Urban Renewal Agency Board

Minutes September 1, 2021 Anaconda Deer Lodge County URA TIF Board Community Service Center 3rd Floor Conf. Room I. Call to Order and Roll Call A. Board members present: Carl Hamming, Dawn Dee, Rose Nyman, Jim Davison, & Kristy McKay Staff present: Adam Vauthier & Teah Fuller Others: B. Jim Davison calls meeting to order at 12:06pm II. Approval of Minutes from the August 18th, 2021 Meeting A. Jim Davison asks the board if there are any corrections in the minutes. Kristy McKay and Carl Hamming point out that their last names are misspelled. The board discusses changes to be made from “special” board meeting to just “board meeting”. Carl Hamming motions to accept the minutes with corrections to last names and the wording of board meeting Rose Nyman seconds the motion and it passes unanimously. III. Unfinished Business A. Eligible & ineligible applications i. Adam Vauthier presents page 2 and 3 of the current grant guidelines. He explains each item that he is referring to as far as what are eligible and non-eligible projects. 1. Rose Nyman states in the application it says the board has quarterly meetings but she states the board has moved to an as needed base. 2. Kristy McKay states she believes the board is meeting the goals of the URA guidelines. Kristy McKay states that there is some confusion about how many times the board will fund the same project. Rose Nyman states she felt entitlement from the last application due to the emergency funding. Jim Davison states that the board may be encouraging people to not plan for these types of emergencies. Carl Hamming states that he likes the wording, but would like to create a new category for emergency funding that the funding isn’t funded at full funding potential. 3. Adam Vauthier explains that he feels that we should rid of the emergency grants. He explains to the board how this category originated. The board discusses different wording for the application to help make this clearer. Adam Vauthier suggests that the board does not take interim applications at all, but the applicant would check a special box on the application showing why their project was already done and why they should be allowed to be funded. 4. Adam Vauthier asks if the board would like to give more points on the score sheet to the applicants that get more than one bid. 5. Adam Vauthier asks the board if they would like the emergency funding to be funded at full funding potential or to go to a lesser value. The board agrees emergency funds should be funded at half the funding capability. Adam Vauthier asks the board to review the funding amounts and decide if they would like to change them. 6. Carl Hamming asks if the confusion about was another question about infrastructure and structural was resolved. Rose Nyman stated that Adam and Teah have made the list to help applicants decipher which project is which. 7. Dawn Dee asks if there should be a cap on the overall amount from one building. Adam Vauthier states that a good cap would be $50,000 per building. Teah Fuller asks if that cap 1  will be per building and per owner or one-time cap in perpetuity per building. The question of whether we should allow applicants to do their own work was also discussed by the board. Carl Hamming asks if we can ask for proof of a state inspection before board gives reimbursement. The board discusses what will be the max amount of a total project per building. 8. Rose Nyman motions that the URA administrator does not accept applications outside of the grant cycle that is being advertised, to no longer accept emergency applications but to allow the applicant to apply within the grant cycle and state why project was done. Carl Hamming seconds the motion, and it passes unanimously. ii. Adam asks the board to discussion if they would like to get rid of parklets and street furniture. Adam reviews the guideline changes with the board. iii. The board discusses if there should be a change in the scoring sheet to help give negative points for applicants that have received more funding. Jim Davison asks about buildings that do not have a planned use. Adam asks if the board adds something to the application to help this. The board discusses where to fill this in the application. 1. Carl Hamming motions to remove parklet and street furniture from eligible activities, add a new category for emergency matching funds to only be half of the total funding edibility, adding a scoring box for negative points for previously received funds. Kristy McKay seconds the motion, with no further discussion, it passes unanimously. 2. Kristy McKay moves to remove “as quarterly” to “as needed”, number 11 of the guidelines and adding a box for emergency and reason why, Dawn Dee seconds the motion, no further discussion was had and it passes unanimously. B. Minimum scoring requirement for applications i. Adam Vauthier asks the board to review the scoring requirements. The board discusses if there is a minimum scoring requirement needed on an application. ii. Carl Hamming makes a motion to have a minimum score of thirteen for any applicant applying to be considered for funding. Dawn Dee seconds the motion and with no further discussion, it passes. IV. New Business A. Application for Emergency Projects. V. Miscellaneous/Announcements i. Adam Vauthier announces that officers need to be elected next meeting. ii. Adam Vauthier announces the call for applications will start October 1st and will close October 29th iii. Rose Nyman asks if the board would like to change the day of the meetings. The board changes the day to Tuesdays. iv. Rose Nyman states she thinks that events will be better at Benny Goodman park. She thinks the Common is too cluttered for big events. VI. Public Comment – This is the time for members of the public to comment on items NOT appearing on this Agenda that are within the Board’s jurisdiction. VII. Adjournment i. Rose Nyman motions to adjourn at 1:30pm, Dawn Dee seconds the motion and the meeting is adjourned. 2