 Good evening everybody and welcome to our February 12th, 2024 meeting. I'm going to just do our official introduction to call the meeting to order and then we'll get started. The time is now 707 p.m. and seen as a form of committee members is in attendance. This public hearing is being called to order. As I said, this is the February 12, 2024 public meeting of the Amherst community development block grant advisory committee pursuant to chapter 20 of the acts of 2021 and extended by the state legislature on July 16 of 2022. This meeting is being conducted virtually using the zoom platform and the meeting is being reported and minutes are being taken as usual. So why don't we do a quick roll call make sure we can all hear each other and then we will go into our agenda. I'll just call on people to make it easy. Just, I'm Becky, I'm the chair. Suzanne, just to make sure you. Great. Oh, you're in. So you're muted. I apologize. Hi, I'm so it's always on a committee member. Great. And Rika. Hi, President Rika Clement committee member. Yes, and that Larson here. I'm also trying to eat some dinner or so it might be off video for a little while. No worries. And, and Nate, you're here. Hi, I'm Nate, a staff liaison to the committee. Great. And of course, and I'm so apologetic. I have a dog barking at the door who I'm just going to let in and then we're going to jump into the meeting actually one second. That's what happens when I kick everybody out of the house so I can have a quiet house for a meeting and then I'm still stuck with the dog duties. So tonight we are meeting primarily our. Well, our first agenda item is to look through to talk about if there are any announcements, but then we will spend most of the time going through the applications. The 2024 application review where we can review and prioritize the proposals review and discuss potential changes to target areas and determine what our recommendations to the town manager are. And then we'll go through any items not anticipated within 48 hours. And, and then have time at the end of this meeting for public comment. This is a meeting not a hearing, but we will have public welcome public comment at the end. And I guess I'll also just say that I'm just going to pull up who's here for attendees that we are obviously going to be talking about the proposals and we. I'll just say for the people on that we have read you can rest assure that we've read the proposals well. But if you hear us talking about something that is actually incorrect, then do raise your hand because we obviously don't want to be considering something that's not correct as we're making our decisions. But other than that, we'll wait to hear from people at the end and we will put a, as we often do a three minute timeline of people's comments at the end of our discussion. So, with that, I guess, are there any announcements that people want to make before we get started. Okay. All right, great. So, why don't we go in and I think what we often do, and what I'd like to propose we do here is begin our conversation with the non social service activities. So, which of this at this application around there are just the two, which are the, the valley CDC micro enterprise project and the infrastructure improvements to southeast street along the East street common project. And that project would require that we believe change one of the target change a target area so that that would be in it. And so that's just something to consider as we go. Does anybody have any thoughts that they want to share on either of those two proposals or neat is there anything that I didn't address just then that we should have in mind is we're thinking about these things. Yeah, I guess I just want to clarify and I think people said they had seen the Southeast Street one and maybe it had been. That was a previous year, but this is the North Pleasant Street. Oh, I'm sorry. You know, I just want to try to try to find where that had been mentioned and so I just wanted to say that it's the North Pleasant Street will deuce path from, you know, like, presidential about, you know, or Hobart lane somewhere in there north to. Yes, and I'm, you know, I'm reading I think it was in the 2024 proposals outline the rubric that you gave us. And I read the actual one, but didn't describe it right as I was just reading off the page. So the North Pleasant one. So sidewalks essentially on that on North Pleasant Street in that area. Right. Correct. And that's not currently in one of our target areas but if I am correct, it could be Nate is that correct that the income. Okay. Do we need to vote first to change the target area before we recommend this or does it matter, but what do we do it in. Yeah, I can let me share my screen and then do we set the target areas up the town did that. Well, the is this where am I here. Yep, yep. Yeah, no, the target areas are set by the committee I mean in the town it's really a target area is meant to be in, you know, a location it can be, you know, fairly, fairly large where the town's investing other infrastructure besides CDBG so where you know where there's some improvements to whether it's, you know, public facilities or looking at increasing housing or doing certain things and so on this map it's a little hard to see, but there's three target areas one is in like the magenta outline down here at Pomeroy. And that included Hickory Ridge. And so we've done like the southeast street and we've done a different number of things down here and then the town center is outlined in red in this kind of odd shape. The light green is where there's income eligible block groups, and the yellow is the outline of the census block groups and so the, the north pleasant street sidewalk is in this area. And the four Pomeroy village was a target area we had North Amherst be a target area. It's tricky because with the new census designation, you know, there's not much in North Amherst that's income eligible so, for instance, we made, you know, up here by Cherry Hill a block target area. I mean we have North Amherst be a target area it's just that then the specific project would have to serve low mod we couldn't base it on just a geographic area because there's not a majority lower income. And so, for the committee it could be that the town center target area is extended and it just, it grows, you know, it's a bigger town center target area, or we can do a separate North Amherst and so how many target areas we can have. Yeah, you know, we used to have four and the state said can you try to keep it to three. It's meant to, I think they, and from their perspective. You know, they'd like to see within those target areas, you know, impactful improvements and so whether that's, you know, outside of block grant to so we could say that in the town center target area. If we extend it, you know, we've been working on sidewalks, you know, we have, you know, the new library we're working on a bite on bike lanes and this so the proposal is for a multi use path on the west side so connecting to bike lanes and then, you know, it's also a sidewalk and then a new sidewalk on the east side. So, I think really the, some communities have a really generous target area and it's just one, or they might have some, you know, two big ones and so. But you know the capital projects have to be in a target area. And so if we're supposed to keep it to three, does it matter if we move a target area to a new location if there's a current project going on in that target area from a prior year. I'm not sure that's a good question yeah I mean we have the Hickory rage is still ongoing. You know, I mean it could be that we, we extend this and say it's just a larger town center target area. You know one point when North Amherst was a target area. This area up here was actually income eligible and so the thought was oh could we do some sidewalks or infrastructure but since, since the demographics have changed it's harder to have this be a target area even though we're doing the town's doing the Amherst you know the library and then maybe some field work and things that mill river but yeah to your point it might be strange to remove Pomeroy, for instance and then create a North Amherst one. You know just because there are, there's still ongoing projects in Pomeroy. So in that case I think I would move to just expand the Amherst town center and then that takes care of any issues at all around that right. You can see here where it kind of comes up and covers an area that was to include Olivia Oaks, years ago, you know probably like, gosh, I don't even want to say 14 years ago but a number of years ago and so we could, you know, extend it along some to come up here. Yeah. Okay. I guess we'll take him. So I moved to do that so we need to vote on that right. Yeah, I'll second that. Okay. All in favor. I'll do a roll call Becky. All right. Rika. Yes. Yeah. Yes. Suzanne. Yes. Zoe. Yes. Okay, so that passes unanimously great. So then we now can discuss the project as being in a place in a location that we're actually allowed to have a project be. So obviously we're in a situation where we have valley, which has done some great work in the past and is asking for a really small amount of money and I remember last year that I did ask. The representative whether they could use more than that and the response was no, they've asked for exactly what they need. And it looks like that's still where they're at. So we could fund both Valley Valley CDC and then give the remainder to the infrastructure project. Which to me makes that would be my recommendation. Okay. Makes no sense. Okay, so why don't I will move to vote in that way that we fund both activities. We fund Valley CDC to the, what it's requested for 15,000 and the remainder, which I assume is 543,000 to the infrastructure project on North pleasant street. Would it be 540,000 if they available is 555. Right. So if that, yeah, you're right. Suzanne. I think we could just leave it as whatever the differences and we can. The remainder too. Okay. So I would move to do that. Second. Great. All right. So why don't we do a roll call. Nat. I said, yes. Zoe. Yes. Suzanne. Yes. And Rika had seconded. Yeah. Yes. Great. Okay. So now always to the, the more complicated and more complex and harder choices. We'll go to the social service proposals. And I just want to say, I think I've said this every time we've done this just for the, I think it's good for our own selves to hear this and for anybody listening that. I think we all can agree that all of the agencies that apply are doing necessary work and they're doing it well. And so this is always an incredibly difficult decision to make. But it's 1 that we signed up to make. And so we're here to do it. Just to remind everybody we can fund up to 5 agencies, but it doesn't have to be 5 so we can. We've since at least I've been on the committee, we've always done 5, but that doesn't mean that we have to do that. And so we have the, the rankings that needed sent out. And I know Rika has now also has her rankings in and Rika, I guess yours. What we could do is just sort of as we're talking about them, you can share your opinions rather than trying to change the spreadsheet right now. And I, I was just going to make 1 comment. I'm sort of curious what people have to say before we sort of jump into the conversation, but I was. I was looking at the, the rubric that we had created and thinking about the categories. A lot of them seem pretty objective. And the, the ones to the 1 to me that's the most subjective is project impact. Because I think about the sort of the, for myself. The ways to define what impact is and project impact could be the impact that the program has on a particular person or it could be the impact that the program has on the community as a whole and sort of the numbers of people that it's helping. And so I ended up. I think all of these. Anybody who's going to any of these organizations for assistance is going to be. You know, highly impacted by them. So I ended up thinking about it really in terms of numbers of people who are impacted understanding that there's always a ripple effect and there's families and all that, but each 1 of them did give us actual numbers of. Of who they, how many people they're actually assisting. So I don't know if anybody has any comments about that or thought about impact differently or any of the other categories that that were sort of the 1 that you found yourself having the most. Consideration of our thoughts about. I shared in that to Becky and also the number of people, not just that the agency helps with the number of Amherst residents. I kind of had to use that as a factor. In, in how I was looking at impact that particular score. Yeah. I did go with the same interpretation as well. I thought about it, you know, long and hard, you know, and it was clearly stated though in a lot of the proposals, you know, the number of people that would be, you know, that would benefit or impacted by this. So I use the Amherst, you know, also category, you know, how many of the, you know, impact that clients would be residents of our area as well. Yeah, I think, I think for me, both project impact as well as project need were some of the biggest differentiators. So, you know, project need. I think I range from two to four and project impact I range from also get two to four. And I think project impact for me was more about how big of an impact in the community, how many people is are being served. That sort of thing and project need is hard to quantify because they're different aspect of it aspects of it. But, you know, so that is definitely subjective. But, you know, if I guess I would imagine if something were not available. With the, you know, community impacted by that and if it seems like it would be a huge hole in the community then that to me would be that's a really big need. And if it's something that well, yeah, some people would be impacted but, you know, the community as a whole wouldn't feel it that much. Maybe it's not as high on community need so in some sense, those were related, I think. And as I look at my scoring now, it turns out that pretty much, you know, the, you know, the low end of two was the same for project need and project impact, and kind of the same for the high end of four. Yeah. I also looked really a lot at project need and, you know, impact and I think as I look at my notes I, I really was focused on impact of on the particular beneficiary, as opposed to the quantity. I think in the past, I've probably thought more about more broader community impact, but this year, I don't know, I was thinking about individual beneficiary impact. Yeah. So, it's always hard to sort of get this started in a minute, you know, I look at this and it looks like, you know, Amherst Survival Center is sort of the one that everybody has at the top of their list regardless I don't have yours here but that's an organization that I think, you know, fits both of those fits the need very easily and then also both ways of thinking about impact. And then the sort of at the, at the bottom end of it. I think that it looks like the literacy project. What's more literacy project was in everybody sort of bottom two and then the other ones varied. So, in sort of thinking about what's in between all of those, you know, maybe we should just go through each a little bit and sort of see where we're at. I will say, I remember when Amherst Mobile Market first applied last year, I think or maybe two years ago, and it had not quite gotten up and running yet and I think it was maybe reaching like 25 to 30 people with like a $5 voucher. I was so impressed by their application this year. And, and when I thought about impact with them, for me, it was not just that they're serving 192 people with providing the, you know, with with food but it's also the community. I was thinking about our, you know, the name of our committee, right, community development and that so much of what they've done is to develop what they saw the community needed and that they're staffed by people who are now working in the community and that they're providing an activity, you know, where they where they are and they talked about, you know, the different other activities that are going on besides the farmers market, the mobile market. And so, and so the staff, it's the staff and it's the people and it's the people who are coming to it and it's really such a broad way of thinking about community and thinking about impact so I was really impressed by them and and put them really way toward the top of my list. I don't know if other people have thoughts they want to share about that or where people thought about. I was gonna say I can share my screen just to show what we have in the spreadsheet form that's visible for everyone. So some of the rankings, you know, each row is a ranking so for some it was, you know, the a clear one through five or one through six and some, you know, for instance, this one had survival center mobile market outreach as a kind of a tie for one. This one had a lot tied for two and so, like I said, I think that, you know, I don't think there was a it doesn't seem like there was a big spread and how they were reviewed and so, you know, maybe there is one or two. So usually right we say one or two seem like they rise the top and then there's the middle and then a lower reviewed one and so I don't know if you know I can type in another column as we're talking if you want to start, you know, putting things down in an order or, you know, other things and then assign, you know, dollar values to them once we get to that point. And one thing that that I was trying to do to because, as you said, there are different ways people did this so three tied for first or five tied per second and how to make sense or not make sense but how to sort of combine those rankings into something that reflected each respondent and guess the way I looked at it was if we just divided it between like first rank and second rank. So for example, in column D and we're survival center is ranked number one and everything else is ranked number two in column a we have three organizations ranked one and then the rest I guess would be ranked number two and it's like in column B survival center big brothers and family outreach we ranked number one in the top half and then the other three be ranked number two. So if when I did it that way and gave each one a numerical either one or number two then it turned out that the average was survival center was average of one family outreach was average of 1.25 big brothers big sisters average of 1.5 mobile market average of 1.75 and then both Center for new Americans and literacy project were both average of two so kind of, you know, my thinking was that kind of gave a spectrum of how people viewed them whether they ranked one through five or one at the top and then the rest tied for a second. Yeah, my rankings would be along that same line I actually I didn't have the survival center number one partly because even though they do amazing work and they really serve a lot of people I also see that they have a lot of places to go for resources and so I didn't have the number one but they're certainly in my top three but I that was helpful in that your analysis of it. Yeah so so in that example, if they were in your top three then they would be given a rank of one in this kind of simplistic. Yes. So then my top one my number one would be as yours were as you described. So if we sort of looked at that as guiding the conversation we have two organizations tied for that fifth spot right who have the excuse me both with the two and but one of which ended up in the very bottom it looks like I mean if the rankings if we went like broke down to into further rankings literacy project I think would end up lower than Center for New Americans if we sort of redid it at that point. So I guess sort of in terms of going does anybody want to make a pitch for funding the literacy project given kind of where it ended up here. I do want to make a piece for the literacy project I feel that once we take care of our basic needs which is food insecurity once we really you know deal with this piece you know the next level of really you know breaking a cycle of poverty is achieving self-sufficiency and kind of you know maintaining you know at that level so you definitely you know you definitely need an agency or an organization who could really work with you know people to get to that level. So it serves a very. I think needed. It's a very needed area. You know that we should not overlook. Yeah, I agree and and I think the way I've always seen Center for New Americans and literacy project is is you know there are some differences in what they do. I guess most most basic description of helping people get education and jobs and integrated into society. They're very very similar in what they do. And in the past because of their similarity. We've typically not granted funds to both and we've kind of chosen one or the other because we can only choose five and it's been a tough, you know, decision to not fund everyone but in the past we've kind of given to one or the other and the one thing that I can't help but take into account is that in the last grant cycle. We gave 30,000 to Center for New Americans but none to the literacy project. And so I guess if we are not able to fund both in this round. I think that my preference would be to be able to fund a literacy project because we gave the kind of two year funding previously to the Center for New Americans. But that's so I'm just looking at so they each are asking for 20,000. And it looks like I mean and I'm happy to be correct if I'm wrong but the literacy project indicated that they would impact 20 people. And Center for New Americans indicated they could impact 100 people or serve 100 people. 100 Amherst residents and literacy project was 20 Amherst residents. And that for me was because now I agree we've always sort of just gone back and forth kind of recognizing. So, for me that was where my thoughts went to fund Center for New Americans if we're going to just do one of the two. I think there's an argument also that can be made that given sort of what's going on globally and the huge number of new Americans who are coming to our area that both of these organizations are providing such a timely need or filling such a timely need that maybe this is the year that they both got funded. So you would propose funding both of them, even though they're in the bottom definitely not making any proposals. I mean I could imagine because it's true we've always sort of gone back and forth. And I think the numbers suggest that if we're only going to fund one it would be Center for New Americans. Which is because of the impact from my perspective but that it might be the year when we've on both. One thought I did have is, I mean, I would propose that we fund the Center for New Americans because of the greater number of people that the organization helps last year was 30,000 because it was to a two year cycle. So, if we thought about just one year of that could be 15,000, or if we wanted to fund the literacy project. I was thinking it could be a percentage of what they were asking based on the percentage of people that they help me know if it's 20 people or their proposals at 57%. But, so that was just some of some of my thoughts about those two particular organizations. Did people print out the rubric do all have that in front I mean the what what we're screen sharing right now, do people generally have access to that. Yeah. So can we can we not screen share so we can see each other. Sure. People go that okay good just easier to have this kind of conversation so we can protect my notes, I see that literacy project in my notes. It was 35 students 20 of whom were Amherst right. The percentage of Amherst out of the 100 beneficiaries were centered for new Americans that was 100 was Amherst. Okay, okay. Thank you. Yeah. And then 85% of them are 85 of them or 85% are low income. Right, okay. So if we were to do both of those obviously, I mean, essentially we need to, if we decide we want to do five organizations as we historically have, we have to pick one that's not getting funded this year. Right. And so that's, I mean, we can, I guess, just go through them and and see. And that's that will be the hardest decision before we figure out who's how much everybody's getting. So, big brothers, big sisters. Also just on the rankings that we had put together, both Center for New Americans Literacy Project had the average of two, and then the next lowest one was Amherst mobile market at 1.75. So going by that, if we say, well, how about Amherst mobile market, would they be a candidate for elimination at this point. And I would, you know, one argument in favor of eliminating mobile market is that well survival center covers the food security nutrition supplement needs an Amherst to such a great extent that you know, the community wouldn't be so impacted if we didn't fund mobile market, they would be on their own to do whatever they could. That's one argument. But on the other hand, I agree with what I think Becky and maybe others have said to that that I was impressed by the application by the mobile market and the strides that they've made over the last couple of years and becoming an independent 501c3. You know, I feel like yeah, I would like to support that. So again, so it's hard for me to say, even though survival center does really cover so much of the, you know, does such a great job of meeting the nutritional needs out there to make sure that they can. It's still hard for me to eliminate mobile market, but others might feel differently. I would, I would be reluctant to eliminate mobile market I would, I would prefer to eliminate either center for new Americans or literacy project personally. I was just, I think there may be people that use the mobile market that don't use services at their survival center aren't quite ready to use services at the survival center or this is a lot more convenient and available. Sometimes then having to get to the survival center, even though they do have, you know, some delivery but I would advocate that we keep the mobile market. And based on the number of people that you know that they've grown to be able to the number of shares that they have. Right, their impact is much larger than literacy project. Yeah, and I think I mean I sort of said this before I think, you know, having watched them grow from being. They watched their impact grow, you know, just as Amherst residents. And I think that this committee supporting supporting that is important and recognizing that. Okay, so if we put Amherst mobile market on the definite list over here, I'm just making notes. So then, if we go to big brothers big sisters, I would definitely like them on the yes. Yeah, they're, they're the ones who I look at as you know that individual benefit is so tremendous site. And, and they're the only one on the list that that is, you know, aimed at youth. Right. Right. Yeah. So true. Yeah. Family outreach. Yes, I would like to see them. I think, I mean, when I, you know, they're, when they talked about prior to August 2022 three to five requests for help a week now five a day. I thought we need to fund them. And housing security is such a big problem and seems to be only getting worse. Yeah, or ability and lack of right inventory and just keeping people in their homes but they've been doing is just, you know, amazing. I think they, I think serve such a unique need to cover such a huge right range of, I mean, from eviction legal issues through who need, does anybody have an extra mattress that they can run this family. I would keep on. Okay. Okay, so we are then down to selecting from between Center for New Americans in the literacy project. If we, it sounds like the, the other four are all ones that everybody's in agreement should be on that list. I think the comments that a couple of you've made already about just what's happening in the country makes me lean towards Center for New Americans over literacy project. In addition to the greater impact. I was going to say, I mean, two things one, the literacy product is now only virtual or immersed there may be a physical location at some point in the future. And I think that is possible to do this. It is different than the other proposals. And that, you know, it's not, you know, there's not a, you know, a physical site in town, and that could be one piece. And then, you know, I was going to mention that there is an ongoing complaint with the survival center and someone not receiving service on whether or not they're following the proper policies and rules there. And so that's something that's ongoing that the town's looking into and, you know, determine how to proceed and may or may not affect how you review the survival centers food pantry tonight but there is something that, you know, staff is looking into. And Nathaniel, what, when do you anticipate that that situation at the survival center would be resolved. Yeah, I'd like to think it could be resolved in the next two weeks. So, you know, as part of the committee's review you make recommendations to the town manager and then the town manager may, you know, I'm assuming is aware of this. And so, you know, it could be that the town manager decides to, you know, modify the recommendations or, you know, seek something. You know, we don't, there isn't, there aren't too many proposals this year. It's interesting there's only six. So it does make it a little tricky. But yeah, I think the town manager would, would, you know, review anything that the committee doesn't anything else that comes out of the dispute resolution. It strikes me that if there's, if there's a, you know, individual dispute, I'm sure there are channels to address that. So I think my feelings that we can let that proceed under whatever channels are appropriate. And this is kind of a different dimension. And we can proceed and, you know, with our review. I agree. Okay, so it sounds like we will actually let's just make sure it is anybody. Right now it looks like, like, it's just it looks like we're leaning towards Center for New Americans over the literacy project, but I want to give anybody an opportunity to. I made, I made the one, the one case for literacy project, but I'm persuaded by the other views for Center for New Americans. So that's fine with me. Okay. And Zoe, how are you feeling about that? I do feel good about that as well. I both are fulfilling the need for self-sufficiency, which is I see it as a the next logical step after we take care of our, you know, your other other needs. And I can, you know, I can be behind this decision. Okay, great. So I guess, probably the first thing is to move to accept the groups and then we'll talk about money. Nate, does that make the most sense that we usually. Yeah, I mean, it seems like there's consensus, but we could have a maybe a motion and a vote and then go to the funding piece. Okay. So I move then that the five organization that we give to five organizations of those five organizations would be the Amherst Revival Center, the Brothers Big Sisters Center for New Americans, the Amherst mobile market and family outreach of Amherst. I know in a second. Second. Great. And now I'll do a little. Matt. Yes. Zoe. Yes. Suzanne. Yes. Great. Okay. Okay. So I'm going to do a second at that counts. Okay. Terrific. So now we can talk about money. And this is where I turned to that because I'm hoping that you have some spreadsheet that you're looking at right now. You created this whole represented situation. So, it's really only a starting point, but I'm happy to share it. Great. So that we have. So with the five that have been, you know, voted. If you add up there, all the requests, it's 222,000. So it's more than, you know, what can be funded. And the total because we have 185. Is it 185 or 195. Well, my spreadsheet says 185. Yeah. Sorry. The state increased the grant amount to 925. After the fact. He's for all, for all minis. So. So I guess, is that so 185 am I 185. Yeah. It was 20%. Yeah. He was trying to do that quickly. Okay. 195 right, but 185. 185 is correct number. Yep. Okay. Oh, so can I. Share my screen. This. I guess I can't share my screen. Oh, sorry. You know what, let me. They can allow you to do that. Try that again. That it should be. Can you see this. Under funding recommendations. Yeah. This is just a starting point, but, and you see the percentages here. So these are, these are kind of roughly. The way the rankings went. So survival center was highest ranked. And so the number 67,000 here is 89%. And family outreach. Was second ranked. And their number. 42,000 is 84%. And big brothers. Was third ranked. And so their number here at 32,000 is 80%. And mobile market. Was next ranked. And so the number 29,000 is 78%. And center for new Americans. Was bottom rank. And so the number of 15,000 is 75%. So it's not. Not really a mathematical formula as much as it is. Putting in numbers and ranking them according to the. You know, scale. One to two average that we. Had done earlier. So that's just a. Starting point. I don't know what people. Think about those numbers. I guess I'm curious to see if we just, I mean, now that we've. Decided that these five are worthy of funding if we looked at the same percentage across the board. I mean, that's what that would be. Yes. I agree with that. Cause I feel like. While we've ranked them. They're all doing really good work. And it's very hard to rank them. And if, you know, essentially we have about. They 83%. I mean, 185 is 83% of 222,000. So if we funded each of them at that percentage. I would, I would like to see what that looks like. Yeah. Okay. So that would be. Wow. You are a whiz at Excel. But wait, that can't be right for the survival. No, it can't. Oh, sorry. I got the wrong. It's, it's, it's of column C, right. Get this right here. So what were you, sorry, I miss, what were you asking an appropriate amount based on. Well, I was just saying if we have, we have a total of 185,000. Right. The request total 222,000, right? 185. About 83% of 222. So I was thinking if we funded everybody at that percent, we'd get to a 185. So when I look at it, it's more like 62,000. Yeah. Yeah. Sorry. I was taking into account it. What don't we want to divide the request by. Yeah, so times 83%. Yeah, which would come out to be 62 to 50, I think. There you go. That comes out to 200. Oh, sorry. Not this one. Right. So then, yeah, so it's very close. Yeah. So that's the. Yeah. And so the. But that's actually giving. Oh, no, never mind. Sorry. I was looking around. Yeah. So there's not, not that much. Difference. If we gave everyone the same percentage. I think I preferred this version of it. I think it's more in line with how I was thinking about the work that's being done. I think it's more in line with how I was thinking about it. I think it's more in line with how I was thinking about it. I think it's more in line with how I was thinking about it. I think based on the way that the rankings were done, because so many people had the same number ones are the same number twos, it's probably the fairest way to do it. Because it wasn't a clear. One, two, three, four, five, six. Right. For everybody. Yeah. So I think if everybody gets the same. Pool. Yeah. Right. It seems like a fair and equitable way of doing this. I think the, the main argument. Against doing it that way is that it gives an incentive or rewards. And ask that. Is maybe disproportionate, right? So if you. But. But in looking at these numbers, it's hard for me to say that. Any of these is really. You know, disproportionate or out of line. I don't. When you say disproportionate, disproportionate to what? Well, to what's realistic. So for example, what they've received in the past, for example, right? So if. In the past. Big brothers, big sisters has received. You know, 30, 35,000, let's say. And they came in asking for 60,000. Because. There's a system where they can receive 83% of what they asked for. There's an incentive just asked for a really, really big amount. But. On these numbers, I guess I don't really see that as. Actually happening. But it is, but it is a big bump for some of these from what we did fund previously. So. Family outreach. If we were looking, if it was a two year grant and we funded 73,000. Half of that is not 41,000. So it is a little bit of a bump. I still think it's fair. I think it's a good way to do this. I just think it's a. That argument could be made. And I haven't looked back at what they had asked for in the past, but, but. Yeah. But it doesn't, it doesn't look to me. Superficially that anyone has asked for anything. Outrageous or, you know, so. Yeah. And I think I, I appreciate that. And I think that you're right to, to point that out. And it, but since it's something that we can, since we're not setting in stone that this is how we're going to do it. We can always fix that should that be an issue going forward. I mean, while, you know, each of these organizations, I'm sure could use quadruple what they're actually asking for. Exactly. So if you look at their budgets, they are not. Yeah. Anything. No, no one's buying it yet. All right. So does anybody have any other thoughts on this before we vote? Anybody want to suggest any other way of dividing it? I mean, there is a little bit. You know, $740 could be. So if I, if I add 740 to survival center that. I cannot believe you can work Excel so well. Yeah, that looks great. I mean, is there. I mean, would we add, you know, at some point we've said that. I mean, you know, you know, you know, you know, you know, you know, you know, you know, you know, if it's a position or something is that, you know, would it make a difference if we had different funding amounts? Right. Or does $750 mean more to one organization than another organization? I mean, I think it probably does. I don't know how we begin. Right. To figure that out. Right. Or we just give everybody. 200. And then. We're not even everybody 150 more. 148 each. 148 each. Why don't we just do that? Yeah, let's do that. I'm so glad there are people who are good at math on this committee. And I just want to call you guys out and say, I appreciate. We found his ceiling. Perfect. Yeah, that looks great. Great. Okay. I need more thoughts before we take a vote. Great. Okay. Great. Well, I move that we accept the. Excel spreadsheet that we're all looking at right now. Call him. Final decision. Second. Yeah. Okay. All in favor. Let's see. Yes. Suzanne. Yeah. Matt. Yes. And Rika. Yes. Great. Wonderful. So Nate, if we can take off. Stop screen sharing. And then we. Can go into. Public comment. Yeah. Before we do that, so I will. I just wanted to say that I'll take these recommendations and forward them to the town manager. There's a public hearing at the end of the month. On the 29th. Where we would, you know, have comment on the recommendations that may or may not be changed by the town manager. And so the idea is to have. Comments on the recommended activities that are part of the grant application. And then the grant is due in late March. I was pushed back a little bit. So I think that would be great. I think that would be great. I would just work on that application. The. As part of the public hearing, we can also receive comments on the change in the target area. So I think that'll be some of it as well. Just the, the modification of that target area. And. I think that's it. I just wanted to make a note of that. Okay. Great. Thanks for the spreadsheet. I copied it down. So I have that as well. Okay. So if, if anybody who is an attendee wants to make a public comment, if you raise your hand, then Nate can bring you in. Give a couple of seconds here for people to raise their hands. And if not, then. Okay. Are you, I don't see any hands raised, but I don't know. Okay. Okay. Okay. In that case, are there any issues? Anybody wants to raise that we did not anticipate within the last 48 hours or occurring with that did occur within the last 48 hours. And I think we are all set. And we can adjourn the meeting. Thank you, Becky. Oh, yes. Thank you. Thank you. So we meet back on February 29th. Okay. You'll be in touch with us between now and then regarding the town managers review. Correct. Okay. All right. Great. Terrific. See everybody on the twin night. Thanks for all your hard work. Yes. Thank you. Bye bye. Bye.