sacramento okay Commissioner Brown piggybacking off that question in our guidelines is there like a rule that it has to be headquartered in Sacramento and then also additional question do they are we requiring them to prove that they are if they do have like multiple places they service do they have to prove that it is that the that the money that we give them is being spent in Sacramento that's the so I'm just quickly looking turning to the work plan to see if it specifically states but uh city attorney feel free to chime in if you find it before I do um the eligibility section Renee yes it does say only nonprofit 501c3 organizations that have an office or facility within the city of Sacramento and serve destitute residents of the city are eligible to apply yeah Commissioner Brown so I think that would mean that they would have to have a physical office location in the city of Sacramento which we will review as we're going through the applications initially okay I guess I stand corrected I thought we've have funded and so we've never funded an organization that I can't say historically that we've never done it we may have and you know they just slip through the cracks essentially but I think now that we're aware we'll be sure to ensure that they are a city of Sacramento business and listed as such okay um commissioner Seymour so kind of a the same question basically for the city staff so does that encompass if the organization has actual facilities are providing services in Sacramento is that would that technically count as their office too or what's the what is the legality of that does their main operational facility have to be from the city of Sacramento or would they be eligible still if the facilities that they were physically providing services at were located in Sacramento so I'm thinking things like any sort of like home halfway house or like shelter facility yes that would meet the eligibility requirements if their facility was in the city of Sacramento that they are receiving funds for specifically and upon your site visit you know you would be able to tell yes or no commissioner Smith we have had places that had an administrative office I think we had one either last year or the year before we lost where they had an administrative office somewhere else because they had sites in several cities and so all of our like stuff was mailed to El Dorado

And upon your site visit, you know, you would be able to tell yes or no.

Commissioner Smith.

We have had places that had an administrative office.

I think we had one either last year or the year before we last, where they had an administrative office somewhere else because they had sites in several cities, and so all of our like stuff was mailed to El Dorado Hills or LA or whatever, but the specific site where they were providing service was in the city of Sacramento, they only provided service to people who lived here.

So the the big thing is where are the people that are getting helped?

And they have to be in the city of Sacramento.

Okay, so for clarity.

Okay, so for clarity.

I thought that I remember that that happened where there wasn't an office outside City Sacramento and we fund, and then Commissioner Smith can recall.

But yeah, what I'm hearing is it's a no, so I just want to make sure that we're all on the same page, that it is a no if the administrative office is in Elk Grove, but but they have like a site in Sacramento.

So the site would be considered the facility, right?

Yes, so that would make them eligible, even if they have an administrative office in Elk Grove.

Okay, that's what I was referring to.

So say, let me just give you an example, Elk Grove Unified, right?

They're gonna have an address in Elk Grove, but they want to do services at Coloma community center, and that's the site of service, then they would be eligible to provide those services and receive funds.

Okay, yeah.

Thank you for the clarification.

I still commissioner Ubog.

Thank you, but okay.

So it says a copy of your organization's current business license from the city of Sacramento.

So if their business license filed is city of Sacramento, then I think that puts them out.

I I might be able to answer this because my department issues the business licenses.

So anyone who does business in the city of Sacramento has to pay the business operations tax.

So uh if you were in Elk Grove and you had a city contract, for example, you would pay the BOT even though your uh place of business in is in Elk Grove.

Does that make sense?

Yes, then they so anyone who does business it in the city of Sacramento uh would have to pay our business operations tax, our gross receipts tax if it they're generating the gross receipt here.

So just not to confuse you, that bullet point specifically is talking about the business operating tax um payment that they have to make, not necessarily whether they're in Sacramento or not in Sacramento.

There is an exemption sometimes that we include for like a small business or for city of Sacramento operating um employers or organizations, and I think if I understand the question correctly, is whether that makes them eligible automatically, it does not because they could have a BOT, but if they're trying to render services in El Grove, even though they have a business license from Sacramento, they would not be eligible unless their services are being in the city of Sacramento, correct?

But they don't need to have it to be able to enter in the contract and get paid.

Your question is specifically if they're in El Grove, your question is if they're in El Grove, they don't have a business, a standalone building here in Sacramento, are they eligible?

Is that what your question is?

No, so I guess I'm just looking at on their website if they're saying their office is in El Grove, but so then I'll automatically say, Oh, well, they're not eligible.

How how would I know that without doing extensive research where they're going to piggyback onto somebody in Sacramento?

So in the application, you'll see location, and they'll identify what district they're planning on serving, and then farther in the application it talks about the services that they'll be rendering.

So they would have to explicitly state we are rendering homeless services in land park or you know, wherever the case may be.

The business operating tax is a separate thing from that.

That's that's just they have to have it no matter what if they're gonna conduct business in Sacramento.

Yeah.

Okay, thank you.

If there's no further questions on Commissioner Stevens, so put clarity across the table for everybody.

Let's say uh we're doing a multiple events, right?

But we're based in Elk Grove, but all of our events are in Sacramento, the city of Sacramento.

Are we required per this and then that's all we care about to show evidence of the event being held here in the city of Sacramento?

Are we asking them a part of the application to fulfill the requirements to show evidence of are we requiring them to do some time but that documentation to show we went to 24 and 30, 30 foreign, and we did feed the unhoused, and then we went to 6600 Bruceville and we had this?

Are we asking for that type of documentation to show that the money that we gave them actually went to the city of Sacramento individuals and not to the Elk Grove location?

That's a similarity question.

Yes, they would have to state in the application where they'd be serving, and then they'd also have to report on it and show evidence of such in their reporting.

But with pictures and videos is what I'm asking.

Not just I don't not just in text documentation, but evidence of like take a picture of the door, or and I'm just using that as an example, you guys.

Don't nobody come for me here.

Take a picture of the door to show that I'm actually in South Sacramento in District 8, district seven.

Are we asking of some type of documentation to show evidence of the event in those specific districts?

Because if we're just taking no for this city body, if we're just taking their word, how do we know that they're not in El Grove doing that and they're just saying that they're in the city of Sacramento?

And I don't know if that's the question that you're asking, but it does make a difference.

Yeah, I think that's gonna be reflective in the reporting.

I don't have the reporting questions in front of me right now, but we can take a look at those and make sure there's something in there that um you know shows further evidence that they are doing the services where intended.

Um so I'm gonna have to get back to you on that once I have a chance to look at the reporting questionnaire.

Yeah, okay.

Let's move let's move on to the funding awards matrix.

Um my memory serves me right.

What we typically do with this is we add up all the scores in descending order.

And then let's say the first block, I'm just using this from the top of my head.

Let's say the first block of scores is 500 to 550.

Then we'll say, okay, we will fund 100% of those, and then the next one is 449 to I don't know, 300.

Then we'll say, okay, we're gonna fund 40 percent, and then so on and so on.

Um can you help me out?

What I think that's how it if my memory served me, my that's how it how it's this is a rough draft of a tool we use.

We put the applicants in the or in the order in numerical score order, and then we look at where are there basically cutoffs between like the top six may all be getting scores that would be a you know, give us give us the opportunity to give them a hundred percent.

Right, and then there may be a break of 50 points.

So it's not that there has to be the same number of people in each one of those categories, it's that, and we adjust we always adjust the percentages.

Last year it was 100 percent, and then the second one was like 90 percent, I think.

And we went down to like going down.

We went down and then we didn't give awards to anyone that was under 20%.

20 percent, I think it was 20 percent.

So anybody that had a score of under 20 percent, we didn't give any money to.

So and if we had more money left that we had not given out, we give out more to the people at the top because our score sheet is designed to show who provides the best response to our grant application.

So we don't want to spread extra money amount around to everybody, we want to spread it first to the people who were the most responsive.

And so we've had yours when we did 100%, and then the next group got 95%, and the next group got 90%, and then the next group got 75%.

So we play with the percentages, and this we don't play with the scores, of course.

Um and the amount that they requested to get us to a hundred percent of the money we have available to give.

Okay.

So this is kind of just a picture of a tool we use, but it's not at all how it looks when we're done.

Right.

Okay.

Do anyone have any questions regarding this matrix tool?

No.

You have a question.

Commissioner Stevens.

Um, once again, uh this year, well, last year, this year, was a little um learning.

Oh, sorry, thank you.

Was a learning lesson for me.

Um, a couple of questions.

This uh form, is this something that all of us should be completing on the day of the disbursements, or is there just one assigned person that this is just here for kicks and giggles of as a guide?

No, but Brian will be doing the adjusting.

I mean the scores, he's gonna put it be on the screens behind us, so everyone in the room can see what's going on, but as we continue to adjust, Brian will be adjusting the numbers.

Did I answer your question?

No, you did.

I was just wondering.

So technically, we don't we should be concerned about it, but this is not our lane.

This is something that staff handles right.

We have the input on as far as what the percentage is going to be, but Brian will be displaying the numbers, and that's the process of this process.

Is it also explained so the grantees understand what we are doing, so it's fully transparent, because I know when I was up here, I was like, oh, how uncomfortable is this.

You're rating me right in front of people.

Well, yes, and go ahead.

I I just thought that we could have did it a little bit more a little respectful more to people because it you know, to do a to write a grant, and I don't know if anybody's ever written a grant, it's a lot of work, and to have your work um, you know, done that way.

I felt that we could have did it just a little bit better in our conversations in our presentation, the way that we handle that, that for me, I was I was not comfortable in the way that we did it.

Not that the process should not be done, but I was uncomfortable the way that it was done.

I felt that we could have did it just a little bit better, a little bit more explanation if it was not given to them, because I know it wasn't given to me, it was all a shock the way that all this was unfolding in front of my eyes.

So I was very uncomfortable with that.

Well, thank you for sharing that you were um that experience made you feel uncomfortable.

Um that surely is not what we aim to do, but you know, there are going to be times where we're discussing something, we're not understanding something, and you know, we're gonna have some conversations back and forth.

It's just you know, we all are individuals, we have thought processes, and we you know we're here to have an open conversation about it, so I I didn't feel like it was, you know, I respect your feelings, but I didn't feel like that there was anything rude going on, and I can understand that they're sitting there and they're thinking, oh no, you know, am I gonna get funded?

Am I not gonna get funded?

You know, oh my percentage went down to 20, oh, I didn't get funded at all.

But that's just the nature of the process.

So that's how I'm looking at it.

If anyone wants to chime in to give her a more, you know, more of a response of how they felt it went.

I let me put a little clarity on something.

Um that's that's not my issue.

Because I'm gonna give an example.

Um cosby show, right?

What do we I just I'll the cosby show that would be?

It's all in the presentation.

I can fix you your favorite meal, and I can serve it to you on some fine china, and you'd be like, oh, thank you.

Or I can fix your favorite meal, go out to the backyard and get a garbage can lid and put your favorite meal on it.

The favorite meal is still there, it's all in the presentation, so it's not that we did anything wrong or we said anything wrong, it's all in the presentation, and what I'm saying to you is as a commissioner sitting here, I didn't even know what to expect.

It was all surprisingly to me.

So for me to be one of the ones that these individuals are looking at, and I'm like dear in the head, like, oh, what are we doing?

We're talking about people's work, and we're and we're talking about how this and how that it's all in the presentation, and I'm saying that we don't need to change the process.

I'm saying we need to change the tone and delivery, educate the audience.

What the what will happen is now that you've all spoke, now that we all reviewed, now that we have your um the the ratings.

Now what we're gonna do is we're gonna calculate, we're gonna place according to this calculation.

You may have thought that that's what was happening because this is something that um most of you are used to, but as a new kid on the block, it was very I just felt that we could have delivered their favorite meal a different way, okay.

All in the presentation, that's all I'm saying.

So what we could do, I I I do believe that we give an explanation of what's going to take place next, but we can word, you know, next, you know, we're going to have a discussion.

We're gonna come up and ask you questions.

I mean, we do say that if there is a question that a commissioner needs from a representative, we bring them up.

So I do believe that we do give an over an overview of what's going to take place.

Um I just feel like we've done that, but if you feel like that did not happen, we will make sure we give more of an explanation of what's going to take place, and you know this is gonna take, you know, there's gonna be some back and forth, where there's gonna be some discussions.

Please don't take the discussions personally, but we need to make sure that um we are funding in the best interest of the community or something like that.

Yeah, just keep them well on warm.

That's all I'm saying.

Okay, let them know what to expect.

Hey, you're gonna have this, you're gonna have your appetizer, you're gonna have your main meal, you've got to have your dessert.

We want them to know, we want them to come back.

We want them to feel loved and appreciated because filling out grants is a hard work is a hard job, and along with doing community service.

So that's all I wanted to say on that.

Okay, thank you for that.

Uh Commissioner Malik.

Um, yeah, I I think maybe to the point that you were making, uh Commissioner Stevens, maybe one thing we could do um is in our next meeting.

I know during the November funding meeting, we have to decide how many are we funding at like the hundred percent level, how many at the 80% level, and I know we don't have the number finalized of how much in grant melee we have to allocate, but I remember that um Brian, you mentioned that we will have that by August.

So I'm wondering once we have that number, maybe one of the agenda items is we can we'll be able we can sit down and say we'll be able to fund the top, I don't know, 20, for example, applications at 100%, the next 10 at 80 percent.

So we already have that predetermined, because I know like during the meeting, we were trying to figure out that allocation, so maybe that's if that's possible to have once we have the set number, we'll already be able to go into the meeting and say we're just gonna throw in the scores, whatever comes out at the top.

We already have decided the top 20, let's say, are getting 100%, and then we can go as follows so that we don't have to move the needle around during the meeting.

Yes, and uh the the award, the funding awards matrix is not part of the application, so that is something that can be updated before the November meeting.

It doesn't have to be ready by August 31st.

So if you all decide uh in the August meeting after the Treasury's uh presentation, oh actually we want to do it this way, or hey Brian, can we figure out how many we can fund at 100%, etc.

and do the breakdown, then I can bring it ready in November, and that way it's already predetermined, and they already know okay, top 20, top 15 applicants are gonna get, and this is how it's gonna go.

Thank you, Commissioner Stevens.

Okay, Commissioner Smith.

So the the issue with trying to get it filled out first is there's a whole lot of variables that take place at the time of the meeting.

So for example, somebody we may all score somebody super high, and this happened last year with two or three applicants that are some of the highest scorers we had.

They didn't show up, so they disappear, and that changes the calculation with everybody as part of us asking questions of the applicants.

We also um we may get some clarification, and I this happened last year.

I got clarification on something that I had rated, and it completely changed how I rated them.

I it moved them up several points in my rating.

Um, and then we have to combine all those ratings to get to the final rating number that fills in that third column.

And so I'm not sure how much good doing a preliminary awarding would do because so much can change during that meeting.

Okay, thank you.

I'll be really brief in the response.

Um, sorry, just to clarify, I wasn't suggesting to rank them, but in the August meeting.

Um I was just hoping we'll have a better sense of how much money we have so we know we'll fund X number of organizations with this much money.

So totally heard thank you.

Okay, I don't see any more commissioners in the queue.

So let's try taking a vote on this.

All right.

Okay, Brian, I have to call off everything.

Okay, all right.

Do I go ahead and make the motion?

I Brian, I have yeah, I I believe you can.

Um I'll defer to clerk's office, but I do believe all changes need to be under the same motion, correct?

Yes, you can make the motion and we can do one motion with the edits as discussed.

Okay.

Okay.

So I make a motion for the 2027.

Okay, I make a motion that the 2027 great grant cycle dates, forms, and process.

The first motion would be to change the funding priorities to include physical and mental well-being on the application to include the close of business for Friday, October 9th to remove the COVID 19 section under.

Do I have to specifically say um under required online application attachments to include the date funds available would be December 11th, 2026 to add the web at a website to add an alternate name and email address for questions four and five at a period at the end of the sentence?

And I believe I included everything for that process.

I believe we were adding the office hours as well.

So where it said covet 19.

Oh, okay.

Oh gosh, do I gotta say this all over again?

Take out COVID at and add office hours.

Okay, to remove COVID 19 to add the office hours.

Um do I take questions now before is this okay?

You need a second.

I see questions in the I mean speakers on the queue.

Do I just go ahead and keep going and then go back to the commission to the if that's the right if that's everything that you feel is captured?

You can you can have the motion be on the floor.

Okay, and you can you can move around to to folks as you okay, okay.

So that is the motion.

Do I have a second?

I'll second.

Okay.

Okay.

So motion made by Commissioner Ellis and second by Commissioner Smith.

Okay.

Um no, we got a vote.

Okay.

Um it's up to the chair.

You can take the vote now.

I can call, do a roll call now, or if you'd like to entertain the the speaker in the queue, you may Commissioner Brown.

Um quick question.

When the first point, you said you're gonna add the priorities to be what was it?

Um physical mental health.

To clarify, we're adding that to the second bullet point of um wraparound services, not like an additional correct.

Okay, we're amending out the uh basic okay.

That's okay.

That's all I need, thank you.

Okay.

Yes.

Okay, commissioners, if you would unmute your microphones, please.

Commissioner Colletto, yes, Commissioner Contreras, yes, Commissioner Malik, yes, Commissioner Brown, yes, Commissioner Stevens.

Yes, Commissioner Ubog, yes, Commissioner Seymour?

Yes, Commissioner Rule is absent.

Vice Chair Smith?

Yes, Chair Ellis, yes.

Great.

Uh the motion passes.

Okay.

So we are moving on.

And did you want to?

No, we're moving on.

Correct.

Okay.

One point I'd like to bring up is we are coming up on 7 30.

Um, so if those are who are not haven't done this before, we do need to have a vote to extend the meeting past two hours.

So if you'd like to do that now before the next discussion item, I recommend it.

Okay.

Otherwise, we do have to stop at 7 30.

I'll make a motion that we extend the meeting to complete our business.

I'll second it.

And it can be up to one hour, right?

Correct.

I'm not suggesting we take that hour.

Just to be clear.

Okay.

So let's go to the vote up.

Oh, sorry.

Okay.

So I've I have a motion by Commissioner Smith and a second by Commissioner Seymour.

All in favor say aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Opposed.

Any abstained?

Great.

The motion passes.

Okay, the last item on the agenda is updating the site questionnaire.

Okay.

The reason this has come up is because during the last uh funding cycle, there was some bottlenecks as far as delayed and timely receipts of funds and some concerns about you know contracts being executed.

Um in the time frame that we had established.

And um based on some of the feedback that we got from the grantees when we conducted our site visit, I thought it would be a good idea to capture some of the administrative information with the goal of strengthening the administrative process.

When we go out, we do get the program information, but um just trying to figure out where is the breakdown and how we can make it you know easier, you know, as far as administrative side.

So that's where that is uh came from for me.

So one of the questions that I would like to have is um chair, yes.

Um I'm in a crunch right now.

Okay.

If I leave with that mess up the quorum because I I do have to leave by step before right now.

We'll be good.

We'll be good.

Yes, and we'll see if we can get this done in the next 10 15 minutes max.

Let's do it.

Let's try to go through that.

I have to go.

Okay.

Thank you.

Thank you.

So one question that I wanted to have, and we can vote on is according to your contract, the first disbursements to be made five to ten business days after contract execution.

Did you receive your disbursement within the time frame?

If it's yes, fine, if not, what caused the delay.

So my concern was some organization said that we couldn't do our programming, and then the funding was extended.

Um there were some concerns about late payment.

So that is the question that I one of the questions that I want to propose be put out there on the new questionnaire.

Another question that I wanted was how would you describe your experience interacting with fund representatives regarding responsiveness, understanding of the program, challenges, and building working relationships.

And this is what everyone, this is even with commissioners.

So that's where I was coming from, and I just wanted to know if anyone else had any questions as well.

Umer Brown.

Oh, I like your second question.

The first question I feel like it would really wouldn't benefit us because like we we would know how fast it would get dispersed through our team over here.

But I don't think it would if we just if we just asked, like, hey, why was it late, or was it late or was on time, and then how that affects you, like we know it's not good, and then it's like we know we already know if it was late or not.

So I don't really think that particular question would benefit us.

It just might kind of irritate other people.

When you say we already know, are you saying that when we you don't know until you go out, though?

Well, yeah, you know, you won't you be able to tell us if it was dispersed what at what point it was dispersed?

No, Brian doesn't tell us.

No, or do you?

Well, I don't I don't necessarily uh give you the dates when they were dispersed, right?

But I I do provide an update on all contracts have a go now payments have been made, or you know, half of the contracts have gone out, half of the contract uh payments have been made, etc.

Uh payments usually take about 15 business days to be processed.

Um there is also uh the mail carrier, right?

That we can't control.

Um so we process the payments as soon as the contract is fully executed and we get notified that it's being filed.

Uh but then once the like, for example, I had a CBO last year whose mail whose check was mailed out in September and they didn't get it until February.

And it was post-dated September, so they know that we did actually mail it out.

Um so like those are things that we can't really control.

Um, but we do have a general um like I keep track of everything, right?

When payments were submitted for processing at that point, there's not really much I can do personally.

Okay, Commissioner Stevens.

Okay.

Um last year again, my first time doing a site visit.

Uh I was not prepared.

I um didn't know what questions to ask.

I did not know the boundaries of what we should state, what we shouldn't state.

Um, so my suggestion is to give us a toolbox, and I'll mean an actual toolbox of resources for commissioners.

Um, when you go to a site visit, this is what you should do.

When this is what you shouldn't do, this is what you should say, this is what you shouldn't say.

Um then in regards to the questions.

Um I'm like him.

I don't really want to dive into a hole that I really don't have a firm answer on.

I rather, you know, let them talk to me.

Like, how was it going when the funds came to you?

How did you disperse them?

Um I when I went to um next move, I walked around the facility, allowed them to just brag about what they do, why they do what they do, and as they were doing that, that's um it helped me to understand their their goals and missions and you know and their measurable outcomes.

And not only did I write a feedback on what they told me, I actually gave them an opportunity for them to with the same questions.

Um I had them to to give a response and then I took it, um, just to make sure that I didn't miss anything.

So I honest I also want to say that, you know, when we are having a site visit, send them out the questions so they know what to be prepared to ask.

Um, I mean to answer.

So that will also prepare their mindset on because maybe the director of the of the organization is out of town and she has Sally Sue to step in and help her.

She may not know what to do.

But if we send the questions out, and we say this is some of the things that we may be asking you, not that we have to stay to the questions, but this is some of the things that we may ask.

Just be a little bit, you know, to learn more about them, learn about what they're doing, why they're doing it, how they're doing, not to give them no advice because it's their bragging time, and to just let them be who they are.

So I think that we for Kim, not for everybody here.

I felt like I could have been better at serving them if I hadn't known the boundaries of things.

Not that it didn't go well, y'all.

I had a very good time with them, we had a great follow-up, but I all I always want to look at how does it look to the person that's receiving my information?

And what can I learn from them more about how to present the questions?

You know, so let them ask, you know, send it out to them, you know, let them answer the questions, and then when we go, then we have a good conversation.

So that's all I wanted to say.

Uh thank you.

Um Commissioner Smith.

I agree, Kim.

That's a great way to get them to think about what you're gonna ask before you visit.

I've done the exact same thing, and they always say, no one has ever done this for me before.

Thank you for doing that.

And so that's a great way to get the kind of input that you need.

I would like to see a way, I always ask, besides these three questions that are on here, I always ask a fourth question.

Like, can you describe for me any issues you encountered in the process of applying in dealing with the the staff who manage these grants?

Did you get answers to your questions?

Um talk about how the when the funds arrived, how that affected you, and just kind of leave it open to them rather than any a specific question, just say, can you address any comments you might have on our process, our communication, and our distribution of funds to you, anything that you might be able to add that will help us do better next year.

Thank you, Commissioner Smith.

I do like that question, and you know, I don't know if everyone the questionnaires to me is a guideline because it's three questions on there is a guideline of what questions to ask, and you have the freedom to ask additional questions if you like.

I understand, Commissioner Um Stevens, where you want to know exactly what to ask and what not to ask, and maybe that can be put on the agenda for August where we get more in depth due to time.

Um but I would like to see that question the way you put it to be like a standard.

Say it again just the same, you know, as a standard question.

I didn't write it down when you said it.

I didn't write it down either.

I made it up.

Okay.

I have it.

Uh it's can you describe any issues you had at any point during the grant process?

Application, selection, contract, disbursement of payments, etc.

Um I like that to be an added question, but if if everyone can remember to add to have that on their own, then if we can we can add it right now and they can send this out to us.

For us to use because some of us uh based on the conversations have already started site visits.

Right.

I usually wait till May, and because I knew we were talking about this, I haven't done any yet.

So haven't done any either.

I'm happy to add one or add questions, whatever people want.

And I just want to say, you know, for Brian, you know, the work that you do is important.

You have a lot of contracts that you're dealing with, but it was just that for the first time of being on the commission, I was hearing you know, things like we didn't get our funds and you know the contract, and I'm like, okay, what's going on here?

So this is just trying to find out what is going on.

So just so you know your work is appreciated, what you do, but when we go out and we hear I could not implement this program because I did not get the funding, then it makes me just question okay, what's what's going on?

So I just want to share that with you.

So Brian, can you read that question back again?

Yes, the question is can you describe any issues you had at any point during the grant process?

Application, selection process, the contracting, or the special disbursement of funds.

I think I used commute the word communication in there somewhere.

We can add that too.

Okay.

Okay.

Any more discussion on a questionnaire?

Oh no, but it commissioner Brown.

I do have one question.

Did you when the question that he phrased?

Did you make it so or did he say issues?

Can we like the more neutral word?

Like a experiences, yeah.

Yeah.

I agree.

That's all I got.

So what about something like do you have any feedback about the grant process?

Application, grantee selection, contracting, disbursement, communication, et cetera.

I just feel like issues was a bit negative.

And we have to put a motion for this.

Okay.

Are there any other questions you want to have?

I don't see any more questions in the queue.

So that's the other one that's going to be added.

I do want to note for the record that we don't have any members of the public with speaker cards.

Thank you.

Okay.

Um should I say the motion?

Are we saying shaking your hand?

Yes.

Oh, okay.

Um, so number six.

Okay, I make a motion to add the question.

Do you have any feedback about the grant process, application selection, and communication?

Yeah, contract, disbursement of payment.

Contract disbursement of payment.

Communication and communication.

Seconded.

Okay, and I have a second by uh Commissioner Malik.

Okay.

Please let me eat your microphones.

Uh Commissioner Coletto is absent.

Commissioner Contreras is absent.

Commissioner Malik?

Yes.

Commissioner Brown.

Yes.

Stevens?

Yes.

Commissioner Ubag, yes.

Commissioner Seymour?

Yes.

Commissioner Rule is absent.

Uh Vice Chair Smith?

Yes.

Chair Ellis.

Yes.

Thank you.

The motion passes.

Okay, so this concludes today's agenda.

Thank you, everyone, for your participation.

The meeting.

Quickly, we do actually have two more items on the agenda.

We have Commissioner Comments, ideas, and questions, and public comments matters not on the agenda.

Okay, is that on my agenda?

Okay.

All right.

Do we have any um ideas, questions?

Okay, are there any public comments?

I do not have any speaker slips for public comment.

Okay.

Matters not on the agenda.

Thank you.

All right, are we are we set here now?

Did I do the okay?

We're set.

Okay, well, that concludes today's agenda.

Thank you, everyone, for your participation.

The meeting is adjourned.