|
| | | | This is also a virtual meeting conducted via GoToMeeting. Should you wish to join this meeting from your phone, tablet, or computer you may go to https://meet.goto.com/655192885. You can also dial in using your phone United States: +1 (408) 650-3123 and Access Code: 655-192-885. | | | |
|
Not available
|
|
| | 1. | | Call to order.
Minutes note: The meeting was called to order at 2 p.m. | | | |
|
Not available
|
|
| | | | Also present:
Minutes note: Andrea Fowler, Budget Office ARPA Director
Tea Norfolk, LRB Fiscal Planning Specialist
Amanda Cervantes, Budget Office
Pres. Jose Perez, Common Council | | | |
|
Not available
|
|
| | 3. | | Review and approval of the previous meeting minutes from March 20, 2023.
Minutes note: The meeting minutes from March 20, 2023 were approved without objection. | | | |
|
Not available
|
|
| | 4. | | Review, discussion, approval, and/or motion(s) on the task force ARPA allocation review and recommendations process relative to application methodology, materials, collection, evaluation, timeline, and/or other aspects as recommended by the Proposal Collection, Review Funding and Criteria Work Group.
Minutes note: Ms. Fowler presented proposed application instruction materials, submission and review processes, schedule of steps, and evaluation criteria to the task force for its review. These aspects were established and reviewed by the Proposal Collection, Review Funding and Criteria Work Group at its last meeting. There were two applications, one for the community and one for departments to make requests. Both application processes would be very similar but differ slightly.
The community application packet starts with an introduction and purpose section to describe the amount of City ARPA funds remaining, the financial situation of the City, and eligible activities. Eligible activities must directly benefit (target) City of Milwaukee residents only and provide services through an equitable lens with regard to race, gender, income, and other appropriate considerations.
The next section on timing and process describes the advertising for and reviewing of applications, ultimately, sending that review to the task force with a virtual informational session (with 2 weeks notice) to inform and answer questions from interested organizations on application submittal and process, a deadline to register for updates on the application review process, an application deadline of month late to allow organizations to apply, technical review of applications by a team of City employees (preferably not including task force members), that a review item be demonstration that the project will be completed (and all associated bills will be fully paid) by December 31, 2026, requirement for applicants to acquire Common Council sponsorship for their applications after technical review, sponsored projects presented and reviewed by the task force with 2 weeks notice, the task force making recommendations, the City Comptroller's Office completing due diligence on selected projects, presentation of task force recommendations to the Finance and Personnel Committee, submission of Finance and Personnel Committee recommendations to the Common Council and Mayor's Office for approval respectively, and signing of City grant agreement for successful applicants.
Application would be available to complete online with a link provided. The application packet concludes with an extension list of questions to solicit consistent applications and to allow organizations to prepare and organize their information in advance being applying. Question aspects include funding information, organization information, project overview, project impact, project monitoring, financial management and controls, budget detail, expenditure categories, and impacted/disporportionately impacted groups.
Chair Coggs said that there should be opportunity for applicants to make corrections to their applications during the technical review process.
Member Sawa said that she would prefer Comptroller review of applications to occur after task force recommendations and that there should be alternate recommendations/selection of applications should any selected application was found to be high risk or not meeting financial requirements.
Ms. Fowler concurred with adding an application correction opportunity and deadline (would extend the timeline), for the task force to have alternative applications to replace those that do not meeting Comptroller review, said that she incorporated questions from other sources including the State ARPA application, that questions were designed to be easy to respond to.
Ms. Fowler presented on the departmental application. It was similar to the community application. Eligibility would require services be provided through an equitable lens but were differ in requiring a project to make a direct, positive impact on City residents and/or City services through new programming or initiatives. Ongoing programming or initiatives would not be considered. The review schedule was similar to be in sync with the community application review schedule but would not require Comptroller review.
Ms. Fowler said that the evaluation/scoring criteria for all ARPA project requests would include criteria required by legislation. The criteria/scoring items consisted of impact to qualified census tract, estimated project timeline, equity impact, performance measures, project impact, likelihood of success, and balancing community needs with City budgetary needs.
Members commended the work group and Ms. Fowler for developing the application materials and schedule process.
Members discussed to hold off on determining an exact timeline schedule (with dates) for all steps of the process to take place due to the uncertainty and ongoing negotiations with the State shared revenue deliberations. The timeline should be set after negotiations have concluded, in which the City and task force would know better the State's impact on the City and the City's future financial situation going forward.
Chair Coggs said that it was appropriate to determine only the application process and evaluation today and that the task force may have to pivot after negotiations with the State have concluded (sometime in June).
Pres. Perez concurred.
Member Zamarripa moved approval, seconded by member Chambers, Jr., of the task force proposed ARPA allocation review and recommendations process, as discussed, relative to application methodology, materials, collection, review, and evaluation. There was no objection from those members present.
| | | |
|
Not available
|
|
| | 5. | | Update on the City's budget and processes.
Minutes note: Ms. Cervantes, on behalf of member Kovac, said that departmental budget requests would be due May 9th and negotiations with the State were ongoing.
Member Zamarripa said that it was important for the task force to know about departments' proposed budget requests at the next meeting and that those requests may impact the task force's decision making. | | | |
|
Not available
|
|
| | 6. | | Next steps.
Minutes note: A. Items for future agenda.
Items to include task force ARPA application process relative to timeline schedule, task force deadline extension, City departmental budget requests, and reallocation of ARPA funds.
B. Set next meeting date(s) and time(s).
Members proposed meeting on Thursday, May 25, 2023 at 1:30 p.m. (can be cancelled if found unnecessary) or in June subsequently. Future meetings would be contingent upon the Wisconsin GOP shared revenue plan and deliberations impacting the City of Milwaukee. | | | |
|
Not available
|
|
| | 7. | | Adjournment.
Minutes note: Meeting adjourned at 2:30 p.m.
Chris Lee, Staff Assistant
Council Records Section
City Clerk's Office | | | |
|
Not available
|
|
| | | | Meeting materials of the task force can be found within the following file: | | | |
|
Not available
|
|
220789
| 0 | | Communication | Communication relating to the activities of the American Rescue Plan Act Funding Allocation Task Force. | | | |
Action details
|
Not available
|