Call To Order, Introductory Remarks, Roll
Call:
Chair Libby called the August 28, 2002, ECHO
Advisory Board meeting to order at 3:10 PM, welcomed the public and asked staff to take
Roll Call of members.
II.
Approval of August 14, 2002,
Minutes:
Chair Libby directed the meeting to the approval
of the August 14, 2002, minutes and asked if there were any additions or corrections.
There were none. Mr. Schleicher made a Motion to approve the minutes.
Ms. Hagstrom seconded the Motion. The August 14, 2002, minutes were
unanimously approved.
III.
Staff Report:
- County Council Agenda September 5, 2002:
Ms. Hodge stated that at their August 15, 2002, meeting the County Council requested that
staff generate an agenda item for September 5, 2002, on Exceptional and Unique Small
projects. Ms. Hodge stated that all contacts on the ECHO e-mail list would be sent
notification of this agenda item.
- ECHO Meeting of August 28, 2002:
the County Council has not changed any directives at this time, it is recommended that the
ECHO Board focus on approval of the existing application. The proposed application will go
before County Council September 19, 2002. All contacts on the ECHO e-mail list will
receive notification that the September 18, 2002, ECHO Workshop had been cancelled.
Notification of this change will be sent to local news media and placed on the ECHO web
page.
- 2002 ECHO Projects
Update:
Volusia County, Lake Monroe Park – The FDEP
permit has not been received. The bid for water and sewer will go out in September 2002
with remaining construction to follow. Piatek & Assoc., DeLand, is contracted to
perform an archeological survey to evaluate resources. Designer is Bellomo of Edgewater.
Volusia County, Rendon Park – The FDEP permit
has not been received and the County may request a permit without lighting so construction
can begin. Lighting (turtle issue) would be finalized later. Contractor is Antinori
Construction of New Smyrna Beach and is expected on site in 2-3 weeks.
Museum of Arts and Sciences, Tuscawilla Learning
Center - A contractor is being selected and construction is expected to begin
in October.
Town Of Ponce Inlet, Lighthouse Lens restoration -
The Restrictive Covenant has been received and the County has issued a Notice To
Proceed. The project manager has indicated there will be a 2-month setback in the original
timeline due to the complex design of the lens. Consultants will conduct restoration
training for volunteers in October. The project will be completed within the grant period.
The African American Museum of Art, Amphitheater -
Official minutes of a meeting stating they will provide the additional needed
dollars ($70,933.) to construct the project as defined in their application have been
received. They have cleared the property and are finalizing the construction plans. A
contract will be signed September 5, 2002, with Malmborg Construction Co., DeLand.
The MainStreet DeLand Association, Athens Theatre
- The grantee contacted the County and indicated the Official Minutes of their
meeting will be available soon. These minutes must state how additional project costs will
be paid by the grantee. A Notice To Proceed has not been issued for this project.
Atlantic Center for the Arts, Visitor Center - The
architectural drawings have been fine-tuned and they will finalize the construction
schedule by the end of this week (August 30, 2002). The contractor is Epoch Properties,
Winter Park.
IV. Old
Business:
Application 2003 – Review All Pages –
Chair Libby directed the board to the review of the 2003 grant application. He
instructed the board to do a page by page review at the request of Ms. Hodge. He
stated that the goal was to complete the grant application review so it could be forwarded
to the County Council for their approval. Chair Libby asked that staff compile a
single page of substitutive changes made to the 2003-draft application so the County
Council would have a better means to identify major changes that the board had made.
Page 4, #6 - Ms. Hodge stated that at last
years’ mandatory grant application workshops a lot of potential applicants
arrived late or left early and asked the board for time attendance requirements for
the workshop. Chair Libby stated that they must arrive in time for and stay through
the entire mandatory workshop. Ms. Williams stressed that clarification for time
requirements needed to be noted. Mr. Schleicher stated that the announcements for
the mandatory public workshops state that the time frames are from 8:00 AM – 12:00
PM. He stated that the potential applicant attendees need to know that the mandatory
workshops demand that the attendees stay until the session ends and that it is very
possible that the workshop may run later than 12:00 PM and attendees are required to stay.
Chair Libby requested that staff incorporate this verbiage into the GY 2003 grant
application.
Page 4, #s 2, 3 – Mr. Davidson asked staff
to clarify the differences between numbers 2 and 3. He expressed concern that
applicants asking for a grant “to purchase” may get confused and not pursue
applying if a distinction isn’t made between capital construction and purchase of
property. He stated that if an applicant is proposing to purchase property that a letter
of commitment be supplied. Chair Libby requested staff to make Mr. Davidson’s
recommended distinction on all applicable items.
Page 5 & 6 – Application Timetable –
Ms. Hodge stated that the mandatory workshop date of September 18, 2002, would be
edited out of the GY 2003 Grant Application and replaced with a new workshop date.
Page 6 – Mr. Schleicher requested that
Room 200 be added to the address. Chair Libby requested that the City of DeLand also
be added to the address. The board agreed.
Page 7 – #2. Grant Review Panel - Ms.
Williams requested the word “eligible” be added after proposed.
Page 13 – Multiphase Scoring: Mr.
Davidson requested that line 10 reflect the word “year” proceed current
(current year application).
Ms. Hagstrom stated that line 12 should be
year 2004, not 2003.
Page 14 – Funding Amounts/Caps and
Restrictions – Grant Funding Amounts – Mr. Davidson – remove the word
“minimum” after grant.
Page 14 – Note: - Ms. Williams
questioned why the word “due” was used. Chair Libby requested that “due
to” be changed to “from.”
Page 15 – Number 10 – Ms. Hagstrom
questioned the wording of number 10. Mr. Davidson requested that “of
projects” be deleted.
Page 15 – Number 12 – Ms. Hagstrom
recommended removing the words “are ineligible.” Chair Libby agreed.
Page 15 – May Be Used As Match But Not For
ECHO Funding, number 4 – after much discussion, Chair Libby requested that number 4
read as follows: Level one only of environmental assessments.
Page 16 – First Bullet – Mr. Davidson
recommended putting a period after “na” and beginning a new sentence with
the word “Explain.” Ms. Hagstrom recommended adding the word “in”
after not in the last line of the paragraph.
Page 16 – Third Bullet – After
much discussion, Chair Libby called for a Motion to inform the applicants not to include
any letters of support or cover letters in the grant application. Ms. Williams made
the Motion. Ms Hargreaves seconded the Motion. The Motion passed with a 5-1 vote.
(Mr. Davidson voted ‘no.”)
After much discussion the board agreed to have
bullet three read as follows: Do not include any letters of support or cover letter
in the application (Tabs 1-9). Inappropriate documents found within Tabs 1-9 will be
removed by county staff and not reinserted or provided to the ECHO Review Panel for
consideration.
Page 16 – First Bullet – Ms. Williams
requested that this bullet be in “bold.” The board agreed (no vote taken).
Page 17 – 1.2 Project Team – Note:
Some projects may not require an architect/engineer or contractor due to the nature
of the project and may be exempted. Ms. Hodge informed the board that Mr. Gummey
would be making the determinations to whether or not a project required an architect,
engineer or contractor.
Page 18 – 1.3 Management Prospectus &
Policy Statement – Ms. Hagstrom recommended striking the word “state” from
number (2) The board agreed – number two reads as follows – Provide
information on the applicant’s management policy as it relates to this project.
Page 19 – 2.2 Multiphase Projects Only –
item three (3) Mr. Davidson recommended that the words “and & when” be
added. Number (3) reads as follows - Describe how and when the public will have use
of the facility through each phase. The board agreed. No vote was taken.
Page 20 – Ms. Hodge asked the board for
direction on whether or not to limit the number of categories contingency fees could be
referred to. Chair Libby stated that the categories had to stay pure (within the
categories) when including the contingency fees and could not be used in other
budget categories. He stated that general requirements in the budget needed to
be segregated and identifiable and could not be used in multiple categories.
Page 20 – Site Construction (Div. 2) Match
Only – Ms. Hagstrom recommended adding the word “for” at the beginning of
line 5. Chair Libby agreed.
Page 20 – Architectural Services – Match
and/or ECHO – Mr. Davidson recommended striking the word “all.”
Page 22 – 3.1 Project Budget Detail, first
paragraph, line 7 – Ms. Hodge brought to the board’s attention the codes that
the applicant must enter after each item marked in the budget phase(s). The codes
are: UC (Unencumbered Cash On Hand), PSC (Previously Spent Cash), IP (Irrevocable
Pledges), PPI (Previously Provided In-kind Service), and
FI (Future In-kind Service). Ms. Hargreaves
recommended that the codes be in bold. The board agreed.
Page 26 – Irrevocable Pledges (as Balance of
Match), line 4 – After much discussion, Mr. Davidson recommended adding
“above $10,000.” Sentence reads: Documentation of pledges, by
individuals, above $10,000 shall be a notarized letter.
Page 27 – Limitations of Matching Funds,
bullet 8, - After much discussion, Chair Libby recommended adding “successful”
before the word application. Chair Libby asked Ms. Hodge to better clarify the
sentence.
Page 31 – Number 3, b, - Mr. Davidson
requested that Mr. Gummey revisit and simplify (3b) if possible.
Page 32 – Tab 8, number one – Ms. Hodge
recommended changing number 1 to read as: All applicants must submit 8 ½ “ x
11” reductions of current design development drawings and/or excavation plans
for the facility. The board agreed. No vote was taken.
Page 32 – Tab 9 – The board agreed to
add “Do not include cover letters or letters of recommendation.”
V.
New Business:
There was none.
VI. Public
Participation:
Chair Libby opened the floor up for public
participation.
Mary Virginia, Museum of Arts & Sciences
stated that the wording on pages 12 and 18 was confusing and needed clarification on when
public access was required. Chair Libby requested that the words “if applicable”
be inserted in Tab 2, 2.1 Single-Phase and Multiphase Projects, number 6. Ms.
Virginia asked for the board to identify what was meant by sustained fiscal stability (Tab
4, 4.3 Fiscal Stability, page 28). After much discussion, the board agreed to add
the verbiage, “a minimum of 2 years” at the end of number 1.
Chair Libby asked if there were any more comments
from the board or public. There were none.
Chair Libby asked for a Motion to adopt the 2003
Draft ECHO Grant Application as amended and for staff to forward to the County Council for
their approval on September 19, 2002. Ms. Hagstrom made the Motion. Ms.
Hargreaves seconded the Motion. There was no further discussion on the 2003 draft
ECHO grant application. The Motion passed unanimously.
VII.
Meeting Dates:
September 11, 2002
September 25, 2002
VIII.
Adjournment:
4:45 PM
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. Davidson Motioned for Adjournment. There was no second. The
Motion passed unanimously.
