Absent
members
Teri Ford Cobean
Marc Davidson - vacation
Jack Wiles
Visitors
(signed in)
Diane Williams,
African American Museum of the Arts
Irene Johnson, African American Museum of the Arts
Mary Virginia, Museum of Arts and Sciences
Monso Tatum, Pioneer Settlement
I. Call To
Order, Introductory Remarks, Roll Call:
Chair Libby called the May 8, 2002, ECHO Advisory Board meeting to
order at 3:00 PM, welcomed the public and asked staff to take Roll Call
of members.
II. Approval of April 10,
2002 Minutes:
Chair Libby directed the meeting to the approval of the April 10,
2002 minutes. Mr. Schleicher made a motion to approve the minutes (
with no corrections) . Vice-Chair Williams seconded the motion. The
April 10, 2002 minutes were unanimously approved.
- Staff Report:
Update on May 2, 2002, County Council meeting - Chair Libby
thanked the board and staff for their support and participation at the
Council meeting and stated that the meeting went extremely well. The
Council passed unanimously the board’s recommendation for the six
(6) ECHO grants-in aid applicants/seven projects. Ms. Hodge concurred
with Chair Libby that the Council meeting went very well and stated
that the questions asked by Council were anticipated (there were no
surprises).
Response to three letters - Ms. Hodge stated that she had
responded to three (3) letters (cities and not-for-profit) regarding
the application process and had received eight (8) completed surveys
and would compile the information into a more concise report for the
board to use during its summer review of the grant application
process. Ms. Hodge stated that she would be doing an ECHO presentation
on June 18, 2002 at the Port Orange Leadership. Chair Libby stated
that County staff is scheduled to have its annual required meeting
with the County Council on June 6, 2002, to discuss what the County
Council wants the ECHO Advisory Board to look at as it is re-doing
policies and procedures regarding the grant-in-aid process and
strongly urged the board members to attend. Ms. Hodge clarified that
the meeting on June 6, 2002 , with the County Council was not a
workshop, but to get direction for the next grant cycle.
IV. Old Business:
Application topics of concern –
Chair Libby stated that a topic of concern was the non-state
foreign corporation status and whether or not the ECHO program
intended to have non-state/not-for-profits applying to the Volusia
County program and asked Mr. Gummey for the legal position of the
request. Mr. Gummey stated, "There were arguments for and against
including foreign corporations." His response to the board was to
question, " If a non-state foreign corporation’s headquarters
was based elsewhere and the assets were owned by that corporation, who
would make the decisions for the organization? Would it be local folks
or would it be folks in some distant location that would have to
consider the entire organization and what is best for the entire
organization rather than what is best for the people of Volusia
County?" Chair Libby asked Mr. Gummey, "If it would be
possible for a non-state foreign corporation, with a local presence,
to partner with a local agency, local 501 ( c ) (3) with state
status?" Mr. Gummey replied "Indeed, but it would take some
time to do." The general consensus of the board was not to waive
the exclusion of non-state foreign corporations. Member Schleicher
asked for a list of an organization’s board membership to be
included in the grant application.
Chair Libby asked the audience if anyone had anything to add to the
non-state foreign corporation status discussion. There was no public
participation.
Mr. Schleicher – Wanted to note that the
process worked really well and wanted to avoid making too many changes
to the application. Some tweaking would be okay, but he did not
recommend any major overhauls.
Ms. Williams – Wanted to know whether or not
the board should address the possibility of indicating that if
information was missing, in certain sections, that there would be a
penalty.
After much decision, Ms. Hodge was asked by the
board to do an application checklist, (similar to the Technical Review
checklist) for the board’s review. The board agreed that an
application checklist needed to be part of the ECHO grants-in- aid
application. Mr. Matousek requested a more structured (fill in the
blank) standardized application form. There was a general consensus
from the board to make the changes to the ECHO grants-in-aid
application form (the questions on the application would be
reformatted to give the space that is required to fill in the
response) and to have it agree with the checklist.
Chair Libby asked the audience if anyone had
anything to add to the requested format changes for the application.
Monso Tatum, Pioneer Settlement, agreed with the recommended changes
and thought it would make the grant application less confusing.
The board instructed staff to put an application
template on ECHO’s web site, but Chair Libby stated that this would
not eliminate the need for a hard copy of the application.
Ms. Hagstrom – Reimbursable policy -
concerned when an organization has to spend a portion of its money
first before it is entitled to receive grant funds/wants to model the
funding process after the State’s model. Chair Libby asked Mr.
Gummey for his legal opinion regarding the reimbursable options. Mr.
Gummey stated that the reimbursements provide the best protection to
ensure that the funds are utilized for the purpose that they were
granted . It shows that the expenditures have been properly funded.
The issue of not using the reimbursable policy has been before the
County Council regarding the Athens Theater, and was rejected. Mr.
Gummey asked the board to consider this question, "What if, and
remember, when things are going alright it doesn’t matter what the
documents say, a small organization doesn’t have any cash and pays
the electric bill with the grant funds that they have been given, what
are you going to do?"
Chair Libby asked the board to be thinking about
what portion of the cash match that it thought should be required up
front from the applicant for a discussion topic later on in the
meeting.
Chair Libby asked the audience for input. Diane
Williams, African American Museum of the Arts, questioned why a
voucher couldn’t be submitted up front for a reimbursement and Mr.
Gummey stated that this is what the Athens Theater proposed to the
County Council and it was rejected for two reasons: (1) Entanglement
with contractors – the contractors would be looking to the County to
make the payments, and (2) Administrative responsibilities – the
County would then be responsible for administering the contracts.
V. New Business:
Election of Officers as dictated by the By Laws and
Resolutions - 2001-70 & 2000-156 (time certain 4:00 PM) - Chair
Libby asked for nominations for the Chair. Mr. Schleicher made the
motion to nominate Chair Libby for a second term. Mr. Matousek
seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. Chair Libby asked
for nominations for the Vice-Chair. Mr. Schleicher made the motion to
nominate Ms. Williams for a second term as Vice-Chair. Ms. Hargreaves
seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously.
Goal setting session - Ms. Hodge stated that
copies of the 2001/2002 Goals were part of the agenda package and
recommended that the board review and tweak the language for
2002/2003. Chair Libby stated that he and Ms. Hodge would meet and
present the board with a working draft of 2002/2003 Goals that would
be finalized after the June 6, 2002 County Council meeting.
Ms. Hodge recommended that the Request For Intent
to Apply (RFIA) be dropped from the 2002/2003 Goals. Chair Libby
asked for a motion to remove the RFIA from the 2002/2003 Goals. Mr.
Schleicher made the motion and Ms. Hargreaves seconded. The motion
passed unanimously.
Chair Libby asked Ms. Hodge to list the goals that
should be done annually to establish a foundation for the goal setting
session and the board would add to it. Chair Libby asked the board to
be thinking of a day (after June 6, 2002) for a goal setting session.
Ms. Hodge asked for clarification for what the board’s desires were.
Ms. Hagstrom wanted to move the timeline up for awarding grants. Chair
Libby asked Ms. Hodge to do a proposed timeline for 2002/2003 for the
application process. Chair Libby asked Ms. Hodge to look at the
Federal and State cycle of grants to ensure that the ECHO
Grants-In-Aid timeline for 2002/2003 would not be detrimental to the
process.
Chair Libby moved the board back to the issue
of application topics of concern –
Ms. Hargreaves – Wanted to know what
peripherals would be funded (the dos & don’ts) with ECHO grant
funds – After much discussion, Chair Libby asked Ms. Hodge and Ms.
Hargreaves to work on a list of generic contractor’s language to
address this concern. Ms. Hodge stated that she feared that the
language would be too generic and would not be of assistance to her.
Chair Libby asked the audience for its input.
Marilyn Breeze, Pioneer Settlement, expressed concern regarding the
definition of restoration. Chair Libby stated that each category of
E,C,H, and O was different and that the board would evaluate the
differences in the definitions as it relates to the category where
applicable.
Mr. Matousek – Expressed the need for a
standardized application form, cash match issues (deferred this issue
to Chair Libby), and the minimum and maximum amounts for eligible
grants (to be discussed at workshop).
Chair Libby - Cash Match – If the
reimbursable policy is maintained, the applicant must have new cash
for 25% of the project, (money in the bank/up front money). He stated
that the cash match would bring more equity (real money/greenback
cash) into the ECHO program. After much discussion, the board’s
general consensus was that the Cash Match needed to be 25% of the
project ( new cash/ "greenbacks" in the bank).
Mr. Gummey expressed concern on the issue of debt.
After much discussion, Chair Libby stated that the general consensus
of the board was to request (on the application form) that the
applicant must identify all debt (including mortgages). He stated that
the debt amount would be factored out of any equity that would be used
as match in the grant application. He also requested that
"partnerships" needed to provide contracts (signed) to the
board showing the partnership(s).
Ms. Hodge expressed concern on behalf of Doug
Gross, Accounting Director, regarding the use of old audits. Mr. Gross
would prefer not to allow audits older than one (1) year and that
anything older should not be entertained for possible grant awards.
Chair Libby stated, "The audit rule is that the last completed
audit is based on fiscal/calendar year." Chair Libby asked Ms.
Hodge to get with Mr. Gross to come up with new language that would
take into consideration a one (1) year gap and would preclude an
organization from giving a five (5) or six (6) year old audit. The new
language needs to define "current audit."
Chair Libby asked if anyone in the audience
wanted to speak on the new cash rule on cash match.
Monso Tatum, Pioneer Settlement, stated that he was confused on the
term "new cash," and wanted to know the difference between a
mortgage and the payment of a lease. Chair Libby stated that a lease
payment was not looked upon as a debt of the organization within a
single year, but was recognized as an operational expense, and a
mortgage was a serious debt, paid off (principal + interest). Chair
Libby stated that the definitions for new cash and previously
spent cash would be added to the definition section of the
application.
VI. Public Participation:
No additional public participation.
VII. Meeting Dates:
June 12, 2002 – Next meeting date
May 22, 2002 - Cancelled
VIII. Adjournment: approximately 5:15 p.m.
Chair Libby asked if there was anything else from members of the
Committee. There was none. The Chair asked for a motion to adjourn.
Mr. Matousek motioned for adjournment. (No one seconded the motion.)
The motion was approved unanimously.
back to
home page
Public information
produced by Volusia County Government
