by Liz Daube
Staff Writer
The City Council Finance Committee continued to discuss possible changes to the way the City gives out public service grants on Monday. However, with several members missing and a relatively small turnout from representatives of local nonprofits, no action could be taken on any of the agenda items.
The meeting was one of several created by the Finance Committee to review the public service grants, which total more than $12 million each year. Attendance by nonprofit agency representatives and Finance Committee members was sparse in comparison to the first meeting.
“I know this is somewhat short notice,” said Kevin Hyde, chair of the committee. “We won’t be taking any action today, especially considering we’re missing several committee members today.”
Council Auditor Kirk Sherman gave a brief overview of recommended changes to the grant application and review process. Those changes include:
• Limit and identify priorities for the grants to serve specific objectives and populations, rather than enhance particular agencies. For example: If children are a priority population, a certain percentage of the total grant money could be reserved for programs with a focus on youth.
• Priorities for grants established on a three-year basis, giving more time for the nonprofits to create noticeable changes. Grants would be given in three-year commitments subject to annual approval, and recipients would have to meet annual goals to qualify for additional funds.
• A limit on the consecutive number of years an agency can receive grants from the City. (No proposed number yet.)
• A required proposal from each applicant. Requirements would include a cover letter and a description of the proposed work: “The applicant shall state — in one sentence — what the program proposes to do and what the ultimate result will be. Then, tell us why the work is needed.”
• Economic development activities, like the Jacksonville Regional Chamber of Commerce’s work, would be separated from the grant process. Those activities would be funded by a percentage of the occupational license tax instead.
• A cap on the percentage the grant can provide for a program’s operating budget. For example: If the percentage cap was 25 percent, and a program has a budget of $100,000, the grant maximum would be $25,000.
Council member Gwen Yates objected to the uniform percentage cap because the varying size of agencies means some have more limited resources than others.
“If we’re going to start weaning some of the agencies, I don’t think we should have a uniform percentage. Smaller agencies have less places to turn to,” she said. “Sometimes we forget that with some of the agencies, if they were not doing that (their work), the City would have to pick up the ball.”
Hyde said nonprofit agencies should send any comments or concerns in writing to Finance Committee members as soon as possible, and no later than the end of December.