Council hears record interest in financial partner program as requests far exceed likely funding

Sherry, the city staff member who manages the Financial Partner program, told the City Council that the city received 50 applications for FY 2026 and that total requests topped $8.6 million — the largest funding request on record.

“Financial partners are organizations that are selected that are able to extend the city's capacity to advance the strategic to advance council's strategic priority and address community concerns,” Sherry said, describing the program and its role in advancing council priorities.

The council adopted a Financial Partner policy in October 2024 that formalized eligibility, reporting and a 5‑year term limit for partners. Under the policy the city will cap awards at 30 percent of an applicant’s agency or program budget; applications that exceeded that cap were adjusted downward to the 30 percent maximum during staff review, Sherry said. She added that every applicant had to identify a single primary strategic priority and provide measurable targets; selected partners will report mid‑year and at fiscal year end.

To reduce scoring bias, staff formed a cross‑departmental team of 19 city employees and required each application to be scored independently by six reviewers on a 65‑point scale, with scoring values of 5, 3, 1 or 0 depending on completeness and quality of performance and equity measures.

Council members raised several questions about the process and budget implications. LeWanna Mayfield (at‑large) asked whether applications that exceeded the 30 percent cap were rendered invalid; Sherry said discrepancies arose when an applicant’s submitted request didn’t match the budget line items and that the policy did not itself resolve whether to exceed the cap, so the council could discuss the question further.

Council members stressed the gap between the roughly $1.52 million in recurring discretionary funding the city expects to make available for partners in FY 2026 and the $8.6 million in requests. “We are starting at 1.52,” City Manager Marcus Jones said when framing the budget context, adding that the city will separate one‑time ARPA-funded awards from ongoing base funding when building the FY 2026 proposal.

Several members urged a clearer, objective framework for making awards and suggested the Budget, Governance and Intergovernmental Relations (BGIR) committee work further on criteria before add/delete decisions. Councilmember James Mitchell proposed referring the issue to BGIR in April; multiple members agreed on a committee review prior to the formal budget run‑up.

Sherry described documentation requirements: auditors’ reports or two‑year comparative statements, salary disclosures, organizational and financial policies, HR policies and board lists; missing or incomplete documents reduced an applicant’s score.

Council members also discussed program priorities and possible duplication among applicants, the use of one‑time PAYGO or ARPA dollars for some partners, and the need to require partners to pursue other revenue sources. “The same level of scrutiny that we're going to do our own organization, it should also be to well‑intended groups,” Jones said.

The council did not make final funding decisions at the workshop. Staff said they will return with more guidance and options; councilmembers asked for clearer scoring documentation and recommendations to help prioritize which applicants should receive limited recurring funds.