Bangor committee approves OVG contract extension, HIV grant, and day space RFP

[0:18] Michael Beck: Hi, all right everybody, it is Monday, May 18th, it's 7:11 p.m. This is the Government Operations Committee. I'm the committee chair, Michael Beck, and also joining us at the table are our members, Councilor Fish, Councillor Meller, Councillor Deane, Councillor Walker. Also joining us here are Councillors Carson, Councillor Leonard. We also have Councillor Faloon on Zoom, and we have the city manager, Carolyn Lear. The first item we have is an order authorizing the city manager to enter a five-year contract extension for the Oak View Group for the operation of the Cross Insurance Center. This is an item that was tabled at the May 4th Government Operations Committee. [1:01] Carollynn Lear: Yes, all right, so I'm going to go ahead and just invite Doug again. I don't know, Jake, do you to come to the table too, or are you about to go on here? Oh, thank you, welcome to the table, is Doug Higgins, who's an executive with Oakley, and Jake Berkowitz, who you've met many a time now, who is the manager of insurance. So as Counselor Beck mentioned, we had a really discussed this contract renewal a couple weeks ago. Counselor Beckett had some questions that we needed to run down answers to, and so then discussion was tabled, and we come back to you with answers. But in retrospect, I should have thought through a little bit more thoughtfully that so many of you are new to the council and probably didn't have a great history of the relationship between the city and Oakview as it relates to the management of the Cross Insurance Center. And that was my oversight, and I was hoping you would indulge me in just a bit of a history on that relationship. So when the city was first considering whether to replace the old Civic Center, a study was produced, actually probably several different studies at different times was produced. And in at least one of them, the study included revenue projections for a new Civic Center. And Doug was kind enough to find that study for me and that report back in I think it was 2010 showed that a new Civic Center facility would likely lose to the tune of $250,000 to $300,000 a year. But nonetheless, the decision was made to invest in the Cross Insurance Center despite those revenue loss projections. And I think the reasoning was really because that new Civic Center, which became the Press Insurance Center, was really seen as a community asset and an economic development tool, as opposed to a revenue-generating asset. As you know, history was created, a new civic center was indeed built, and then fast forward 13 years and an RFP was issued for the management of that new building. The at that time three entities bid on that management contract and OVG was the strong staff recommendation at that time. So since 2013, OVG has managed the Cross Insurance Center, it was an initial five-year contract and then a series of several contract extensions. I think one of the primary issues that Councilor Bethu raised a couple weeks ago was the question of an RFP, and I think it's a fair question to raise. Now there are two vendors that operate in this space. case. One has since been consumed by, was it OBG that consumed the other? And so there are two. And for many reasons, it's pretty unlikely that other vendor would be did on the management contract for our cross insurance center. Not because it isn't lovely and not because it's not a good job to manage it, but more so just because of sort of marketplace place factors they're very present in new hampshire not in maine and they kind of see our cross insurance center as competition however more importantly from my perspective an even worse case scenario than only having one bidder would be if they did bid on the work because i really think that it would be pretty disruptive to operations to have to transition to a new vendor I think you would see a substantial portion of the staff turnover you currently have a staff and an organization that has nearly I guess well over I guess to a decade of managing the cross insurance center pretty effectively you have an organization that really knows the vanguard community and know sort of how the city operates were we to rfp and go to a different vendor like i said i think operations would be pretty disrupted and you know i would also note i think the relationship with ovg is a little bit different than with any other contractor that we work with it really is a transactional relationship with a company that paves our streets or even cleans our buildings but it's not a particularly transactional relationship jake is essentially a department head within the city he comes to our department head meetings we meet twice a week he engages with and interacts with all the other department heads on a pretty regular and ongoing basis so I also think there's just it's a Little bit different than your typical contractor that the city contracts with, so that sort of went into my decision as well about whether or not it was a worthwhile exercise, given that we're extremely happy with the level of service, or I'll speak for myself, I'm extremely happy with the level of service that OBG has provided. I think this is the fourth time that I've seen Doug in person in my 11 months of being city manager. I'm pretty confident in that relationship. I just don't, I don't from my perspective, it doesn't make sense to go up to the marketplace and solicit a bid for this work. So that sort of is sort of the background of why you don't have a bid recommendation before you to consider. Instead, you have just another contract extension. I think with that, I don't know if Doug or Jake, you have anything to add. Otherwise, I'm happy to field the questions. [8:08] Doug Higgins: Just briefly, just Carolyn talked about our relationship with the city, and I'll speak about myself personally. I've been coming here since 2009 when the old civic center was here. I was here for the groundbreaking of the Cross Insurance Center. I was here when the service center came down, really been intimately involved with Bangor since the Arena Yes campaign back in the 2000s. And so it's a bit personal to me, both the city and this account, and really I'm proud of the success we have here. I'm proud of the team we have here. So I don't, I'm happy to answer questions, but I just wanted to go on record that it's more than just a contract to me personally. It is, it is, it is a facility I'm proud of and proud of everything, look forward to the future. [9:01] Michael Beck: Questions, I want to get the Florida everyone else with riots money, I mean, okay, so if we don't like no indulgence some questions, so the first question I have is regarding the basically I know that it talks about that there's a, an annual CPI increase. My question is, are we able to put a cap on that, like four percent? Yes sir. Okay, the next one is regarding the 500,000, which is very generous, and thank you. My question is, the way it's written in the contract right now is, and not that I would expect there to be any breach from your end, but if there were, the contract still requires us to pay back the remaining amount in full. Is there something we can put in there that if it is a breach of contract from OVG's end, that, you know, the city's not liable for the remaining amount? [10:00] Doug Higgins: If that's directed at me, I'm happy to have discussion with our legal team of all, but as you can understand though, the amount of money, the 500,000 over five year period, I have to look at from a business standpoint. I have to be able to make that money back in some shape, form or fashion, and when we get in the breach language, breach discussion, I need to have the lawyers involved. What defines breach, how we get there. Certainly if we run the ship into a brick wall and cause massive issues, then I would agree with you. If it's a technical breach, where I'm not so sure about, and the city is looking to make a change, I would feel like we would be do our own advertised portion back. So I don't think I quite answered your question, but there may be a legal path that get you comfort to what you're saying. If we're purely completely negligent, I'd agree with you, and there should be some pain in our end, but if it's a breach for technical reasons, not so sure [11:10] Michael Beck: Are no, that's my question, yeah, and I, yeah, getting the lawyers involved, I mean, it's contracts, I'm with you there. The other question I had is getting clarification on the one dollar fee for events with over thirty thousand attendees. Obviously across the insurance center, the whole thirty thousand, okay, but the way it was word in the contract, it sounds like per event. So does that mean that would encompass like the Bangor State Fair, for example, like where, when would [11:39] Doug Higgins: be paid that dollar fee, but I was just trying to the intention of that, and that's been historical as part of our agreement for what we consider a hard ticketed event, a ticketed event that's in the arena. That would not include the Bangor State Fair, and so that to me is a line of deal in the asian, it's nothing that goes on in the conference center, which is why we proposed, you know, having some sort of compensation directly related to food and beverage, which is really what the key is to the running business in the conference center. So I think our inputs for a line there, but also to be sure that we bring ticketed events into the arena portion of the [12:13] Michael Beck: facility, and that's where that is intended to be. Okay, yeah, there was the number 30,000 that was tripping me up, because the arena is a whole 30,000. No, it's over the course of a year, so it [12:25] Doug Higgins: incentivizes us to bring in total ticketed patrons to the arena, and that's when that kicks in, it's [12:34] Michael Beck: over 30 000 patrons this year okay because the way it's word that to me it sounded like it was single like paid per paying attendant to a concert and or broadway show singular over the course of the year yeah but there's nothing in there about the course of the year yeah i'm not [12:52] Carollynn Lear: sure what you're doing. Yeah, and this is my MMO. Yeah, so it could just be that I even started [13:00] Doug Higgins: all the way ahead, and that's in the previous version of the agreement as well, which to get very clear from the annual basis. Well, again, the intention there with both of the incentives is that we're, we're linked together. It's just the more business we put through the facility, the more money we bring to the city of Van Gogh, or that's going to get compensated. Sure, and this [13:22] Michael Beck: question actually got answered for me by the city manager. I'd asked about debt ownership, and you would answer it and said that hey, long as the city, and that's actually in the original contract already. I brought up the, you know, the issue about the survey performance bonus, but since that time we've chatted through that. I have no more questions about that. The last question I have is regarding the two percent food and beverage. Currently it's gross, and I guess my question or issue is, you know, because we've already got the fee attached to consumer price index being the gross this kind of also feels like a two percent tax and every dollar that comes through that's also attached to the consumer price index I mean cost of food goes up you know the gross goes up and that's a added value and I 'm wondering if we can have a discussion instead about possibly doing net I'd be comfortable exchanging the gross to net on a [14:16] Doug Higgins: comparable basis where we can still take out similar compensation but based on the net as [14:20] Michael Beck: supposed to. Yes, sure, and I don't want to speak for the council, but just make sure I understand, this is what we're doing tonight is we're authorizing you to then get these details hammered [14:30] Carollynn Lear: out. Yeah,, and so what you would have, presuming council is happy with that, with those changes, which we can talk through, you would then get a, an item on the agenda hopefully Monday. I think we could work those small changes out by Monday that would reflect those changes [14:57] Michael Beck: for a full council to vote on. Okay, any other questions? Council Fitch, I just want to say [15:05] Carolyn Fish: That you know, those are great questions. I'd like to bring up to kind of look at those points again, but I know from my experience, and especially COVID and watching what the Cross Center did trying to recover, bring back, bring back activities and bring back entertainment and what you guys had to do to bring that back and to be where we are today and that recovery, I don't really have any complaints from, you know, I've only been on council a little less than three years, but I have been a long time resident. I have been going to the Cross Center and I've watched the activities and it continued to improve year after year. So I'm pleased to continue this and thank you for getting back to us with your report. So I just wanted to say, I don't have an issue. [15:58] Michael Beck: The other coming to questions. So we're looking for a motion to move this forward? Yes. [16:05] Carolyn Fish: I'll entertain the motion. I move that we accept the lease with some pending changes [16:16] Carollynn Lear: coming before the week is out. Can I articulate what I think the changes are just so we make sure we're approving the same thing? We're talking a four percent cap to the CPI increase, going from an incentive based on 2% of gross food and beverage sales to net food and beverage sales, and we will calculate that percentage to keep things equal to the amount of compensation that you're calculating you would receive. I put a note that I'm going to ask for a little tweak to the language to clarify a 30,000 attendance figure just to make clear that it's cumulative. And then we're going to look for some language adjustments on the $500,000 item to the extent we can. Because I think that's probably the one where there's the most maybe tension to offer the city some comfort and protections as it relates to when that will get clawed back. [17:26] Michael Beck: Yeah, and clearly we're authorizing you to make the final call on that. Okay, so is that the ocean? Yes, that's the motion. We have a second. Okay, so we're all here, so we're not the new roll call vote. I mean, we do have a new roll call. Well, it's anyone objecting, but that way anyone object. Oh right, which you've done on the committee though. Who's, it's not a counselor? Yeah, she's not attending. Oh, I'm sorry, she was waiting to talk. It's not counselor [18:06] Susan Deane: Oh okay, which I don't know that. Yeah, we're not being public [18:14] Michael Beck: Okay, I don't see any objection because all members are here. I won't do a roll call vote, so we're gonna say that has passage. That brings us to thank you, by the way, thank you. Item number two, order authorizing the city manager to accept an appropriate eighty thousand dollars from Maine General to implement outpatient early intervention services with respect to HIV disease. I'm gonna ask Jen just to come on up. Okay, probably help director. Hi, thank [18:53] Unidentified speaker (Staff/Grant Presenter): you. This probably looks familiar because it does. What you approved before was a resolve to ratify my staff actions for accepting a one-year grant retroactively. This is for an MOU moving forward for the 26-27 contract year. And this is for Ryan White Part C services, which actually include more than case management, includes testing, outreach, referral to services, education, and other risk reduction activities. Questions [19:32] Michael Beck: or comments? I'll [19:37] Wayne Mallar: call Dr. Miller. I'm just curious as to what percentage of your time is spent in the immediate Bangor area as opposed to, because you're doing Penobscot and Piscataquus and Washington, are we doing Washington and just those two? No. [19:56] Unidentified speaker (Staff/Grant Presenter): So right now the agreement that we have with the general is that our priority is people specifically residing in Bangor and then it will go in a circumference out to that. But it's basically Penobscot and Piscataquist counties what we'll cover. [20:11] Wayne Mallar: So what percentage do we spend in Banco as opposed to? [20:14] Unidentified speaker (Staff/Grant Presenter): Right now it's 100%. [20:15] Wayne Mallar: OK, which I'd rather see. [20:20] Michael Beck: Any other questions? Well, I have a comment and then a question. The comment is, that speaks volumes about the work you're doing. I don't think you've 80,000 already. But now we're saying, hey, we're going to give you another 80,000. So thank you for that. And then I'm not looking to have the conversation today, but last time we talked about it 's about you know shifting funds from the opioid settlement fund back to so the conversation i guess i would be looking to have is either do we shift the money back and for other recovery programs or make the case for how this 160 000 with the capped opiate settlement what but who's the city and you know how that would play out absolutely and [21:03] Unidentified speaker (Staff/Grant Presenter): And I also want to point out that all this $80,000 is actually not completely going to our HIV case managers. We have another staff person, another couple of staff people and other grant funding that's been doing HIV outreach and referral and testing. It's going to allow us to cover some of their salary as well. So it's more than just covering the HIV case managers. But we can come with that breakdown and a proposal with you on what that funding that did cover the case manager's time, could look like whether it goes back or whether we have other plans or programs [21:38] Michael Beck: that we could propose to you sure and that proposal I guess what I'm looking to do is have it be a choice of well if we move the funding that's one thing but here's what you're missing out on if you do you know there's some lengths of the product you know to this program something show the benefit and you know in solace absolutely do you need a motion on this one okay I move to [22:00] Carolyn Fish: to authorize the manager to accept an appropriate $8,000 from the main general to implement the outpatient early intervention services for HIV. [22:09] Michael Beck: Second. We have a motion with a second. Any doubt? OK, that will have passage. And last item is the day space RFP. [22:20] Unidentified speaker (Staff/Grant Presenter): Yeah, so one of the times that I spoke to you was we talked about the day space RFP. And so what you have before you is a draft version of an RFP. I based it upon other RFPs for day spaces that I saw from other locations throughout the United States. And then I also included some of our language from our warming shelter RFP. So what you see before you is a draft for the day space. And you can see that there are some requirements that we're asking for, including that the day space must offer one meal a day, snacks, a place for phone charging, Wi-Fi, and access to health care and social services we're asking for people to submit two different budgets one if the day space was open Monday through Friday from nine to five and one opened all seven days that would be optimal because people need a space every day not just on the weekdays a couple of other things is to point out is that typically day spaces are for people who are unhoused at the moment. We want to make sure this is a space for people who have actually been newly housed as well, because we are hearing a lot that people are feeling lonely and isolated and feel like they might have been cut off from some resources and services that were either coming to them directly when they were doing through street outreach or other. So this would be a more inclusive day space. We are asking some specific requirements like we did with the warming shelter space, that the owners of the building, the organization that's putting in the RFP must be owners of the building proposed for the day center or have a rental agreement that aligns with the time period of the day center. So we want to make sure that there is, you know, we're not halfway through and all of a sudden there's no more access to the actual physical location. You can see that there's other qualifications, including that they have to have a history of fiscal and reporting integrity, they can't have any uncompleted or not submitted reports or financial responsibilities to the city. I've outlined the scope of services, this would only be for adults age 18 and over. The heart center back in the day didn't delineate age, we think it's not best practice to include youth and adults in the same space, so right now this would just be for adults. You can see where there is some other decenter requirements, it gives you an idea of how the proposal narrative and scoring would happen, and that we are asking for two budgets for those, you know, five days a week versus seven days a week. A couple of things I just wanted to mention is this would not only just be a benefit to people who are experiencing housing instability or newly housed, but also for community-based organizations that are now kind of chasing people. I wouldn't say chasing, is the wrong word, but are trying to spend a lot of time trying to connect with people who are dispersed throughout the city. The other thing that I just want to put on your radar with this is that this is a day space. The next question might be like, well, what about warming shelter? Like, we need to start thinking about that now, not when it gets to be November. And should this be something included? One of the things I did include in this RFP is that the preference would be given to an organization who can transition into a warming shelter. The other thing that we're keeping an eye on and why it wasn't explicitly included in this RFP is because Maine Housing will be providing warming and shelter funding and we kind of want to support organizations to apply for that and then see what happens with that funding source. The other thing that I wanted to mention is that 's not included in this as well, but is something that may want to be considered at some point and we brought up before, is a transportation to be able to access the day center and any ancillary resource resources that come off of that space. So there may be a time in the near future that might be another way that funds want to be spent particularly if this day center is not in downtown. You know, there's pros and cons to being or not being in downtown. If it's a space that's not directly downtown, there's gonna need to be some way to support people to get to that space, whether it's bus tickets, but we know the bus doesn't run on the weekends. So again, just thinking comprehensively here about how to access space, just putting that on your radar. No answers to that solution, no answers to that problem at this time, but just something to keep in mind. [27:19] Angela Walker: Questions, Council Walker? Have we thought about or have you thought about in the transportation piece of the liability that a day center would be responsible for? And I guess it would look a little different too if we, if you guys, if it was offered like on the weekend, if these, if it two different RFPs that are going in, one for Monday to Friday, one for seven days a week, and could that transportation just be on the weekend where the bus doesn't go because it is [27:51] Unidentified speaker (Staff/Grant Presenter): day space in the hours or it's not. You're absolutely right, it could just be and I haven't even put thought into what that RFP would look like, but for your liability, I mean, I think what we would do is look to our legal advice, but more than likely in these circumstances, whatever an organization bids on includes the increase in liability for those transportation services that they take, that on, it's their vehicle, we're just providing the funding for it and we would want to write the language Clearly for that in terms of, you're right, it could just be on the weekends. This does, you know, the hours would be nine to five, the bus ends at five, so there might be some questions there depending upon where the location of the day spaces. Definitely in support of the [28:40] Angela Walker: day spaces. I know that seven days a week, 365 days a year is a lot. You think of it and you're like, this is great for everyone to have a space available for those days, but it is a lot on staff, it's a lot on community to have that space open for that amount of time. Yeah, and I [29:00] Unidentified speaker (Staff/Grant Presenter): think one of the lessons that were was learned from the warming shelter space to, particularly with Together Place, volunteers are great to a point, but you really need to rely on paid staff [29:13] Michael Beck: have to be able to do something like this. Thank you very much. I just want to acknowledge I do see Counselor Fluent hand up. We're going to go to Counselor Dean Fish and then come to Counselor [29:23] Susan Deane: Flynn. Thank you. My question is regarding the days of the week. Now obviously this is going to cost more than the overnights we've discussed that because we need to have paid workers. Through your research on other warm rather day centers, the Saturday, Sunday, could that be more utilized by people volunteering where a lot of people don't work Saturday, Sunday? Or do you think it would be the same amount of money to run it on a Monday as on a Sunday? [29:52] Unidentified speaker (Staff/Grant Presenter): Or do you have any idea? I think we'll have to take a look. I really, I think what I observed from the warming shelters is that the two warming shelters that were based out of churches have a congregation that they leverage oftentimes, and they're also the two warming shelters, the Brick Church and the Mansion, have been working in this space for a long time, and so they have like a repeat volunteer. What I've seen with Together Place, with the new organization coming without that sort of same base of congregation, one of the things that I noticed is the volunteers were really good with like making food or getting donations for hygiene kits or making sure that there was close like these ancillary services to the dave space. I would be really nervous building a day space that weighed too heavily on volunteers to staff. The other thing that we learned is that this becomes a really important space when you've got routine people who've gone through the right training because this is also part of the relationship building to build trust in that space you have volunteers kind of coming in and out, it really disturbs the stability [31:06] Susan Deane: The space just felt that. Do we notice a difference in the day of the week when these services are needed? I mean, are people by the end of the week getting more antsy and they feel like they need support compared to a Monday, or is it pretty much the same Monday through? For people who are [31:24] Unidentified speaker (Staff/Grant Presenter): are unhoused at this time, it doesn't matter if it's a Monday or a Saturday. For people who are generally housed, it doesn't matter if it's a Monday or a Saturday. OK. OK. [31:37] Carolyn Fish: OK. Mr. Bish. Do we have any idea? I guess the city is going to fund this. And do we have any idea? And how are we going to find it? One question. And if we're funding is a city, I want this for our Bengal Run House. If not, people getting dropped off and sending it, so I really feel quite strongly about that. And so what do you see as perimeters around us having getting a handle and an idea? Do we have, is it, you know, 10 million dollars, is it 500,000, is it 60, you know, I just have no idea. I know it's going to [32:19] Carollynn Lear: be expensive. Yeah, I think first, I think this isn't a commitment to do this. We're soliciting RFPs so we can understand exactly that, how much it would cost, what the city's investment might be, and also hopefully to get a sense of what other funding sources these organizations are aware of that might be able to supplement it. So I think we don't actually really, the numbers could come back and it could be not possible. I don't think that's going to be the case. I mean, I think you had sort of back of the envelope to maybe 200,000 a year, and it wouldn't be clear, it wouldn't be clear until we saw that the RFPs whether an organization would be asking for all of that from the city or just a portion of that from the city and some of it from their other funding sources. Hopefully it will be also from some other funding sources. I think, I think it's an interesting question that Bangor residents versus folks who are new to Bangor and how to delineate service and whether that's even something that sort of universally council wants to do. I think we could put some thought into parameters, but it could be challenging because whether they're from here originally or from away, they are here now. And so I think the issue of day space is trying to congregate folks to a place where they can get their resources to move on from being unhoused in Bangor. Maybe we want that for someone, whether they're from Bangor originally or not. [34:00] Carolyn Fish: Then I think we have to have other ideas about how to stop that influx, because if they're busing here from all over, we can have day space with good intention, and it's going to be overwhelmed by people from Missouri and Oregon. I mean, I'm all for taking care of our own and even our smaller communities, but if we're going to put this much, we're going to have a great idea and make the investment and partner with other health providers. Somehow we have to put some guidelines down and some limitations. That's my feeling. It's just [34:32] Unidentified speaker (Staff/Grant Presenter): myself. I do want to offer two thoughts to that, and I will tell you we are very frustrated by people who end up in Bangor and there wasn't a plan, or it was even more frustrating is when people come to Bangor because they had a job lined up and when they got here, it really never existed. Like people are also really vulnerable to scams and then they find themselves here completely unsupported. I think there's two things to consider is one, if those parameters would be put on, there's the high potential that information would spread pretty quickly and people would not necessarily tell the truth which then means it becomes a barrier for how to really help them because if they came up from another place and they were supposed to get a job and it never happened or they came up here for a relationship that did like if they don't tell us the truth of where they maybe came from we don't know that we can actually get them back to that support service so I think I'd be concerned about people not being able to share their true story so that we can actually link them to services I think the other thing that I would I would highlight about that is the resources so if you're somebody who comes from say Missouri and ends up in Bangor for whatever reason the resources that are going to support you if you're in a day space then those resources are going to reach you because they're reaching everywhere where if we say that person can't come into the day space that I'm just going to say Path for example now Path is like okay I've got to come to the day space for this population and then I'm going to here for a population that can't come in so I think there's a lot of things to consider I fully recognize your frustration we deal with it every day but I want us to be really thoughtful about the unintended consequences of restrictions but we have to have some tough thoughts and we have to [36:22] Susan Faloon: Have a line in the sand at some point and we don't counter fluke. Thank you. I'm not on this committee but just a couple of things anyway. I know in the draft that you provided you asked that these organizations include the number that they can serve. But I wonder if it would make sense if we have like a target number because we sort of know roughly how many unhoused people there are out there that maybe it would make sense to include, you know, preference would be given to someone who could serve X number of people. Just a thought. And then I'm curious, so in the documentation that you provided, this would start as early as June 15th of this year and go through June 30th of 2027. I am wondering what happens after that and should we also give preference to organizations that could extend beyond that could renew. I assume there would be a contract and so a preference would be given to you know someone that could say yes we could do this for an extended period of time and then my I don't know if you want to address that I have one more question but if you wanted to oh yeah no I think those were really great points absolutely [38:01] Unidentified speaker (Staff/Grant Presenter): The Target number we can put that in terms of the review period I put one year just so that we didn't over commit to an organization that didn't work out with but I think what we can also put in the scoring Matrix is preference like we put like we say preference to organizations that can also stand up a warming shelter we can say preference also given to an organization [38:25] Susan Faloon: that could extend beyond a year yeah thank you and then my other it's not really a question but it's a concern that has been expressed to me there are a couple of day centers that exist now. There's MANA and then also the Bangor Area Homeless Shelter does serve, I want to say around 40 people during the day. And so I know that the goal of this RFP is to fill a gap that is not already being served and to be able to help more people but I think we probably need to specify that we're looking for something sorry I'm thinking out loud here I don't know really how I want to word this but like it's not somebody who's already providing this service unless they could expand it you know what I'm saying like if somebody's currently serving 40 people in their fall it wouldn't make sense to provide funds to Them even though I get that they are doing this work already and it's valued, but we're looking to increase the number of people that we can serve. So if it's a program that already exists and it's already full, if they could increase their capacity, then they could be considered. But if they can't increase their capacity, then they wouldn't qualify. [40:03] Unidentified speaker (Staff/Grant Presenter): Great points. Yeah, that absolutely makes sense. I think in the purpose of this notice, I put something in terms of this funding can be used to expand beyond existing services and or establish a new day center. Funding cannot be used to replace current funding for existing day center services. And I can expand upon that. [40:20] Susan Faloon: Yeah,, yeah. And that sounds like, sorry, I like I just skid back over it again real quickly. [40:26] Unidentified speaker (Staff/Grant Presenter): That's okay you bring up a good point and I think you know your point is well taken in terms of there's mana and Bangor area homeless shelter and they were also open during the winter and the well still saw up to 80 people a day so we can we know that there is this ongoing need there I [40:45] Susan Deane: Just wanted to go back to something that council official brought up the fact that you know we have limited resources in Bangor and so I do agree we should be concentrating on our Bangor residents and county residents hadn't thought about the fact that if somebody from way comes into a center and receives support that perhaps we could get them back home which is a great point but I also want to make sure that if we provide day centers or perhaps a sanctioned encampment that is on invitation for Everyone to come here. We have to be very careful. So there do have to be some sort of parameters. And I really think we need to think about that. We can't just open the doors and have everyone coming to our city. [41:34] Wayne Mallar: Dr. Miller. I'm curious, how many of these day centers are there in Maine? [41:43] Unidentified speaker (Staff/Grant Presenter): There isn't one place that I could pull that information up, but Portland has a day center. The city of Portland does at their resource center. I don't have the list in front of me right now. But there's a number scattered throughout the state. [41:59] Wayne Mallar: You should know what the budget is, how many people they serve. [42:10] Unidentified speaker (Staff/Grant Presenter): I also want to point out that the Portland resource center is an overnight shelter as well as a day space, and they have this very large complex that includes health services, housing navigation. They probably have the number, like most of my department, in that space, so I can provide that budget and the number. But just keep in mind that this is like a full comprehensive [42:36] Wayne Mallar: resource center. Yeah, I'd still like to know how many other ones are on the state because I've not heard of many, if any. [42:45] Susan Deane: I'm not sure. I thought I heard that. Well, [42:51] Michael Beck: I'm just going to say that, you know, I definitely see this as a tool for managing chaos. I mean, I don't think anyone's coming here for a day center. They're coming here for a shot of housing and a shot to get back on their feet. And you know, right now with you know with the change of the ordinance, everything, we've got people who have migrated now to 395 and elsewhere. And you know, like you said, you know, outreach workers have to find them, and this gives a central location where everyone's gravitating back towards that they can be found. So that's not only is it for the safety of the residents, but safety for the outreach workers, so they're not having to, you know, march, and they may still have to do that some, but maybe less. So I'm in favor of this just because, for a number of reasons, but that's a big one too. Counselor Parson. [43:42] Angela Walker: So what happens at night if we have a day space? So I'm thinking of that because part of what is solved with having the day space is that people have a place to go, but there's services, right, that can find people. But something that we often see is that when somebody is out and they've accumulated things, they're not going to leave their things, right, they that's all that they have is their earthly possessions, right. So if they've gone somewhere and they've set up a tent and they have their things, are they even likely to come to a day space and risk the potential that they're going to lose that stuff, you know, when they have when they leave the day space? So I'm sort of worried about like what you might see is the potential gap that would still exist even after doing a day space. And I still I recognize that this, no matter what, would really bring down that gap, but I'm then worried that and what happens [44:38] Unidentified speaker (Staff/Grant Presenter): At night, so what happens at night when a day space exists is probably similar to what's happening at night right now, because people are not setting up space for a long term, because people are being asked to move along. There's just a lot of movement that's happening right now, a lot of movement. And so where do people go at night? Sometimes we just don't know. And so I don't know if that dynamic will shift because it's happening right now. It could be interesting in terms of like how we'd be able to maybe re-engage with people in a different way, knowing that there's a space that they can come to regularly and predictably, right? That's predictability for this population is valuable. In terms of people's personal belongings, I mean, you're right, there are situations where people will set up a space that might be hidden that people don't know for, and they don't want to leave that space because everybody's going to get stolen or taken down or all those reasons. I [Susan Faloon: don't know.] In some ways, you know, where predictability is very valuable, it's it's a population that deals with unpredictability every single day. [46:10] Susan Deane: Okay, questions or comments, sort [46:18] Carollynn Lear: of our motion to move forward? Well, I mean, I wouldn't say no to a motion. I think you already voted to have us do this during a workshop. I think what we were most looking for was feedback on the RFP itself, whether it addressed what you were hoping it would address, and whether you had any additions, which I think there's a few things that will tweak and change before it gets issued. But I'll say, unless you say otherwise. [46:49] Unidentified speaker (Staff/Grant Presenter): I do have a process question. Oh, sure. Sure. So I do have some feedback here about adding some numbers, maybe strengthening some language, about adding that preference for an organization that could predict they could continue this. Last year, we did the warming shelters. We had the applications come in. It was a little less formal because it was happening. It needed to happen pretty quickly. And we were just fortunate enough to have two organizations that could come in and do the work, and they did beautifully. We do have a scoring matrix here, and so this will require some people to get together and score some applications. So I think maybe what I can offer is once we get RFP, I'll set, with these minor tweaks, I can get this out the door this week, we'll set a timeline on getting applications back, and then I can come to you and say, this is how many applications we have, this is what we propose as a next step, and then get your feedback if that works. we [47:50] Michael Beck: got a consensus on that like it anything else on this well [47:57] Susan Faloon: I think with that we're adjourned. That's right before 8 p.m. Good night.