Title
Audit Committee Agenda
Summary
Agenda
1. Updates
· Midpoint Report on parks and Libraries
2. Topic Discussion
· Feasibility of next topic: CIB
How should the topic be scoped: Are the changes that the city made regarding the focus areas working? How do we measure that in some regards? Who's participating and where are the investments being made?
· Is the two-year cycle for city department-submitted projects and community-submitted projects working effectively?
· How are members of the public engaged for membership to the CIB Committee and community-submitted projects?
· Is there an economic equity piece in the CB process during the grant cycles? Whether the project would land in the same place if looked from an equity lens. Whether the process is producing the equitable result that the city is looking to achieve
· (education component) What worked in some wards and not others? Process-wise, how do you help take an applicant from point A to point Z? How well-informed is the community on projects submission and decision? What would a process improvement look like in understanding how knowledge of the process works, i.e., institutional knowledge, community folk’s knowledge, background, and experience with the process, etc.? What process improvements would look like with these insights? Is there an obstacle with knowledge or understanding of this new process? Are there concentrations of institutional knowledge that need to be addressed?
· Regarding the Community process, are CIB committee members intended to act as community ambassadors? Is the CIB committee fully filled? Who are the CIB committee members, where are they from? and does that track with where the applications are coming from (e.g., where the investments are made). How does the vacancy on the CIB committee compare to other boards? Is the vacancy typical or is it just a challenge for the CIB committee, or is it a challenge of community participation post COVID? Did the new process achieve what ...
Click here for full text