Finance adds $608K to Jax PSG funding for 6 agencies

Jacksonville’s flawed Public Service Grants process got yet another review from the Jacksonville City Council Finance Committee on Friday afternoon.

Councilman John Crescimbeni again spotlighted the lack of funding, and how many of the organizations toward the bottom of the funding matrix suffer because of a lack of funding.

The total request for all organizations: $3.78 million. Essentially, the groups that score best get what they need, and there is a downward spiral of subjective scoring that affects the rest.

“These are agencies that are dealing with lives,” Crescimbeni said, saying that the funding level should approach that attained by the Cultural Council.

Councilman Matt Schellenberg spotlighted his own approach: “Take all the money away and give it to people who are doing good work.”

The evaluations, he added, are done by a few people, and council “could do a better job.”

“All of them are doing something, but some are doing better than others,” Schellenberg said, citing the “arrogance” of the process.

“Unless you get good people on this … committed to doing good work, and obviously there are some people on here who don’t give a damn,” Schellenberg said, the process won’t work.

Councilman Bill Gulliford asserted that it’s best that a “somewhat independent entity” make such decisions.

“Probably all these agencies on here are deserving,” Councilman Reggie Gaffney said, adding that the “process is so subjective” that one group or another will get the shaft.

Councilwoman Lori Boyer pointed out that the revived Jacksonville Journey will “reach many of the same people these programs are trying to reach.”

“Going forward, I’m not necessarily supportive of an increase in this pool of money” outside of the Journey oversight rubric.

“I’m not interested in the agencies; I’m interested in the outcomes,” she said, especially with regard to crime prevention and intervention.

Joyce Morgan, meanwhile, worried that “the entire city may not be being served,” and that money should be dispersed throughout the community.

And Anna Brosche, chairwoman of the special subcommittee charged with reviewing the process, urged for funding to be restored to an organization that had gotten underscored: L’Arche Harbor House.

Crescimbeni rejected that proposition.

“I feel like if I do it for them, I have to do it for everybody,” he said.

Aaron Bowman proposed looking at a few other agencies in addition to L’ Arche. Two agencies from each of the three categories would, under his proposal, have funding restored. About $608,000 would be the total allocation.

From there, the discussion went back into the scoring matrix, which approximates the subjective grading matrix of a freshman comp paper.

Crescimbeni rejected, again, the “business of rescoring.”

Then, Gaffney proposed a restarted process for the programs that had scored poorly in accordance with the Jacksonville Journey.

“I don’t understand the motion,” Crescimbeni said. “What does it have to do with the Jacksonville Journey?

“Most of these things aren’t really Journey functions.”

Gaffney responded, in that Gaffney way, and Crescimbeni laughed out loud before collecting himself.

“They have no ability to really handle a rescoring process,” Crescimbeni said. “I want a process that’s going to be objective and fair.”

The debate continued for several minutes, with Crescimbeni contending that it’s not a “workable plan.”

After more commentary, Brosche reiterated the charges of the subcommittee, and then reminded those assembled of the Bowman amendment that was still on the floor.

“Today we’re trying to make a decision of what we do today,” Brosche said, in response to Morgan’s apparent proposal to put the process on hold.

Morgan: “I believe at this point we accept where we are and get ready for the next round next year with a clearer purpose, a clearer vision, and hopefully the correct number of persons on the committee.”

Then, Garrett Dennis wondered whether the was city left open to a potential lawsuit.

Then, Danny Becton said, “There is always going to be a process, and there’s always going to be flaws.”

Appeals are necessary, Becton said, to provide “a second look within a reasonable period of time before things are finalized and look it over just like I’m sure a lot of other groups have.”

“To sit here and beat ourselves up and think we’re going to find a process that is not flawed is not possible. It just doesn’t exist.”

Becton then suggested that maybe more money be added to the Bowman proposal.

Crescimbeni said nope.

“We’re making everybody who made the funding cut whole,” with the Bowman proposal. “If we add one more dollar, we have to cut it four ways.”

So $608,695 was added to the kitty.