Grant application information

ECHO Advisory Committee

MINUTES
Volusia ECHO Advisory Board Meeting
September 10, 2003
County Council Chambers
DeLand, FL

Absent members
Teri Ford Cobean
Jack Wiles

I. Call To Order, Introductory Remarks, Roll Call:

Chair Matousek called the September 10, 2003, ECHO Advisory Committee meeting to order at 3:00 PM, welcomed the advisory committee members and the public and asked staff to take Roll Call of members. Mr. Matousek stated we had a quorum with 7 members present.

II. Approval of July 9, 2003, Minutes:

Chair Matousek stated that the July 9, 2003 minutes would be approved at a later date.

III. Staff Report:

Staff Report - Mrs. Hodge reported on the August 20 and 23, 2003 Mandatory Workshops. The total number of attendance for both workshops was 36. Twelve organizations for Not For Profit were represented; eleven organizations for the Municipalities were represented; and the County of Volusia was represented by the Leisure Services Department. Mrs. Hodge stated that both workshops moved smoothly. She also said that some organizations are applying for more than one project and that she thought everyone liked the new format. The 2002-2003 Projects Quarterly report was presented and discussed. (See Attachment) Mrs. Hodge reported that the African American Museum opening would be October 4, 2003. Chair Matousek has accepted an invitation to speak at the presentation. Chair Matousek recognized Mrs. Hodge for an excellent report and requested that the committee be given a quarterly update either by email or regular mail.

IV. Old Business:

Chair Matousek opened with the discussion of the County Council meeting, July 24, 2003. Mr. Matousek stated that he and Mrs. Hodge participated in the discussion on a couple of items. The County Council came up with their criteria for the exceptional project status ending up with $600,000 up to four years. Mr. Matousek stated it was a 4-way vote and we now have official policy from County Council on the exceptional project status. There was discussion from Mr. Libby about more detailed information on the exceptional project status through the news releases. Mr. Matousek agreed that we need to take every opportunity to get the information out via the media. Mrs. Hodge will copy any future news releases to the committee.

Mrs. Hargreaves asked about correct language concerning Tab 2 Scope of Work indicating applicant’s requesting exceptional project status. She asked if this was an old copy. Mrs. Hodge later in the meeting cleared any questions and all agreed it was the current copy and the correct language.

Mr. Matousek opened discussion on the second item of the Council meeting on change in scope from the City of Daytona Beach pier project. He reminded the committee that they had voted unanimously to not accept that change. He then reported that the County Council voted unanimously to accept it. Mr. Matousek stated that as a committee we clearly operate under a different set of rules. He added in looking at the application, the “Change in Project Scope or Venue” is somewhat vague. Mr. Matousek opened up discussion of whether we need to make changes or not.

Mr. Libby asked if we have had any opportunity to move forward in negotiations with Volusia-Forever on whether or not they will look favorably on a pocket park purchase program under the Forever program. There was some discussion on this and Mr. Matousek asked if Mr. Gummey, Mrs. Hodge and himself could meet with the Forever group. It was decided to schedule a meeting.

V. New Business

Chair Matousek opened the discussion on the “Change in Scope or Venue,” stating that we do have some different criteria than does the County Council—given the reason for disconnect at the July 24 meeting. All those present agreed that the criteria/language was fine and had no problem with the vote of the County Council.

Chair Matousek opened the discussion of the grading policy. It was a consensus to leave the grading score at 70. Board members would have to make up their own minds as to whether an application should be scored down and how much when something was missing from the application.

January 2004 Meeting Date

January 7, 2004 – Grant Review Panel. DATE CHANGED TO JANUARY 14.


VI. Public Participation

Moira Lynn Mefein, Aisling, Inc. working with Bethune-Cookman College and the new Performing Arts Center. Miss Mefein stated that the whole issue of compliance/non-compliance and of scoring seems to be creating a lot of unnecessary angst. As she interpreted it, meeting with Barbara, a score of 70 indicated eligibility for recommendation, and nothing more. Mr. Matousek agreed that Ms. Mefein was correct with that statement. Ms. Mefein went on to say that under those circumstances in any other grant organization that would not imply that they were eligible for funding at all. All it would imply is that they were eligible for consideration of funding. She felt that thinking of it in that respect and perhaps eventually rewriting the semantics that way might be useful. Ms. Mefein continued, commenting briefly on compliance/non-compliance and sections missing. She stated that she came from an environment where 80% of grants washed out because of non-compliance. On a personal level, she was delighted with the looseness on this, but on a professional level, she was a little concerned that it makes a very uneven playing ground. She stated that she hoped over the course of time this would be considered.

Kelly Ferguson, Lively Arts Center. Ms. Ferguson declared that she had a clarification issue. She stated that the Center applied last year for $3 million dollars. With the exceptional project changing this year to $2.4 million, she felt the fluctuation of the cap in funding could create some limitations for projects that are working on construction from year to year and trying to hit the ground running to get their projects going. This year the Lively Arts Center is applying for $1.9 million, deducting what they have already been awarded. She wanted to know if there was ever any future consideration given to the issue of the fact that the funding cap fluctuates with the exceptional grant. Mr. Matousek stated that he thought that the exceptional issue would probably come up every year. He added if we keep having increases in property taxes (10-20 percent) each year, we would have more money.

Greg Wood, City of Holly Hill. Commented on the scoring process in relation to the committee’s forbearance with some of the minor issues as far as completeness. He said he was looking at the range of people that we have applying for this grant. He stated that he helped design the automated CDBG Grant Program, and unless the Committee wanted to go to that level of automation, we could expect to have some of those inconsistencies. Mr. Matousek agreed that the point was well taken.

VII. Adjournment

Meeting was adjourned at 4:13 p.m. 

Attachment to Minutes

ECHO Grants In Aid 2002 and 2003 Projects Quarterly Report/2002 Grant Recipient Report
September 10, 2003
You must have an Acrobat Reader to view quartery report.
If you do not have one, you may download one for free.