Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Human Services topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council amends Impact Award motion; removes explicit grocery‑delivery directive, keeps food‑insecurity RFP focus
Summary
Councilmembers debated changes to human‑services funding and whether the Impact Award should explicitly fund a grocery‑delivery pilot in Winton Hills; an amendment to remove the grocery‑delivery directive passed on a roll call.
Councilmembers spent a substantial portion of the meeting discussing a package of motions to change how the city’s human services Impact Award and related funding categories are allocated for the coming biennium.
Councilmember Mika Owens, who introduced the reallocation motion, said the package was intended to reduce duplication between existing city funding streams and the Human Services Department’s RFP process and to direct funds to human‑services priorities for fiscal years 2026–27. Owens described changes in proposed funding percentages: reducing the Impact Award allocation from 33% to 10% while increasing other categories (comprehensive workforce development to ~26%, youth gun‑violence prevention to ~26%, housing stability to ~26%). Owens said the motion would preserve the overall funding level — "human services funding would remain 1.5% of the general fund plus that additional allocation" — and that the administration would issue RFP language to target funds at specific neighborhoods and problems.
Councilmember Anna Albee introduced the Impact Award proposal that, as drafted, would have used the Impact Award for a grocery‑delivery pilot in Winton Hills. Albee described Winton Hills as a neighborhood with high SNAP participation and limited grocery access and said a delivery pilot would bring groceries to residents’ doors and supplement household food budgets. "This is something that has been discussed across the nation," she said, adding that Winton Hills residents had told her it can take three hours to get groceries by transit.
Councilmember Walsh raised a procedural concern: the Impact Award historically funds a competitive, city‑administered selection process; he said inserting a specific project into the motion risked circumventing that competitive RFP. Walsh moved to amend by striking the sentence that specified the Impact Award "would be used specifically for a grocery delivery pilot project." Councilmember Parks seconded the amendment.
The roll call on the amendment produced these recorded votes: Councilmember Kramerding — Yes; Councilmember Johnson — Yes; Vice Mayor Kearney — Yes; Councilmember Mark Jeffries — Yes; Councilmember Anna Albee — No; Councilmember Nolan — No; Councilmember Owens — Yes; Councilmember Walsh — Yes; Councilmember Parks — Yes. The amendment passed and removed the explicit grocery‑delivery directive. The chair then said the amended item would be put on for passage.
Members debated substantive concerns as well as process. Councilmember Johnson and others urged that "gun violence" not be treated as an undifferentiated category and pressed for RFP language that targets root causes and specific high‑need neighborhoods. Councilmember Albee and others pointed to the city’s Achieving Change Together (ACT) violence‑reduction blueprint as alignment for the RFP priorities and said the Human Services Advisory Council (HSAC) would help evaluate proposals.
Councilmembers described next steps: the administration will draft RFP language that defines the Impact Award objectives and eligible applicants and will return to committee with a report on any submitted motions. The chair set a related timeline for motions seeking remaining one‑time budget dollars (see separate item): motions must be submitted by Friday at noon and the administration’s report will be due around Feb. 21 to inform a budget committee discussion scheduled for Feb. 24.
