Today is wednesday, october 30. This is the
social services ad hoc committee.
we are a couple minutes late. We just had a
fire alarm, luckily a false fire alarm.
we have our fantastic fire chief here joining us.
so
we are ready to start the
meeting. To be have public comments?
>> no public comments. >> great. So we will be
discussing the community assistance grant funding
current and future needs and
recommend changes. Me we have a report,
please?
>> yes, tbyte. I will kick
it
off briefly. We have been working over the last
year or so
and looking at our community assistance
grant
fund program, as
well as social services
in general. Things have really changed
over the past few years, particularly
related to social services. The council
has
committed millions of dollars to a
number of social services
program such as housing, homeless programs
for those that are disadvantaged,
and as a result we
have been working on reconfiguring our community assistance
grant fund program.
we made changes for this current fy
and
we are here today to talk about further
possible changes to make in light
of the programs and resources that
the council has set
aside in other parts of our budget.
with that I will hand it over to
>> no. For. >> thank you.
good afternoon
. We were in front of you in june
of this year. We were seeking
authority to approve the 2024-2025
cagf
slate of recommended grants. At
that time we talked about making
some changes for this year's
process. Yourself and full council
approved the changes in late
june. To just review where that took us,
and
you can also follow along with attachments a or b
in your packet.
so, at the start of
this year we were recommending bifurcating the
cagf
process into two different
categories, one being the traditional
grant
and the other being a contracted
critical service provider set up.
the chart here
lists all of the 2024-25
cagf grants.
there were 23 organizations
funded in the amount of 1.1 million. We also recommended
converting five of the grantees into a critical
service provider agreement in which
we would contract with them for the
same
amount as the previous cagf award,
but it would be for as needed
based on services rendered. They would
invoice after the service was rendered,
only for what they actually produced
or
performed. The amount is 1.292 million.
if we look at the bottom chart
here, the total combined traditional
cagf
coupled with the
critical service agreements for these five organizations
brings us to a total of
$2,406,144
for the current fiscal year.
recognizing as the city manager said
that there are
changes in the community currently and will
king
at the future and participating
additional changes, we would like
to really make this
program more reflective of the
needs of the community.
is the city manager mentioned we have invested
a great deal of funding, the council has approved
over $3 million
in homeless specific
funds
directly. It can be broken down through
looking at the step
up on second agreement,
there is a software system, the apricot
system,
we have the
p.a.t.h. Shelter beds at 138,000,
providing five beds
every day of the year. We also have
partners such as the all saints episcopal
church, they assist with the home
again program.
there is safe parking l.a.,
and our new partner healthcare in action.
I do want to note that in terms
of services to the un-housed,
and as
a result of looking at all of the
different service providers, we have
to find a more cost-effective way of
dividing the same level of service
to how it relates to the unhoused
hotline,
as well as the ability to transport
a
person to a motel in the middle of
the night, should they request such
assistance. Working with the
police departments current
providers for supplemental services, that company covers
six, they
have agreed to take on this
service at no additional cost. Effective
this past monday, the 28th, we were there
and able to end our
relationship with nass tech
, they were providing the service
in a customized package,
in an amount that the city should
be able
to realize in future savings is $930,000.
and by eliminating that
$930,000, that does reduce the total
annual spending on
unhoused services, to 2.1 million.
now, also looking forward to the future,
there were other needs that
come up that both the community service
department and human services division have
identified. Some have been providing
behavioral
services to some of the youth
in the populations that
we serve in our school programs. Such as
the afterschool adventure camp.
that is just one example of how
some of these funds could be repurposed.
or they could be
used for future needs. It is also our understanding
that we are looking at
various departments looking for additional
ways that the
city can reduce expenses. And one proposal that
we have is additional changes to
the grant process. Actually
placing the grant
process on hiatus for the 2025-26
year, which is the fiscal
year that would start
july, 2025. And we are looking for the specific 12
, technically 13, I will actually
not momentarily, putting these
organizations on hiatus.
doing that would provide
savings of approximately $370,000.
the last item that you see on
the bottom of the chart is the westside
food bank. I indicated that there
is
recommended savings of $200,000.
their current agreement is for $250,000.
we are recommending
is
still awarding $50,000 contract,
that would help provide,
as well as just regional food
pantry support, direct deliveries
to our housing program for the formally
unhoused.
we set that up at the beginning of
this year and they
are receiving weekly deliveries.
um, what we
are also recommending is
to create a new category called community service
providers. Much like the critical
service
providers, they would be not to exceed
a mount with services
paid for as they are rendered. And
we took a look
at 11 of our current
cagf organizations. We
identified some of these that could
be
important to have for the community,
but we are not sure if
it is needed to be
funded at this full amount or if it
would be more appropriate to be
funded based on invoices
submitted for work performed. Another
concern that comes up regularly with
the
cagf ad hoc of both
the council members, as well as human
relations commission and charitable
solicitations
commission, is, are we certain that
beverly hills residents exclusively
are receiving this financial and if
it through these grants?
in some of these organizations that
we are recommending placing on
hiatus, it is hard to quantify because
they do serve the region.
whereas, some that
we are recommending as
community service providers, we know
their services are more concentrated
to beverly hills but not quite at
the level of
the critical service provider, which
would be this group.
if we were to
discontinue funding this group of
riders, we would
see detrimental impacts in the community.
so,
in
conclusion what we are recommending
is
contracting with the 11
groups at a cost of
$535,000, continuing to
contract with the five critical service
providers at
$1.2 million, for a total of $1.8 million. By
leasing the 12 organizations on hiatus,
that would generate a savings
of about $578,000. So
this is the recommendation before
you. We are here to
answer questions you may have.
>>
great, thank you so much. Councilmember?
please go ahead.
>> it seems a bit
extreme to put them all on
hiatus. I think we need to,
I mean some seem obvious. But I do
believe others do provide
services
for the residents. I am wondering on what
basis
is the recommendation being made.
>> this recommendation is being made
based on us looking at the quarterly
reports
from the previous fiscal year end
identifying the services that were
rendered to beverly
hills residents in particular. Or
if the
contract or agreement was
effective, generally speaking. The affordable
living for the aging,
they enrolled 63 new participants.
they did 13 home visits, and
870 email inquiries
that they fielded.
but the number of beverly hills residents
in that group
was only 10.
another organization we could look at
-- exactly.
tower cancer.
let me pull up my data on that one.
so approximately 10% of program services
are utilized by the beverly hills
community. I think in the report.
>> 10% of overall services? Because
$50,000
is not going to fund
a lot. I
mean if they are saying 10% of the
total volume is beverly hills residents
and
they have 10,000 people, that is 1000
people, a significant amount.
>> they say 10% of the grant amount
goes directly to ph eight beverly hills
residents.
the other percentage would
--
>> I guess what
I would say is I would contact each
of them and let them
know that there would be the hiatus,
allow them to come to
us and try to explain that
they understand that this is to serve our residents.
and why
either they accept it, or why we should reconsider.
I would say, you know, because knowing
that we
expect that if we are providing x
amount of dollars and only
10% of those dollars are being used for our residents,
that is something that we are not
going
to be able to continue to support,
because
we have many other needs for our residents.
>> but how
would they be able
to change that? If that is the number
of residents that are
coming to the organization.
>> outreach. Or they just would not contest
it
and would say sorry, we are here for everybody. We cannot
decide who comes to us. We understand. You know, ultimately
they
should understand that we are doing this
, you know,
there are resources for the county
and other communities that they can look
at, but
we are doing this specifically for
our residents and there are a lot of
these. I would just give them the
chance. I am guessing if
they cannot back it up or say sorry,
we don't have a lot of
beverly hills residents that use our
services, there is not a great argument
to
continue or not put them on hiatus.
>> part of the reason we are starting
this process really early, we are
talking about grants that would take
place, you know, seven, eight,
nine months from now. It is so that
we
get some feedback from the ad hoc and
we can let the organizations know ahead of time
before the applications would normally have
gone out, that we intend to put their grant on
hiatus.
we could certainly come up with some
sort of process where they
can submit a letter.
>> or come here
and
explain and answer questions. But
with those savings, shouldn't we
be looking at reinvesting them in
services that are
residents actually take advantage of?
>> yes, I think that is one of
the things mr. Paulson was talking
about. We are experiencing,
maybe director harris can speak to
some
of the challenges we are having with
the afterschool programming. Please.
>> it sounds like, it is not included
here,
the 900 grand we are saving on nass tech.
that is not included.
>> it is imported
--important to know
that that funding was essentially
one time funding that was taking us through
december of
this year. So it is not that it was
ongoing funding. But it was not
something that we have to find money
for moving forward.
>>
briefly
speaking to some of the new things
we found, adventure camp program and
afterschool
programming, we are servicing about
430 students. Our universal tk program
has brought in students
as early as four years old now.
so, really long days. We are
starting to see students who are taking
advantage of our programs until 5:00
p.m. However,
during the school day they have aids
and during the adventure camp
program they do not. Just because
that is not
something that we currently
offer. Ideally we would like to bring
in
a partnership and bring somebody on any contractual basis
to be able to provide continuous service to the students
who need support for afterschool care,
so they can successfully
participate in our programs. That
is what we were referencing in the
report on
some of new needs the community may
have, that
we did not necessarily have previously.
>> to recharge for those fees, to have
the aides?
>> currently we
do not have ability to
provide the aides.
>> but would it be charged for if
we provided
the service?
>> we would have to work
through the risk management and
the a.d.a. Accommodation process.
so there is the possibility of
us to be able to
recoup some cost.
however, based on the a.d.a. Requirements, we would
be able to support them if necessary.
>>
and that was one of my questions, with
regard to the grant funding. So, this
was
not included in our jpa?
is this part of the agreement we arty
have in place? Or
will this be in addition to that?
>> so, yes and no.
we use the school district
properties for a variety of things
because the jpa, which we pay a
great deal of money for, and then
we use their facilities for our programs,
so
for the afterschool programming for
example, we use the school sites.
so the children who are on campus
during the day
are currently able to stay, you know,
until their
parents are able to pick them up .
having said
that the programming itself , if you
want to have your child participate in
adventure camp
after school, the daycare, and
is a service that parents do pay for.
we are
in the process of looking at,
making sure the program is at least cost recovery.
and then as far as aides go, afterschool aides,
I think
that it would depend,
as the director was saying, as to
whether they are needed because
of an issue, disability issue with the child.
in which case that is something we
are required to provide.
as opposed to having some tk students,
some that are four years old, at the
site for five or six hours
a day and then with us for three additional
hours a day. It is leading
to a new world of some challenges.
those kids are tired.
and they are needing a little bit
more
of staff to student ratio,
lower staff to student ratio.
>> got it, thank you. First of all
I guess starting with controlling
our
cost right now we need to be mindful of our budget.
I think it
is important to go through this exercise
and see where we land with it.
making sure that the services that
are being provided,
that are crucial to our community,
I wholeheartedly support that. I think
it is
important. We don't want to have any
gaps in our service
,
providing our service. And then specifically
caring for beverly hills residents,
I think that
is important. Any of our unhoused
are kind of moving through different
cities and we are providing a very large service
to that.
I guess it depends on how you look
at it. These are taxpayer dollars.
so while I do support giving services
to as many people as possible, we
do
need to focus on our own community
as well. So while I'll support our
unhoused, I also think there are programs in here
that
are wonderful, really great
501(c)(3). But at the end of the day,
or nonprofits, but at the end of the
day we need to also focus on
our own residents and providing the
best level of service for that. I think moving
human
services department to the fire department
has been a wonderful decision
under the chief's leadership. And
christopher getting a promotion,
and we are really excited about
the new level of leadership and everything
you
are doing with that.
and this is part of that. Leadership
is
about making difficult decisions and
moving forward with certain things
that may not always be
easy. I read some info in regard to
p.a.t.h. That was
concerning.
and I want to know if,
what information
we have on that. We are working with
an organization
that --
>> there were a
few articles in the l.a. Times recently about
p.a.t.h. And some of the loan programs
that they have .
as far as I am aware those
issues do not affect
the programs that we have with p.a.t.h...
unless I
am missing something.
oh, I am sorry. It was step up on
second. I apologize. Sorry.
>> yes, that is correct. Nothing, there is
nothing that has impacted beverly
hills or that we have contributed
funds to
that is under scrutiny or in question
as it relates
to our relation with step up on second.
>> great.
that was the first thing I wanted to check on.
and a lot of these programs, just
for clarity, are payouts needed.
--
pay as needed. I know we know the
answer to
this and sometimes we just ask for
clarity. [ laughter ] if we budget
$100,000 for a service,
what is that process? Can you walk
us through it, please.
when they are contracted.
>> yes, so if we use the p.a.t.h.
as a perfect example.
it is $130,
and I believe it is about $10 per night per bed.
and we are allowed to reserve five beds.
my math might
be off. In order to guarantee we have
five beds, we have to pay
for the beds whether they are filled
or not. We are
paying 365?5, that comes to about $90,000,
I believe it is actually 90,500.
and then the additional 95
00 is
additional to fund the grant.
this
year they sent the invoice, the report,
they give the actual names of the
unhoused
person. John doe spent 34 nights in
one of the beds. Then the
bed was empty for 15 nights. Then jane doe spent
16 nights in bed number two and it
was
empty for three nights, for example.
they give us the breakdown. And then
of course in that situation we still
have to pay for the bed, even when
not used. So it is always there. That
is what the invoicing looks like.
if we look at the
jewish family services of los
angeles, for example, that is a large
$500,000 agreement. They provide detail
reporting each quarter of the different clients they
serve and what type of service the client received.
and what the service translated to
in hours spent, like labor hours and
what the cost is. For example, social
worker provided
10 hours of in-home supportive care
over the past month. That comes out to
$800, for example.
then times however many clients,
they have about 30 to 40
clients currently. In those 30 to
40
clients are receiving a range of services.
some folks are just getting occasional
food gift cards,
and others are receiving two, three, four
days a week of supportive
care, light cleaning, things
like that. It runs the gamut of what
the needs are. And they provide all
the detail for us.
>> thank you. That
helps. [ laughter
] with regard to westside food bank,
I see we are doing the $50,000 contract
to provide
fresh produce and food
once a week to the residents in the city housing programs.
have we asked our local
grocers, for
example beverly hills market, to make that
,
to provide those services? That way
we are
supporting a local business as well as
--it is closer. And for them
to be able to provide those services
to our residents.
>> so I think there is two answers to this
question, I
can answer the second part. We have
not started reaching out to local
agencies yet to see about the support.
and
I also just wanted to clarify. Currently
out
of all of the cagf recipients over
the past years,
what we did is these five listed here
were the first rendition of
service based providing three contract.
so the level of invoicing is now coming
in and they are paying for services
rendered. Versus the traditional
cagf program, including
westside food bank. We have just been
issuing the funds on a quarterly basis
based on services they are providing.
the goal would be to take
some of these and turn them into a
similar contract like we did with
the
initial five critical service providers.
because they
are not necessarily critical
in the same fashion that we have called
the others, we have
deemed those to be community services
partners. We would be transitioning,
if this is supported, this next
year into the model that you guys
supported earlier this year for the first five.
>> I understood
that, that was clear in the report,
that made sense. Thank you. But going
back
to my question, I think it would be
interesting and nice to be able
to, we want to be able to work together
as a community. It would
be a great way to ask our local grocers.
I do not know if we have any
besides beverly hills market,
or whole foods, if they would be interested. Pavilion.
>> -->> [ laughter ] I do
not think that we could afford that.
>> $15
avocados that nobody buys.
>> so,
yeah, that way it is a strong partnership
between
our local businesses and supporting
our neighborhoods and the needs of the residents.
>> we would be happy to reach out
and see if they are interested.
>> thank you. There were four charities
that I noticed that were cultural
on the community service providers.
and a few others that
may be would even fall into that.
>>
[ inaudible ]
>> yeah,
so my question is, these are social
services and those are cultural services,
may be more appropriate for
our arts and culture commission to look at.
or something in the arts section.
why are they lumped into social services?
how does that justify? Can you explain that for me?
>> so maybe five years ago
, four years ago, I am
trying to think now. They were embedded
as part
of the cagf program. At
that time this was living
with the human services division within community
services and they incorporated this
as part of
their program. Happy to look at a
process in which we pulled this apart
and do the same sort of thing, take
funding
that has been allocated to this portion of
the cagf
program and make
there be a new application and
vetting process through the arts and
culture commission, if that is the
directive
of the city council.
>> would you be okay with that? Put
your microphone on.
>> there is not
a separate budget for it. You look
at the amounts, it is very small.
I don't know
that we necessarily want
, you know, we may want to vet the
cultural grants through the
arts and culture commission, but I
would not have
them have a separate grant kind of thing.
>> for example, I think
the wallace already has a contract --
>> they get a lot more money than that
from us,
but they need a lot.
>> right, but
I do not know that it is
necessary for them to be here and
there. It is doubling up services
that are already provided. Nancy,
maybe you could speak to that.
>> the only other option would be
to give arts and culture a dedicated
budget each year that they then recommend
for cultural institutions. And if
we
did that, you know, I would not have
a problem with that.
but we need to ensure that they have
some funding each year to be
able to share with the cultural institutions.
>> 40 grand or something, maybe.
but I don't
know, whatever the amount
, we can talk about that when we budget. But
I think this
is the time to have the conversation
to just discussed separating them. John?
>> as
long as they have a budget. You know,
it is 85 now for those four,
I would suggest 100 or more. I think culture,
I think these, theater 40 is
so extremely important.
they are so dependent
cagf
no cultural institution makes back
the money through the box office.
it is just
not possible these days.
>> okay.
but don't you think that would be
more
appropriate to have in the
arts and culture commission?
>> sure,
if we could give them a budget.
yes.
>> we can talk about it at the meeting
with some
kind of funds in the next --because
we are discussing budgeting now for
the
next agenda. So those would be our
recommendation, to remove the cultural component's
from here.
>> but replacing them
at the arts and culture
commission with a dedicated budget. Right?
>> yes.
okay,
let me see if I have any other questions.
now, just out of curiosity
, why are we
not
[ pause ]
--
so because we are
contracting some of these major
asks, would it not make more sense
for
some of the larger
grants that we have here to also use
those as a contract to see how it would
work? Or is this temporary? What was the
process to make the decision that
these five would be
contracted, versus the others getting a straight out
grant?
>> so I think, just
to sort of
, I guess take a step
back, so I think where we will end
up, if I understand correctly
with the report today, groups will
either be put on hiatus,
or they will be put on contract.
>> correct. >> we
would not just be saying we think
you are
a valuable organization and we are
going to give you a
check, regardless of whether
you serve our residents
or any of those things. We would be
moving
everyone into a contract --
>> that is not clear here. Here it
says on attachment b
that there is 11 items, community service
providers. So we are
putting all of them on contract as
well? You are saying yes or no?
>> yes, that
is what we would be saying. If you
look at attachment b, community service
providers,
minus the cultural ones at this point,
is the recommendation. The remaining
would move over
to mirror the way we started with the critical service
providers. These would
be contractually based agreements
for services rendered is what is paid for.
>> now I will say we are working through
a little bit of what we mean by services
rendered with some organizations.
so we would have to, like the folks
did with the other
organizations, work out what the reporting
would look like
and the invoicing, so that
we know what we are being charged for.
>>
all of these items are going to be contracted.
>>
the five previous. Yes . And the 11
would be contracted.
the others would be put on
hiatus.
>> right, correct. So that
is what I was
saying. The hiatus ones, people
are used to getting the same amount each year,
a little bit more
they ask for. And when they don't
they will probably be upset. I think
that
is why they are bringing it to us
now. We will be prepared, if they
want to make an argument as to why
they should continue, again understanding
that they all do great work, we are
insisting that it be
tied
to our residents with services. They
will have to then come and explain either
why they already do serve the residents
in the figures do not reflect
it. Or
what they will do to ensure we are getting that
value for life.
>> and this was under which commission?
>> human relations commission. >>
okay. My other thought
is that we have
a commission for charitable contributions
.
with they
be able to, would we be
able to put all of this into that box?
and is it a commission or a foundation?
>>
it is a foundation.
>> so not as it is
currently
configured today is the answer. We
are talking about the beverly hills
community charitable foundation. This
is essentially a separate arm of the
city, it
is its own 501 c3 with its own
board that can accept donations from whomever.
to benefit city programs. The current
structure of the community
charitable foundation is to take in money.
accept
it.
and then essentially transfer it to
the city. The city then cuts the check.
or the city does the bidding, procurement.
the community charitable foundation
as
of today does not have the ability
to write checks, does not have a treasurer.
I guess it has a treasurer but does
not have --I am sorry.
I apologize. As a board. Yes.
>> I am just trying to figure
out ways we can utilize it. I know
that it may not be structured today.
but I think that is also an area that
I would
recommend revisiting or visiting to begin with.
and then see if that portion of it, because it this
point our
charitable commission, where is that right now?
>>
charitable solicitations commission
is the commission that has been in
existence since the 40s. And
they have
a few things that they are responsible for.
but they
sort of vet organizations that are doing fundraising
membership drives and
something else.
how their funding is spent.
at this time
a lot of the information
that was not available in the 1940s,
postwar fundraising, is now available online.
you can find
form 990 on the irs website and such.
not to say we are not concerned
about ensuring the people
who are raising funds in our community
are legitimate
and using the funds for proper purpose.
so we would still
issue
charitable solicitation permits. But
as far as a commission and all of
the overhead
that goes with the commission, overseeing that process,
we will be sunsetting that commission.
>> and this was under
their approval. That is why I am suggesting
that there be some oversights
to make sure that there is
some balance,
that there is some kind of
--instead of a commission there is
also community members
on that committee. To just kind of assist
the community with
the process.
>> okay. We understand
the concept. We are not set up to
do it today but it is something we
can work towards.
>> no. I just
wanted to put it on your radar. I
think it would be a good balance
based on the decisions made regarding
the charitable solicitation commission.
all right. So those are my questions.
do you have any others?
>> no. I think this is a bit of a
major move where we have
so many organizations that have been getting
funding and have been doing good
work. But I guess it is to focus on
the residents, they just
have not been providing that.
I would absolutely set something up
to allow them to respond,
to make their arguments.
it again, lay it on the line. We love
the work you do,
unfortunately your facilities
are not buying used by our
residents and therefore that is the
basis of our
judgment. We have to allocate resources
to
services that our residents are using.
I think being very straight
about that but having the ability
for them to come to us and talk
to us, that is fine. There is time.
and I
like the suggestion to give funding to
the arts and culture commission,
to allow them to
separately give grants to cultural institutions.
>> I don't know if we would do a whole
process
that they would come to us. I think that I would
--
>> there is public
comment. And they have come to us
in the past when we have said sorry,
no. We have to expect that. They are
allowed to do that. But
I would actually, to save them time
and whatever, I would lay it on the
line. This is what we are looking
for. And you only have 10% of
the money we are giving you going
to our residents.
that is just not an efficient
allocation of resources.
>> I want
to just add that part
of the, like a six month long cagf
process, echoes through the early,
late
winter, early spring. We do get an ad hoc of
two commission members
entered will commission members that join the
human
services staff to conduct interviews
with all new applicants
, as well as any applicant that was
existing and maybe we have questions
about or would like to see performance
change or
that we had questions about their data.
we have been thinking about this and
hearing the commissioners
over the past two years talk about
wanting to bring the impact directly
to
beverly hills residents. Those were
some of the
questions we asked. I hate to pick on
an organization, but as
an example safe parking l.a., last
year they
were funded for $50,000. This year
they were funded for $10,000.
when we met with them in the
spring, we said look, you have not
provided us with data that shows x
amount
of vehicles that were parked in beverly
hills with
someone unhoused living in them
and then went to one of your parking
lots.
>> that is
because it is pointless. We have ordinances
in place that there is no overnight
parking in our city.
>> absolutely.
but there are still folks that might
parked here during
the day and then park in front of
a park in a park ranger
can see that they are back, the backseat
is completely full of personal
belongings. That would be
a recommendation. If you
do not want to dispose of your vehicle
and come inside to a shelter,
you could go there. When we pressed
safe parking, we asked how many vehicles,
it was exactly the answer that we
knew it would
be, which was zero. They say but we
service hundreds of people from spa
5, that
includes l.a., santa monica, culver
city, and unincorporated areas. None of those from
beverly hills.
I say this to say that
from staff and commission's perspective,
we
were driving the organizations
to provide the data in the spring.
those that were
able to provide compelling data are
on the list that is recommended
to be contracted for. And those that
could not provide data
or could only speak to generalities
--
>> that is fine. You will tell them
that they are on hiatus,
they will say geez,
they know that they
can come to us if they want.
>> I
support the staff decision. It looks
like you have done your due diligence
and have asked those questions. And
that
is why these recommendations were
made in the first place. With regard
to decreasing it
from 50, to 10. So
that was kind of a here, we are letting
you
know, we will still give you a little bit
more. But I support the staff's decision
on that. The only thing
that I was going to recommend additionally
when I was listening, on your application
,
formally
there should be a place that says
how were the funds used? Was
it for what you described in the first
place? What
percentage of the funds were used?
a lot of times organizations do not use
all of the funding.
that is good for us to know as well.
and, you know, what percentage of
it
was used for the city of beverly hills residents specifically.
so I am sure that you
have that but just to
clarify and make sure. You could also
look at the form that the beverly
hills rotary club has.
a lot of the questions for their grants
that they offer for repeat
groups have a lot of those questions on
it, just to clarify and make sure
that the money went where it was supposed
to go in
spent how they said it was going to
be spent. In the utilized
all the money that was spent
that we provided. What do you do if
someone says I did not
use all of the
, where
does it go?
>> the current process
where it is grant funding, there is
absolutely nothing we can do if they
are not using it directly for services.
>>
but that is taxpayer dollars that
were not utilized in the way that we originally
--
>> have you
let them know they will be on hiatus?
>> not yet. >> okay. Once you
do some of them, again, these are
public meetings and anyone can come
and
speak and ask, and they can. But if
they
want [ pause ]
if they want
to be heard or taken seriously or
have any hope for a change, they are
going to have to answer those questions
and have to say
, either give a plan or say that the figures are
incorrect, or something. I will agree
with the vice mayor. I think it
behooves you to let these people know
, unless it needs to go to the
council first. But probably not. That
they will be put on hiatus.
now. Soon. So they can,
if they want to, either respond or
not. I would get
that taken care of soon.
>> we absolutely
will councilmember. And
with the timing it will give them the opportunity to
make their case or reach out.
may I ask a clarifying question?
so, what I heard was that
we are interested in
moving the arts and culture grant
funding to the arts and culture commission.
I
just want to clarify that we still
intend for that funding to be
used for the grant program. Is that correct?
>> oh, oh! Otherwise it was
going to be a [ pause ]
I need to think about that.
>> as
opposed to what? Yes, it would be
used.
>> no. We were going to recommend
for them to be contractual. As opposed
to grants. Is that
what you are saying?
>> it is actually a two-part question.
yes, we were intending for
them to become contractual. So what
I was saying earlier was still working through some
of what the reporting will look
like. So, how much do we give
to theater 40? 50,000?
>> 50,000. >> I am sure that the seizing
costs more than 50,000. Right? We
have to think through what that would
look like. But the intention
here was to move those four organizations into a contractual
basis. So
that is question one.
>> I would support a contractual service. Adjust,
I do not know if it will make more
work or
if it would help
. I just thought if something is
cultural, arts and culture, it should
be in that division.
but if it is too complicated and easier
to
have it all in one place, I am fine
with putting it in
. I think it is fine to make all
of these contractual right now.
>> yes, and that is entirely, you know,
we will do
whatever it is that the council would like to do.
so it is a question
to you. If that is
the case, if we want to make them
contractual, then I don't know that
there would be a role for arts and
culture.
>> you
are right. I didn't -- again, this
was
before I realized that all were becoming
contractual. In that case I would
keep it where it is.
and
let's try it and see how it goes this
year with that process.
>> we will
still move it to
community services, which is where the
arts and culture funding , the larger
program for the city
is located. But they would be contractual
just under community
services, then under fire.
>> well, would you agree
with that?
>> yes. Yes. >> I just
think that we are providing services,
I mean
this is a beautiful service to give
arts and culture
to the community, but I
think we have different budgeting issues.
like set aside for that.
>> yes. Okay. That is helpful. To
I.
>> thank you for clarifying.
that
was helpful. Anything else from you,
sir? Okay. Thank you for being here.
and the meeting is adjourned.