The Open Door Recovery Board voted at its meeting to reopen a previously used grant application process, set a 30‑day application window and schedule a review meeting, board members said.

Speaker 1, a board member, opened the meeting at about 4:02 p.m. and announced current account balances, saying, "As of right now, the new round that come in, the restricted funds are $66,065.12." The same speaker reported unrestricted funds of "$31,009.54," while the transcript contains nearby repeated or slightly different figures; the board noted those balances as the basis for this round.

Speaker 1 said the board would reissue the press release used last year and formally reopen the application process immediately. "She's gonna reopen that back up starting today again and go through the process just like we did last year," Speaker 1 said.

Board members debated how long to leave the application window open. After discussion of 30, 60 and 90‑day options, Speaker 2 moved "for the, the deadline to be 30 days and then the meeting to be on the 20 sixth." Speaker 3 seconded the motion. The board confirmed the application deadline as the 12th (30 days from today, as stated by members) and scheduled the review meeting for the 26th at 4:00 p.m. "The deadline would be the twelfth and the meeting would be the 20 sixth," one member repeated during scheduling discussions; the board then settled on the twelfth deadline and the meeting on the 26th at 4 p.m.

On reporting, Speaker 3 asked what recipients must report. Speaker 1 said awardees "should be coming back in front of the commissioners at least every 6 months" to show how funds were used and that the board will obtain copies of those reports to track compliance.

Speaker 1 also pointed to legal context and outside litigation that could affect future rounds, noting ongoing lawsuits and an "attorney general suit" involving Eli Lilly as background the board is monitoring. That remark was offered as context rather than a board action.

Next steps outlined by the board included posting the reopened application and deadline online and circulating a press release; Speaker 1 asked Judy to post the notice. The motion to set the deadline and meeting was seconded and carried by voice—no opposing votes were recorded in the transcript.

The board did not record any roll‑call votes in the transcript; the motion passed by voice and the board adjourned.