Health and Human Services Commission - Regular Meeting

I'd like to impose on this meeting just for one more moment. In my presentation to the board, I was anxious enough that I forgot one little detail. And that's that I wanted to make public tonight that we really have appreciated Evie and Amy and Jennifer's investment in making this commission work and all the hard work you put into it. Because if you didn't do that, we would really be overwhelmed and unable to function.

Nice to be impressed. Agreed, Heidi. It's nice

to hear.

Thank you. So the first order would be, is there a motion to accept?

We're going do roll call?

Oh, roll calls. That's Okay.

Chairman Brennan?

Here. Vice

Chairman Danford? Here. Commissioner Moeller? Here. Commissioner Voisin? Here. Commissioner Smithson? Here. Commissioner Meiklen? Here. Commissioner Wood? You have a quorum, your honor.

Okay. All right. Do I have a motion of consent to approve the agenda of our meeting, last meeting?

So we're approving the consent agenda, which includes basically the agenda and minutes from 04/22/2024 meeting.

Correct.

That's what we're looking for a motion for now.

I motion that we accept the meeting for Health and Human Services back from 04/22/2024.

A second?

Can you second? I'll second.

I'm sorry, who was it? Me. Okay, thank you. Okay. And then a roll call on this. Commissioner Moeller? Yes. Vice Chair Danford?

Yes.

Commissioner Voicing? Yes. Commissioner Smithson? Yes. Chairman Brennan?

Yes.

Commissioner Mikeland? Yes. What is absent? Okay, motion passes.

All right. Okay. Then old business. Do we have any old business?

No old business.

So we'll go to new business or All current

right.

New business. The introduction of staff members.

Thank you. So I am Evie McKinney. I'm acting city clerk. We will get into a little bit of history farther down in the agenda and can fill you in on the status with Jennifer Pena. This is Amy Greening. She's our city clerk admin assistant. So she's like my right hand. And then we have one new member this year, Sandy. And if you want to just introduce yourself, Sandy, and just say what your desires are in a couple of minutes of what you'd like to see happen while you serve on

a board? A couple of minutes. She's like, let me fix is my first one. So my name is Sandy Meiklen. I'm retired, retired from nursing. I have lived in Apache Junction for thirteen years. Because I'm retired now, I

have lots of time to work on different boards and commissions.

I'm very, very, very involved in local politics and statewide politics. I'm a delegate for the AZGOP and just looking for places to give back.

Perfect. Welcome.

Thank you.

Do other commission members want to do an abbreviated sort of introduction of themselves to Sandy as well? No. Well, I will. So I'm Michael Brennan. I'm a retired physician. I was a board certified psychiatrist. And most of my history was academic medicine with some stints in the public sector, etcetera. But nonetheless, that's essentially it. I was an educator, mostly in a residency program. And I've been a commissioner.

This is my second stint. And I didn't know whether or not it was a penitent move or not. But I think I'm absolved of all of the things, transgressions, that I did with my first rotation.

Thank you. Would you like to add something?

Okay. I guess I'm Angela Smithson and also an educator, but not a big medical background, except that I've been a caretaker for my mom for about ten years with Alzheimer's. And so, yeah, it's been an experience. But this is just my second round on the board, and it's been great.

I'm Heather Moeller. I'm an AJ all the way. Moved out here when I was five years old. Went to the elementary schools, the high school, the junior high back in the day.

I worked for Parks and Rec here for

ten years. And now I'm

on this board as well as

the Parks and Recreation Commission. And we're all about

giving back to the community. There you go.

I'm Jeff Danford, happily retired. Been in Patchett Junction for fifteen years. I sit on two commissions, this one and the Public Arts Commission.

I'm Penny Visin, and wishing I was retired. Nurse by background. Soon, very soon. And this is my second stint on this commission. Not second stint, I guess, my second year. Second year, first term. Yeah.

Good. All right. Okay.

And Penny, my apologies for butchering your last name. It's a

tough one. It's so difficult. And you did just fine.

Right. So I suspect we have to go through the motion again for chair and vice chair, etcetera.

Yes. So I would like to read just a brief process on how the voting of chair and vice chair goes. Per city code two-eleven-four officers, the commission shall elect a chairperson and vice chair from among its members to serve for a period of one year. The vice chair shall preside at commission meetings in the absence of the chair. This election process for chair and vice chair follows the Robert Rules of Order by using a nomination process.

A board member seeks recognition from the chair to make the nomination. The nomination does not require a second. So once you say the name, we won't ask for a second. It is possible to have more than one nomination. However, the first name nominated is the first name for the vote once the nominations are closed. If that nomination fails to achieve a majority vote by the board, I move on to the second name, and so on and so forth. Once there is a majority vote, the process is complete. So are there any questions before we get started on this? Okay. So you may ask for your motion to open the nominations.

I ask for a motion to open the nomination for chair of the Health and Human Services Commission.

I nominate Mr. Brenner.

Okay. So first, we just need to open the nomination. So we're looking for a motion to open this process. I

Go ahead.

Okay. We're all leaning forward. I motion to open the nominations for chairperson of Health

and Human Services Commission. Great. Thank you. And a second.

I second.

Vice Chair Danford?

Yes.

Commissioner Volson? Yes. Commissioner Moeller? Yes. Commissioner Smithson? Yes. Chairman Brennan?

Yes.

Commissioner Meikling? Yes. Motion passes. Passes. And now anyone can start with their nominations.

I nominate Mr. Brennan for chairperson.

I

motion that we

Nope, not yet. Nope. Okay, I'll lie. If there are no further nominations, the chair does have to ask three more times for nominations.

Are there any further nominations for chair of Health and Human Services? Are there any more nominations for Health and Human Services? And for the last time, are there any more nominations for Health and Human Services chair?

I move the nominations for the chairperson of the Health and Human Services Commission be closed.

I second.

Roll call.

Commissioner Smithson? Yes. Commissioner Moeller?

Yes.

Vice Chairman Danford?

Yes.

Commissioner Volson? Yes. Chairman Brennan? Yes. Commissioner Meikland? Yes. Motion passes.

I move that Mr. Brennan be seated as chairperson of the Health and Human Services Commission.

And a second?

Oh, I second. I apologize. You think this would be easier because you have it written for me. I'm like

It's always confusing. It doesn't matter how much we have it written out. You just have to go through the process, it Commissioner Vosson? Yes. Commissioner Smithson? Yes. Vice Chair Danford? Yes. Commissioner Moeller? Yes. Chairman Brennan?

Yes.

Commissioner Meiklen? Yes. Motion passes to seat Mr. Brennan as your chairman for the board. Now we'll follow the same exact process for vice chair. So first, the motion needs to be opened for the nominations and closed. Then you can nominate. And then we'll close the nominations.

I move there is a nomination for the vice chair of Health and Human Services Commission. A motion for vice chair.

I second. GREGORY Heather, thank you. Commissioner Moeller? Yes. Vice Chair Danford? Yes. Commissioner Wilson? Yes. Commissioner Smithson? Yes. Chairman Brennan?

Yes.

Commissioner Mikeland? Yes. Motion passes.

And then we go ahead and And now you

can nominate.

I nominate Jeffrey Danford for vice chairperson.

I second.

Not yet.

Not yet, sorry. Preemptive.

If there are no other nominations, you need to ask again for three times.

Are there any other nominations for vice chair of Health and Human Services Commission? A second time, are there any other nominations for Health and Human Services Vice Chair for this commission? And for the last time, are there any other nominations for the position of Vice Chair of Health and Human Services Commission of Apache Junction? Hearing none, is there a roll call vote for confirming that?

We'll close the nominations.

Let's close the nomination. Yes. To close the nomination. Second.

So is that something I need

to motion or second? Was that Mr. Danford?

Yeah.

No. Yes. Yeah. So Chair Brennan has asked for a motion to close the nominations for vice chair.

Yes.

And Mr. Brennan has now moved that. Now we need a second on that. Second. Okay.

Commissioner Moeller? Yes. Vice Chair Danford? Yes. Commissioner Voisin? Yes. Commissioner Smithson? Yes. Chairman Brennan?

Yes.

Commissioner Meiklen? Yes. Motion passes to close the nominations.

Okay. All right.

And then we'll do a roll call for Mr. Danford as vice.

Okay. A roll call.

Commissioner Smithson? Yes. Commissioner Moeller? Yes. Vice Chair Danford?

Yes.

Commissioner Vosund? Yes. Chairman Brennan?

Yes.

Commissioner Meiklen? Yes. Motion passes as Vice Chair Danford, serving for the Health and Human Services Board.

Perfect. I will get you for that.

You did such a good job

last year. Oh, yeah.

And yeah. Okay.

So the next agenda issue is a discussion of fiscal year 'twenty five-'twenty six and new application and funding timeline. Okay,

so you all should have received a copy of the new application. Looks quite a bit different than if you remember what we had before. It was, I don't know, 20 some pages. So we really tried to condense this down. We compared it with a few other cities and local government agencies and decided that this was a really good product that we ended up with.

It basically is still asking for all of the same information. It's just that they fill it in and put as many words as they want in their own Word document so they're not scrunched for availability of space in a block. So we thought that this would just be a clearer way to handle this. At this time, we don't know how many applications we've received. We haven't gotten any phone calls on confusion or concern about the application.

So we're happy about that. And I know you all have not had a lot of time to review it. But there isn't really a lot to discuss about it. It's made, and our next meeting will discuss definitely the applications that we receive. More so, I wanted to go over the timeline so that everyone understands the process of this, especially for our new member, Sandy.

Every January 1, we do put a public notice out that we're accepting applications for the funding for the next fiscal year, which is July 1 through June 30. Those applications are required to be submitted to the clerk's office by the '31. This year, the commission's timeline is today is your first meeting, so just kind of getting back into the saddle and just getting a flow, kind of planning our next dates. February 24 is the next meeting date where you will score the applications, And you'll receive those prior to the meeting. And then that's where we'll just kind of go over everything.

March 10 is the suggested date for the interviews of the applicants. And on the agenda, which we will be asking for the motion to be corrected, we did put in the agenda for the next meeting to be March 24. But there are conflicts with staff and a couple of the board members. So we're asking that we do that on March 31. I'm going to stop there and go back and share a little history.

Previously, there was one meeting in January, one in February, one in March, one in April. And then the chair would recommend to the city council at the May work session of the commission's recommendations. And council has requested that they have a bit more time because they only have one more meeting before they do the final adoption of the budget. And if they have any questions or concerns for the commission, they don't have enough time for them to come back and you to reconvene and discuss further. So that's why we're kind of squishing two meetings into March.

And then Chair Brennan would announce at the 04/14/2025 work session all of your recommendations that we come up with on March 31. May 20 would be a second meeting for the commission if counsel decided from the April 14 presentation that they had some questions. So we would meet again. June 16 is the slated date for counsel to do the final adoption of the budget for fiscal year 'twenty five-'twenty six. And July 1 is the date of the new contract's effective commencement.

Then typically, we don't meet again until January. Doesn't mean that we can't, but the main function for this commission has typically been to make the recommendation of dispersing of the funds that are granted for the nonprofits for this purpose. So any questions on that?

Do we know what the dollar amount is we're going to be allocating this year?

I have not heard for certain. There was discussion that they would increase it, but I have not heard that as of yet.

So to follow-up on that question, do we then assume that the sum is at a minimum the eventual sum of last year of $90,000 Or is it reverting back to $80,000

That's a great question, your honor. And I will get clarification before our February meeting so that we know for sure what I I know last year we had two different amounts. I would rather go to counsel with one black and white amount for each organization rather than to go with, well, if it's this much, this is how much. And if it's this much it just got pretty confusing last year. So I'll get clarification that we should be able to know for certain what is going to be recommended by the February meeting?

Well, I think the expectation last year was that they were saying they were going to raise the money within the next few weeks. So we gave them two options. And then I don't know if they ever raised the second option or not. Yeah, they did.

I think it did go up to the next level. It was another But 10

Commissioner Danforth is accurate that that was nebulously defined and left remarkably vague even up to the last moment for us. Was only when I presented information and what our formula was if they adopted the more expansive funding that that was somewhat clarified. But I think there's an issue for me, at any rate, relative to what I thought was being conveyed to me by several of the city council members. And that was a rather broad misunderstanding of what it is that the commission really has power to do. I think there was the implication that we somehow select the applicants and even decide what the vetting process is.

Is. And I was hoping that maybe at this meeting, if we have time, that we sort of define those issues or understand those issues better for the commission so that ambiguity is dispensed with. I really got the impression that they were somewhat frustrated with us. And so they believed that we had not exactly responded to the parameters of the funding requirements. And I think it was just a general misunderstanding on their part of exactly what the requirements were because we believe that after they've been vetted, etcetera, our function really was to determine the specific needs and how they reflect the needs of the community.

EV, there was a a few months back, there was a meeting scheduled for us to meet with counsel. And that meeting got canceled. And my understanding why we were going to be discussing not only his issues but the parameters, maybe tightening up the parameters of the funding process. Because there were some questions from council last year about is this really a proper use of our money? And what guide I think we're asking for more guidance because there was some confusion about, well, is an air conditioner allowed?

Is a new building allowed under the funding or what? And I was wondering why that meeting got canceled and why we never got rescheduled. And I did talk to a couple of the council members who won the meeting and were disappointed it got canceled too.

So thank you, chair and vice chair. The decision was made for the most part, what council wanted to discuss was the timeline. So administratively, we came up with this new timeline And also assured counsel that in the motions, when you make the recommendations of funding, we'd be very, very specific. And you do have permissions to say, this can only be funded for specifically. And in the motions, that's what we need to say specifically.

Because there were just a lot of gray areas last year. And you're right, vice chair in the air conditioner. The goal, which we're kind of segueing into our next agenda item I'm sorry. I'm taking charge, Chair Brennan. But the goal and the duties of the commission is to, yes, disperse those funds in the best way they see fit for Apache Junction citizens.

Indirectly, an air conditioner was helping the citizens. But I think what counsel is looking for more is how they can assist the elderly, the handicapped, in home shut ins. It's services for that type of category.

Hungry people.

Hungry, yeah, unsheltered.

So because I'm very concerned about current events and a discussion about the possibility of there being some modification in a dramatic way to Medicaid. Medicaid is called access in Arizona. Its history is interesting. Medicaid was passed in 1965. But Arizona didn't adopt that until seventeen years later.

And they adopted it because they were reticent to accept federal funds with limitations and other restrictions. And they opted then to have something that was more of a managed care sort of format that really was rather unique and in some ways a very fascinating sort of concept. Because quite early on, it looked like it may be adopted across the country. And as a physician, there were numerous questions on medical board exams, initial as well as in specialties about what was the state that didn't initially approve Medicaid, etcetera, and what did they do. So that was what happened.

But we're at a time of interesting fiscal issues. I was president of psychiatric society in 2010. At that time, the state legislature made a decision about funding for access recipients. And they decided that because of the financial constraints that the state had, that individuals that were childless individuals could be exempted from access. Now, that was without regard to any illness, severity of illness, etcetera.

They used that as a sole criterion. And 200 and some thousand people got thrown off of access. Jan Brewer, at that time later, signed an agreement with the federal government that as long as the Fed has provided 80% of the funding that the state would be able to perpetuate that program. I have no crystal ball. I don't know if that's what's going to happen or not.

But if it doesn't, it could become precarious. And we don't have some aspects of this that sort of address those issues about people that really have some pretty severe illnesses children with asthma, diabetes, in both children and adults, epilepsy, etcetera. And I figured that if they're not treated, that would be pretty disastrous in numerous ways. I have discussed in previous meetings the identity of Mackenzie Scott. And I believe Mackenzie Scott, if you know about her, is a very interesting woman.

She was the wife of Sergei Brin, who was a partner with the founder of Apple. And when they separated, she got quite a sum as part of that. And she has been a remarkable philanthropist and of late has been quite generous. As she was challenged by another individual who said that she was being too generous, she doubled her ante. So that's how rebellious she can get.

But nonetheless, it's been for good causes. And I've been concerned that we haven't necessarily made application to that source of funding because we have some needs not only in the homeless and other things. I've talked about Schwarzenegger and how he donated 2,600 tiny homes to LA for the homeless there. And then saying that he should do that, he's very aligned with Los Angeles. But McKenzie Scott seems to have compassion and a sense of social justice for individuals rather broadly across the country.

And I think that if a well formulated proposal was submitted to her, it may stand a chance of getting some funding. And she has, of late, decided that the funding is yours. Once I decide that you've got it, then I'm believing that you're honest and you're going to use it well. I'm not going to come and audit you and other things. So that's pretty gratuitous. So if we can, I'd like us to explore that.

So off the top of my head, your honor, what I'm hearing is basically you would like, within our city code, which that would require an ordinance to change the code, that we specify in there this particular category of health care needs.

I really have some concern. I think we're in a very precarious state right now. And if you've been attuned to the news, lots of funding has already been extinguished, that we have ended certain relationships that would help deal with infectious diseases, etcetera, like with the WHO, etcetera. And so I just am concerned that this would be a general problem that would have ramifications that are pretty potentially dramatically horrible.

Yeah, but I don't think that's our purview. Our mandate here is to accept the applications of community organizations who are asking for assistance. And it's up to us to determine, one, should they get that assistance? Two, what actions of their request should get the assistance? And three, how much money we give them? And it's really not up to us to dictate who comes to us and applies.

Right. Can only

If they apply, we respond to them.

Right. You can only fund to those that submit an application. That was going be my second point.

That was one of the questions that came up last year. It's counsel was, well, why didn't you give money to this group or this group? And we had to respond, they didn't apply. Right. They don't apply, they don't get any money.

Right. Yeah. And that process is open to everyone. It's a public process. It's posted on our website. We've got three or four social media platforms that it's on, as well. It's just on the city website. So it's out there.

It's there.

And so to clarify, I'm not asking that we have that as a subset right now. I was asking that we seek out that funding, if available. Then we look at that sort of ability to provide those resources.

But that's not us to seek out that funding. That's up to the organizations to seek out that funding.

Well, it's up to us to perhaps elicit external funding sources. I mean, we get funding from the city, but there's no prohibition to seeking funding from other entities to supplement that.

But that's not what we're here for.

No, but that's for the city to solicit.

Well, they go to city council and make that proposal to the city council. Fair enough.

Right. And so basically, to wrap everything up, we would probably have to discuss this at a future meeting. We could put it on the agenda for the February meeting to further discuss it. I would probably ask that you all make a motion if you want to pursue that or not. And then it would be a recommendation to the city council. And then they would determine if the ordinance needed to be changed, if we need to change who or what type of criteria we now want to fund through the Health and Human Services funding.

As I recall from previous years, your staff actually vets each one of those applications, right?

Correct.

They determine exactly where the money's going to go or what they're asking for, how they've used the money spent in the past, and whether they're reputable or not, and whether they meet the requirements of the application process.

Well, is directly your responsibility as commissioners. Yeah. Our staff really doesn't do anything other than just to make sure that they've got all the required documentation when they submit that application. And if they don't, we do call them and say, we're missing whatever it is that they're missing. So that by the February meeting, when you are ready to discuss and score the applications and come up with a tentative amount, that you would have all the information that you need to make your decision.

So would you like me to put that as an agenda item for February?

No. Perhaps I misunderstood. Again, my suggestion was just that to look for added resources to be able to enhance funding possibilities, I think, is not our job. It is a position that the city has to take on. And I believe that there are opportunities. And I'm just suggesting that those be explored.

Okay. What I will do is further this. And we have a new grants coordinator on board. And I can have a conversation with that staff member. And perhaps she's already got some information that can go for that. But as far as it being anything that the Health and Human Services Commission would do, that's out of your league, basically. And you understanding that. Right. I'm getting clear from

We're to decide the delegation of the resources that we

have. Right.

We're not in a position to solicit those or whatever, modify the other format. Yeah, I fully grasp that.

Okay. Great conversation. Thank you. Okay.

Moving on. Okay, do I hear a motion to discuss the duties of the commission?

We don't have a motion for that. That's just the next agenda item to discuss those commission duties. And everybody should have gotten the handout. And It basically is just giving a little bit of history, the membership and the terms. And the duties are on page two under two-eleven-five.

Conduct public hearings to determine the needs of city residents with regard to public health needs, provision of human services, and care of the elderly, handicapped, and developmentally disabled, to enhance the development of the public health through public forums, seminars, and work with other agencies to review requests submitted by health and human service providers, the nonprofits, for city funding and to make recommendations to the council regarding that funding, to assist in the development of health care facilities, and to make recommendations to the council regarding elderly health care and emergency transportation programs.

So it does fit under those issues.

It does fit under there. And that's why I'm saying it would be just a recommendation to counsel. But I will get clarification on if it goes to counsel from you, or if it's an internal staff situation that we can handle.

What pathways are in place currently for this commission to learn about issues such as in item E for elderly health care and emergency transportation programs and things of that nature. If we're to be making recommendations to counsel on things, what pathways do we have for learning about the issues that are out there? And how often do we do public hearings to get feedback from I mean, how often has that happened historically? I feel like just I've not been involved with this that long. But just looking back at meetings and whatnot, it looks like we focus a lot on item C and not much else.

Exactly. Thank you, Commissioner Wilson. And I think that that has been a passion of Chair Brennan's, that the commission does reach out and do more and get in touch with other organizations. And you don't have just that one sole responsibility to disperse those funds. Clearly, you can see all of those.

To answer your question, I am not knowledgeable about if there was ever any public hearing scheduled. To my knowledge, no. But I can't say that for certain. And I would say, if there are items that you want to make recommendations to counsel, that would be efforts on your part that you would do member as a whole. Probably not at a meeting, I would suggest that if you have ideas like Chair Brennan has, that's when you bring them to the table and we discuss them at this meeting and then decide if they warrant recommendation to the council.

In prior solicitations, there had been a requirement that individual organizations have to demonstrate that they have a collaboration with other entities to sort of, if you will, multiply the efficacy of their efforts so that if you're providing food, for example, and you know that someone has some other medical issues, that you refer them over. And there was one program, at least temporarily, that had a navigator to try and do that. Though it didn't seem like it was very robust or fruitful, to be honest. And so I thought that that was a good idea at the very beginning. But when it turned out that the hours were very limited and that they really weren't trying to get people enrolled, for example, in access if they were eligible, etcetera, etcetera, that was of concern to me, because they did have other issues that could have been dealt with that sort of forum of an adjunctive entity serving that purpose of aligning that, arranging for and so the question that was raised about transportation, etcetera, that's really been a vague issue as well about how do people with various problems get transported to medical appointments to other things, even for meals?

Because it was brought up that, well, so and so has x meals from x time. Well, if somebody doesn't have transportation, they can't get there.

I can answer a little bit to that through our Parks and Recreation Program. And Heather, maybe you can help me with this, if you recall. They do receive funding and they do have a transportation system in place. And the citizens do need to contact the senior center I'll use that as a contact that they have a doctor's appointment or they want to go grocery shopping. And I think there's a nominal fee for that transportation now, which went into effect in July, maybe.

I can't tell you the amount.

Yes. It's nominal. It's just a couple bucks. Yeah. That is in place. And, you know, again, I'm not sure how to get the word out. It's on our website. There's information. There's brochures and flyers at the senior center. So if people go there. I'm not really sure that I'm answering your question. But I can say that there is a transportation system in place through our Parks and Recreation.

Okay. So that sort of addresses one of the issues of defining what transportation services might be available. But I was hoping that it was a little broader than that. Okay.

Like, were you thinking for doctor's appointments and stuff? Because I know through church, there are people that there's like a whole system out there in age eight. And it's partially paid, I think, through Medicare maybe, too, something like that. So I think there's stuff out there. I just don't know. I just know how to get it all in one place, I guess, for us and for them

to find out

about. Or even in several places. I mean, it's a matter of knowing when somebody qualifies as well. So if people are educated and can inform people because I think part of the problem is there are people that are just unknowledgeable of whether or not they qualify to receive those benefits.

Exactly.

And I think that that would enhance some as medicine, one of the indictments I can do for my own profession is that we've been structured in such a way that we respond to what the problem is after it's become almost catastrophic. We haven't really emphasized any sort of preventive quality, to be honest. And it's been talked about and gotten a lot of lip service, but it doesn't get a lot of engagement and real programs to do that. There are examples of it. Kaiser Permanente has done that.

And there are individuals that have set up various formats. There's a Doctor. Dean Ornish that set up a format to deal with executives. But that was because he was pretty prominent. They were very wealthy.

And they were able to purchase those services and tailor care for them and deal with that so that he prevented and actually was able to reverse cardiovascular changes, all sorts of things with an intervention that included meditation, diet, exercise, etcetera. Now, they had to be pretty persistent about it. And it wasn't immediate. But it was over a couple of years. But it was really remarkable because at the time that he instituted that, no one really believed that it could be done that way.

I do feel like the only way to really truly understand the needs of the population here in Apache Junction is to hold a public hearing to find out what those needs are. And if there are things that come forward that we need to take to city council, then that's what we do. But I mean, think we're doing a disservice by just focusing our efforts on funding and not really listening to the voice of the community to find out what the issues are. And we might not have the funds to fix anything, but we do have the voice to take to city council to see if we can impact some of those concerns. So that would be my recommendation.

And if I'm not mistaken, because last year was my first year too, when we looked at the duties, which we only did briefly, I think they were established in nineteen seventy something. And so there wasn't a lot about youth in here. And I don't know. So that would go along with, if we held a forum or something, maybe it would open our eyes to some new things that we need to be taking a look at.

So I don't think it's that novel to solicit from the community what they believe are the resources that they desperately need. And that way, it would be informative.

Perhaps for next year. I don't know if you have the time frame.

Yeah, no, no. Fair enough.

No pressure.

Well, and I think to all commissioners, vice and chair, and all of you, again, you can certainly come up with recommendations for anything, basically, based on item E, make recommendations to counsel regarding elderly health care and emergency transportation programs. I think also it would be expected of you, if you did see other needs, that those recommendations go to council. But again, keep in mind that it would require an ordinance change to city code. And that is not a quick measure. Not that it can't be done, because we do it pretty often at regular council meetings.

But that would be just the tip. And as Commissioner Moeller said, it would not happen this year. But it certainly can be discussed. And I can get a little bit more information before our next meeting in February. And we could put this on as an agenda item for February for further discussion.

I guess my thought was that it might not require any changes to city code. If we hear things that are of concern, maybe we can then start working on item B, where we provide some sort of public health education through seminars or working with other agencies. I mean, don't think that it needs to be that large of a scope where we have to go back and change city ordinances. I just think we could put a little bit more time and effort into this role. Sure.

So two things I heard is, one, the criticalness of the Medicaid situation and how many people are going to be affected from that that are not elderly or they're not developmentally disabled. That's on a financial threshold. And Commissioner Smithson mentioned the children that are now in our system. And those aren't specifically mentioned in the code. So that's where I was going. If you were going to if your desire was to specifically state in code who else could receive this funding, That's what it would require

to Or does that change

fall under special what did I see here? Special populations, I think. I'm not quite sure how it was worded.

Yeah, because I know in the past we've I mean, one of the biggest items that comes up every year is the food bank, for instance, and their school kid program, lunch programs, and stuff like that. So I know we do allocate funds to organizations that work with the kids and work with the younger people. So I'm not sure which line that falls under, but I know we have done that.

Yeah, it had outlined special populations somewhere. So maybe there just needs to be clarity on what those special populations are. Are those the youth? What does that even what is that?

Good question. It's a nebulous definition. Okay.

So I will get more clarification on how we proceed with something like this. And we will discuss it more at our February meeting then.

Thank you.

Okay, great. Thank you.

And I'd like to punctuate the sentiment that said that we don't expect this necessarily to be implemented this year. But if it can evolve progressively, that would be really helpful. Think we have one issue, though, that we broached very early on about a modification to our meeting calendar. Do I have to ask for a question?

Yes. And your honor, if I can back up just a little bit to the staff liaison's report, I do have two items that I'd like to include on there. Okay. Jennifer Pena was our city clerk. And we received a resignation letter from her in November.

Effective date was November 28. So we are in the process of filling that position now. And the other announcement I wanted to make is that on February 12 I believe it's the twelfth. I wrote the fifteenth, but I think it's the twelfth is our State of the City address. Not sure if any of you have been to that or if you're interested in it, but it's a great it's something that was started years ago from a prior mayor.

And it just kind of recaps the past year and the forward anticipations that the city has as a whole, as the government. And this year, to note, is at a different location. So I just want to point that out and make sure that you all understand that it is at Desert View Wedding Events Center. And the address is 2104 South Star. Do I have that right, Heather? 2014. Thousand Okay. Was dyslexic. February.

That's Okay. My husband makes fun of me

all the

time, so I'll it like four times. He's like, just

get it done.

Like, I have to check.

So it starts at 05:30. It's a reception with just some simple refreshments. And then the actual address starts at 06:00.

Perfect.

Then if you're ready to move on to the meeting times.

Please.

So we are regularly, tentatively scheduled for the fourth Monday of every month. Therefore, it's not considered a special meeting because it is a regular, tentative publication a posting that we put on our posting board. Because all public meetings have to be posted for the public twenty four hours before the meeting. So tonight, on the motions, we would ask that two things. One is that we will need to make a motion for a special meeting for March 10, and then a correction to the agenda meeting for March 24, that that would fall up to March 31.

So it can all be one motion. But it will be a motion to approve our next meeting of February 24, a special meeting on March 10, and our regular meeting on March 31.

I move for a motion to accept that twotwenty four is our regularly scheduled meeting, threeten will be a special meeting for interviews. And in lieu of the regularly scheduled meeting of threetwenty four, we meet on threethirty one to fulfill that responsibility for the month of March and a regular meeting of this commission.

I second. Oh, Do I move that? That was his move, so I second.

Okay. He moved, you're seconding, yes. Commissioner Muller? Yes. Vice Chair Danford? Yes. Commissioner Vosson? Yes. Commissioner Smithson? Yes. Chair Brennan?

Yes.

Commissioner Meiklen? Yes. Motion passes for those meetings to be scheduled as stated.

Somewhat choppy, but thank you.

Do have a I question for you. Yes. For the application date, it's Friday, January 31. But isn't the office only open till Thursday?

They can submit them online.

Oh, perfect.

Yeah. Thanks.

Yeah, they have to be received by that date.

Okay.

Yeah. Excellent question.

And we hope nobody's going to argue about the postage on it. It's gone

up, man. It's gone up again.

Don't want to stay on mute. Use email.

So because of that, in light of that, then I'm going to ask for a motion to adjourn the meeting.

And you can just call the adjournment. You don't need motion for this. Yes, same time. Catch it.

Okay. And just use your cap. Okay. The meeting is adjourned.