Anchorage Assembly: ACCEE Fund Board Meeting 2026 05 20 Meeting Recording

We have Trevor Storrs.

Jessica Simonson. Present.

Branwyn Colyer. Good morning. Good morning. Kevin Berry. Good morning.

Khalil.

Georgina Broke.

Jesse Nessett.

Good morning. Morning. Mildred Parker, we know, is absent. And Chuck Shaka, we know, is absent.

Fantastic. And Jessica, I just started the meeting and I asked you to lead it today because I'm distant and I may have to step out. Do you want to take over? Oh, fine, I can do that. All right, I'll turn it over to you.

Just to let you know, if you can't see the room, the mayor has joined us and we may want to adjust the schedule a little bit and put her up because of her schedule, and I'll turn it over to you. Um, so our agenda, the first thing was finalizing the agenda, but we could move the mayor, um, to talk about, you know, the administration's priorities. Um, welcome, I'm glad you joined us, and then we can move that up.

Sounds good. Thank you. All right, well, good morning everyone. It's really nice to be back here with all of you. Thank you for serving on the board.

Thank you for, for doing this work for our community. I'm very grateful to each of you for all the time that you put into this work, and thank you, Director Holquist. Um, are you all on first name basis or How do you do things in your meetings?

First name basis. Okay. Thank you, Jessica. Appreciate that. And I know that you all are picking up the budget and having those conversations.

And I was thinking back and had the opportunity to talk with Nolan and Bill and Christina. Director Holquist about, or at least it made me reflect on how when the fund was created and that was a collaborative effect or effort to get it approved by voters, there were a lot of different ideas around the mission. Good morning. Hi. The mission and how best to use those funds and how to support and stabilize the childcare and early education.

Sector potentially doing innovative things, which you all have done in Braid funds, and have— how to have the most impact, how to measure that impact. And so as I was going over some of the materials, it just was appreciating the thoughtful dialogue and consideration that you have given to different ways to do that. And that question of how to best stabilize the sector, I also appreciate the positive feedback from the community and from providers around the use of the funds and this work. And so as I think about the next steps and from the conversations with folks, having more data, I think, is something that would be helpful as you further consider where best to invest funds. And so I would like to see funding for the community needs assessment included in this budget to get a fuller understanding, you know, of our needs and also to define stabilization.

I like the idea that you have around funding startup providers for in-home providers and think that, you know, that would be something that would also be impactful. And then I just want to address the $2 million that's been in there for ASD funding, because I know that's something that is right there up in front as you consider the budget. And so it would be— I would be very grateful if you all would have a discussion. I'm not necessarily here, I don't need to do that today, but like, you know, if we couldn't fund it, is that something that we're okay with going away? Is this, you know, $2 million— does it fit the mission?

Is it impactful? You know, how do we measure that impactful? And are we okay if we wouldn't do this allocation anymore? And I don't mean that in any way to suggest it isn't an important program or ASD doesn't need the funds. But I do think it is really important to get your thoughts on whether it fits with the mission and, you know, how would we be if we couldn't fund that anymore?

And so, yeah, I wanted to address that one head on because it has come up each year. Year. Is this the second year of the budget allocations? Okay. And last year too, and just would really appreciate your thoughts on that.

And I will stop there and reiterate that I'm really grateful to all of you for doing this work. It's hard to get boards and commissions to engage sometimes, and you all are stars because you really put in the time and, um, consideration and really grateful for that. So thank you, and you're making an impact.

Thank you so much, Mayor.

Yes, uh, the ASD thing, uh, has come up, and it would be interesting to add that to the agenda as a conversation in the, in the future.

The first piece of the agenda is finalizing the agenda and then approving. Madam Chair, could we have a conversation with the mayor? She shared some things, see if there was questions or thoughts for the mayor before we move on. Sorry about that. Yeah, that's okay.

And for the record, we should also recognize that Khalil, I believe, has joined us if I'm seeing it correctly. The screen is small. It does look like Khalil. Congratulations. Congratulations.

Wonderful. It is definitely a busy time of year for those who have kiddos in school. So thank you for joining. Kevin is also here in person and Bill also in person. So that's the update.

Yeah, I had a quick question. Uh, thank you, Mayor. I'm just wondering, in the sense, I appreciate you asking, uh, the question. We should always ask those questions of not just of these programs but all of our programs. And I think originally the ASD was under the alcohol tax The alcohol tax is specifically around the prevention of interpersonal violence, and child abuse was a piece of that.

The role of childcare and early education, there's great, great studies and research that shows that that kind of investment plays a significant role in lessening the risk factors of child abuse and neglect and other issues. I know homelessness is equally important. Homelessness has been taking the vast majority of that funds, even though the funds were not designed solely for homelessness. And actually the passing of it was based off of intervention, investment in prevention work, not just around homelessness. And we had a surplus and those were the dollars come over.

I guess my question for you is, how are you as an administration prioritizing prevention over tertiary? The homeless work is not prevention, it's tertiary. And the work that ASD and what we're doing actually hopefully will lessen the individuals that will find themselves in mental health distress, physical distress that then leads to homelessness and other issues. And how are you weighing that so we can actually incorporate that as well? And I think that's the important piece is we want to be aligned, but asking us just that question doesn't provide us the full picture, and that would be very helpful.

Yeah, no, thank you, Trevor. I appreciate that. And, and I'm trying to remember exactly the language around the alcohol tax. And the 3 buckets, and we haven't, I haven't for this next go-around looked at, you know, where we're at, and because there's a reduction there that will need to happen as well. And yes, it's true, some of the emergency needs of our community around homelessness have taken up more of that budget.

Sorry about that. And so that is something to be certainly weighed, you know, how, how do we balance all the needs in this community with that obligation in the fund to have a portion towards prevention and specifically around child abuse? And so that's, that's a question that we'll be taking up when we look at the alcohol tax as well. Because, yeah, we are in a, as you all know, an environment of constrained resources, and it's something that— how much, Bill, do you know offhand how much the decrease in the alcohol tax projection is? I know we have to make—.

It was just over 15. I don't remember off the top of my head how much the decrease was. It was short of that. Okay. I mean, all of this is in some ways born by the general background of an era of scarcity.

Right. And I think all of us, not speaking for you, but I think it's interesting we agree that if there was enough to go around, we should both address the immediate crises and invest in prevention. In a world where there's not enough to go around, house is on fire, got to put the house on, you got to get the fire out first. Then try to figure out how to build a better future going forward too. So it's difficult, but it's somewhat possible.

Yeah, no, I agree with this climate of scarcity at all levels. It makes the, you know, what we do at the local level even more impactful, even more difficult, and dealing with the fires around and the emergencies. I mean, when it comes to homelessness, of course, the vision and the goal is to get out of that. Place of crisis, right, and ultimately, you know, have stabilization there for members of our community. But all that to say, Trevor, thanks, you know, thanks for bringing up that point, and it's something that also, you know, needs to be weighed very closely as we look at the allocations and the alcohol tax to make sure that we're meeting those obligations.

And I appreciate that. Trevor, I see your hand. Yeah, I appreciate that, and I appreciate understanding of the fires. I actually don't think there's a fire because we've had this homelessness, we've probably had 3 different citywide, potentially 4 citywide plans. It's been an issue.

It does seem more prevalent of recent years. It's definitely increased our feeling of it, so forth. It's not like there's an actual fire and houses are at risk. That, that's been going on, and I recognize the work that's being done, and it's, uh, it's been much greater compared to what we were ever doing as a community before. But part of— even when there's a fire, you still can do mitigation, uh, and mitigation is that prevention side of it.

And that's where I think, again, it will be very helpful for us just asking us what to do or make this decision. We want to try to be in line with you, and this is where it's been the challenge, is not really understanding fully what you're trying— what are your goals in the sense of primary versus tertiary, but also how you want these things balanced. So we can then take that because we basically have to decide if we fund ASD, that leaves us— and I'm just working off of $5 million, uh, give or take That leaves $3 million, which greatly changes how we put money out. Or we don't fund ASD, they don't have funding to fill that in. That's 8 classrooms with 100-plus, maybe 200-plus, I don't know, kids that would then lose that preschool.

So we'd actually lose slots, which could be very damaging for those, those kids. And that progress. So we're really trying to figure out that way and how best to approach this, and that's the direction we need because I don't want to see us in September going head-to-head or feeling like we've done all this work. And then as a board, as you mentioned, they've really invested. I'm very proud of this group, of their dedication and involvement, and it feels very deflating when we work so hard and then present something based off of our knowledge, our experience, and the science, and a decision is being made to change that, that we weren't a part of or made kind of aware of, and that work gets stopped.

And that's how commissions start— stop being involved and being connected, and I don't want to see that happen. So taking those all in. So we may need to have you come back as you figure some things out to help give us that direction. And again, thank you for your time. Yeah, no, thank you, Trevor, and happy to continue that conversation.

We'll be taking a look at the alcohol tax and, you know, I guess just for context, I would just share with the group that during COVID our unsheltered homelessness numbers went up 300% and we are still in a period of decompressing that number. And so when I say emergency, that's what I'm talking about, is, you know, bringing that number down and hopefully shifting more towards getting people into housing and supports. So that's what I mean by that number. And yes, would love to continue the conversation, appreciate the perspectives, the informed perspectives of this group as we wrestle with these really big issues. I'm so tempted to say sales tax, but I'm not going to, but I'm not going to.

So, but thank you all.

Thank you, Mayor and Trevor. It's interesting you talk about, like, mitigation, you know, I think of, you know, how they trim back the trees and make sure, you know, things don't burn down further, right? And how, how can we align so that we're doing prevention as well? Did anybody else have any comments or questions for the administration?

I guess I would just chime in. Consistent with what Trevor said, you know, and he mentioned the science, there's research from like James Heckman and others that it's really, it's cheaper to change the trajectory of somebody's life the younger they are, either prenatal, pre-K, and everything else. When it comes to helping people later on, it gets much more expensive. So I think the wildfire metaphor is a good one. I also think about like a bathtub.

If you've got a bathtub that's overflowing, the first thing you do usually is turn the water off. And so if we're thinking about future problems too, I just think we, we need to continue to remember that the easiest way to prevent future social problems is focusing on children first. Absolutely. Good schools, supports for families. I agree.

Absolutely critical.

Hello, here in person. Are we ready to move, or did anybody else have any questions?

Sounds like we're all set. Okay, all right. Thank you. Thank you so much for your time. Absolutely.

Okay, I'll pull back the agenda up and we can finalize it. Oh yeah, I do. Get on to the next. Thank you all.

Okay, was there any changes to the agenda besides what we just moved around? Things to add? Okay, I'll entertain a motion to approve the agenda as edited already.

Thanks, Khalil. Would anybody like to second? Second. Thank you. Then anybody opposed?

Okay, agenda's good. Next is the meeting minutes from April 15th. Like to entertain a motion to approve the meeting minutes. So moved. Thanks, Kevin.

Second. Thanks, Khalil. Anybody opposed to approving the meeting minutes?

Minutes are good. Then the next piece is the ACE program announcement piece.

That's me. Thank you. Okay, so for the first update, we will give on the pilot and capital request for grant proposals. Those went out and closed. We are working to finalize paperwork.

We met as an evaluation committee and working to finalize the paperwork. So the recommendation of award and intent to award letters to proposers can go out. Um, we have steps that the admin team takes to process the grants for approval and where the selected applicants get notified officially. Where there's an intention to award them. So that's where we are.

That final approval does land with the Assembly. So, um, we will be submitting those approvals to the Assembly and then can give another update to the board once that happens.

Christina, is, is it like certain ones get approved by the Assembly or all of them? I believe all of them get approved. Okay. Do you have a number of how many are going to be recommended? Or—.

See, I didn't have—. I'm trying to remember how many we had. Well, so we'll— because we're still in the middle of the process, we don't want to have a final—. Gotcha.

Some of that information shared out since it's not actually on top of the students. I wanted to share how many applications we did receive, though. Yeah, and that was interesting when we talked about last year. Yeah. And I think it was 47, 47, 48.

Yeah, something like that. For capital and pilot combined together. Yes. Yep. Majority of applications were for capital.

Similar to last year, it would be interesting to look at, like, what was the total ask as well versus how much we were able to put in that bucket. Yeah, what will be interesting once this process is finalized, I think, is for us to look at what we received. I think there's a lot of information and data in those applications. What, what we've received for pilot requests, what we received for capitals. What those specific, you know, there's trends in what was asked for in both mostly in capital.

There are some great ideas that we received in pilot applications. So I think it's definitely worth looking through, you know, we can compile that information and have a conversation about what we learned from those and potentially that can form into part of our design for future programming. As we see what those needs were. So, once we're through the process, I think that's going to be something where it sounds very high level of an update right now, but that's to be respecting the process that we're in or where we are in the process. I think we will definitely have more conversation once we're on the other side of that.

One last question. When do you anticipate those going to the assembly?

We are working to get them there as soon as possible. So hopefully in within the next few weeks.

Any other questions on the pilot and capital?

Okay. So the update on operational funds, we've been working with THRED. Those applications closed the end of April. They received 187 applications and 183 are eligible to receive payments. That is pretty close to last year.

It's actually more application—. More eligible applications than last year by about 7. We—. The eligible providers this go around are licensed child care and accredited day camps. We also worked through—.

Met with the Implementation Committee and talked through some of the lessons learned. You know, THREATT attended our board meeting in January, sharing some of what they had came across as lessons learned. So based on feedback, the bonuses are handled a little bit differently this year. The categories for the bonuses are participating in Learn and Grow, the quality recognition and improvement system, caring for infants and toddlers, and providing non-traditional hours. The programs will receive a bonus for each category that they're eligible for.

So I know last year they received one payment if they met any of those categories, and this time it will be more applicable toward—. To each category that they meet. We did have several circumstances delaying our process. We would have liked to have been a little bit farther along than we are now, but we have been working, Trevor and I, with the THREDD team on the final formula. We've worked several different options.

We're really being intentional and looking at those proposed formulas from every angle to make sure we're putting what we think is our best foot forward. So some of the delay is making sure that it's us just looking at a couple of different formula options and making sure we can really stand behind what we put forward, knowing that this year two payments will be made. We want to make sure that those formulas are aligned for both opportunities.

So, wanting to make sure we get it right the first time. We do expect payments to be able to go out as soon as possible within the next month. But the Round 2 payments will then be in the late fall.

Thank you. So the next piece is our public comments, which is where we're gathering feedback from the community. Is there anybody here for public comment?

I don't see anybody online with a raised hand. So we can close public comment. And then the next piece is under new business, the data review. Okay. That will be me.

I will go ahead and share screen. So I did send out a one-pager snapshot of some data from 2025, and we'll go a little bit deeper today. Let me know if anyone had any questions about the one-pager that was sent out highlighting 2025, but we did discuss in our last meeting that looking at some of the data and the outcomes of the programs that we implemented in 2025 would be helpful in looking forward to the 2027 budget. So today we'll look at, um, some of those outcomes, what some of the provider workforce and family impacts were, key takeaways from those programs, and a few considerations for 2027.

So as a highlight overview, our main programs here were the operational assistance for licensed providers. That was through THREADD and $2.4 million. Early Educator Childcare Subsidies, the ASD preschool programming. And then we had our pilot and capital projects. Those were about $1.1 million for the capital projects and about $648,000 for pilots.

And I want to pause and welcome—. We have—. Hi, what's up, Jesse? Yes, in the room now. Okay, so for the operational assistance, some key findings and themes.

One piece of data that we saw was that this was the broadest impact across our early childhood system, the broadest reach of the programs that we delivered. So it was able to reach 198 child care providers. Um, we had about 48% response rate, or no, so 48% reported that it supported their staffing. I did add, um, the response rate was about 70%. So of those who were awarded, we got 70% back.

Returning the survey and answering the questions of how it helps them. So this was a sector-wide stabilization strategy. It helped providers remain operational. 90% Of them reported that the funding helped maintain or increase capacity. Do you think is a very interesting fact?

90% Maintaining capacity is a— reaching a goal. I would say of stabilization, increasing capacity. Interesting to look at that. I think operational assistance functions as a foundational infrastructure. So, as we think about future programming, that's a consideration.

The funding was primarily used by programs for rent, utilities, insurance, and maintenance. So, thinking about how that also aligns with our capital projects and what we saw as A high usage of those funds was maintenance improvements, facility and utility improvements. So we can look at where those maybe have some overlap with these operational funds.

Moving on to the child care subsidies. This demonstrated strong outcomes related to workforce retention and family stability. So those who participated in the program, there were 81 programs served, 120 children received care. 79% Of the participants responded to the survey here. Also a good high number.

Um, 97% said that it helped reduce financial stress. For those early educators with childcare. Is this the families or the programs responding? This is, this is both. Okay.

For the families, there were, I think the family responses were 48%. Yeah, I have that noted. So the programs responded as we arrange. The programs are saying that they reported, or the participants, so this actual staff, 98% of the staff who participated said they were more likely to remain in the field, which is a high—. I think it's not a surprise because the amount of support, child getting that high expense of childcare being covered.

You know, they're all going to be in that workforce wanting to be with their children, but that expense is a lot. A main reason why providers can't stay when it's not worth them working. So I think this is really—. This seems to be the biggest innovation that the fund has done so far, and it's demonstrated the strongest outcomes for workforce retention. Do you know offhand how many people received a subsidy?

I'm just wondering, like, if we can think of a multiplier effect of like—. How many families? How many providers who received the subsidy and then how many kids those providers could potentially be covering too on top of the 120 children that were directly subsidized?

Say that again. So we've got 120 kids who received care. Some of those are parents who have multiple children. Correct. But each one of those people is a childcare worker that's still in the sector and working.

And caring for 2, 3, or 4 other kids. So I'm just wondering, like, what's the multiplier for— we bought 120 kids child care, but we got 480 kids in care, right? Right. Yeah, so then we've got 600 total kids who are in care who otherwise wouldn't be. Yeah, that's a great number.

We can definitely add that to the reporting collection for this year and possibly go back and ask for that information. It's going to be point in time, so it might be in there. Yeah. Yeah. And we'll probably have to use like an average classroom size, right?

Because it's going to depend what age group they're teaching and what setting they're teaching at. Right. Which I think we can get actual numbers. That'd be awesome. Yeah.

This is Trevor. I actually think they were asking that, or I remember when I was reviewing the evaluation form, we were asking that. So you may want to go back, Christina, and look at the evaluation form and what data do they have. And let's pull it because there's, there should be more than just this. There is, there is more than this, just this.

This is a highlight of the main data points. I don't think, yeah, I will go back and look and see if we have that specific question. Thanks. Yes, for which—. Where the staff is depends on what classroom that staff was working in to support, and I don't know that we drilled down to that level, but we definitely can.

Well, and I don't know if it really highlight— needs to highlight which staff was in which classroom, but if they provided infant to 4, what did that opportunity open because I think overall the center might need, say, 20 teachers. They just can plug one into any room. It doesn't necessarily mean that they have to be in an infant room, but the overall ratio is what you're indicating, like maybe an average. That's what I was thinking too, yeah, because it also comes down to like which room would you close first if you lose a teacher, and that number is going to be different for different centers, maybe. Plus, we're certainly going to shut down the toddler room because that's where all the chaos is.

Brandon, I'm wondering what you're thinking in this conversation for—. Oh, I was just thinking, I mean, Alaska Family Services would definitely be able to tell the total number of staff, you know, and exclude the siblings from that number of 120. 120, But the— and we did answer, the providers did answer some questions as far as how many kids that affected, but it's just, it would need to be— you're not going to get an exact number. It would be sort of an average between the, okay, the ratio of 1 to 4 and the ratio of 1 to 10, because it's not like that clean where it's like, okay, this one staff was only in a 1 to 4 ratio all the time. So I, if it were If I were being asked, I wouldn't be able to say like a very hard number of 5 kids, but you know, it's between 4 and 10 per staff, so we could call it 6 or something.

I don't think I'd— I mean, I think most programs, if it was like, okay, if you had to close one classroom, if you didn't have the staff, it would be the infant room. And so that would be the lower number if it only changed 4 kids, but it would be more— it's more critical because the infant cares is more critical in terms of the community needs. So, could you then maybe present the data not as this many kids were served, but this is the ratio that was reduced, right? So instead of it being 1 to 10, now, or now it's stayed at 1 to 4, right? That makes sense.

I don't know if that would be good. A question you could ask though, a different question to ask providers.

Yeah, I think this is a great conversation because it's really like, how—. What is the outcome that we really want to highlight and look at when we are looking at our funding? And when we're telling the story, right?

This is Trevor. What I would think is think about in categories is, one, how many? So think about that, the quantitative side, like how much money went out, like here, a number of children that received services, things like that. What are those numbers? The so what is like next is like, what did it change?

Like when we invested money, it paid for rent, it lowered operational costs, which allowed people to stay open, things of that nature. And then, who is better off? That's where you can go by numbers is we provided stipends to X number of adults. So let's say 50 people got the stipend, and on average that allowed 20, uh, each individual to serve, uh, 8 additional kids. I don't know, I'm making up numbers.

And why are they better off? So I think if we kind of do it from that results-based— and I can help you, Christina— I think that's where we probably want to take our data and start putting it into that. And when we want to share it out And that also gives us our narrative. You want to do that because people look at the data differently that are decision makers. Some people just want to know numbers, some people want to know better off, and sometimes something in between or a combination.

So if we provided all, we have a better way of reaching multiple decision makers and showing how our decision of where to invest these dollars is resulting in, in reaching our goals. Yeah, that would be great. So the data committee did— we did, um, we are going to meet again, but in between our meetings, we— I sent out all of the reports and the survey was one of them. So I pulled it back up and we did ask that question, how many children do these employees care for in a typical week? So we can look at that.

This was definitely a conversation as a data committee. We wanted to look at each one and decide what story we're trying to tell and what data we do have. Just quick glance, it ranged from the individual responses. We had 87 as the highest number and 3 as the lowest number. And then somewhere in between there, there's 30 to 40 or 6 to 10.

So we have that information.

I wonder if it'd also be interesting to look at year over year, like, How many of the employees are staying? How many employees were attracted because of this? Mm-hmm. You know, because that helps tell the story as well. That'll be the benefit of looking at the data from 2025 and 2026.

Looking at who was retained, you know, who was repeat, who was new, etc.

Anchorage School District Title I schools, this expanded access to pre-K services for vulnerable populations. As you know, it funded 8 different schools with a high-quality pre-K classroom. Students were selected by lottery based on the risk factors. So this is an area where we were really serving vulnerable populations Additionally, from those classrooms, there were other pieces, funding mental health consultation and a playgroup for those who couldn't access the program. Key highlights I think that is worth mentioning in this program is that, that outreach in the playgroup helped to meet families where they're at and increase the ability to give referrals or access, you know, connect to access to services for children and families.

20 Students also were able to receive special education services. So this program, I think, you know, when we're talking about it, really looking at its reach beyond the access to slots and to care and the fact that it's serving our most vulnerable populations and a way to increase access beyond child care to services that are needed for families.

Um, I thought I came off mute on my way here, and I gave a great speech to Madam Mayor about this, but I did not come off mute. So I practiced, and when you all didn't respond, I realized I didn't talk. I didn't see your hand either. No, I just said, can I, can I mention something? And it was on my Bluetooth.

But I do want to highlight that we do look at those hardships and I— it gives a score based on what families report to us and their— what they might be experiencing. And we are not intrusive in what we're asking if they want to disclose more. But our playgroups in shelters have been very successful. So successful that we are seeking more funds for additional groups, calling them pop-up agains, because we just cannot meet the needs of the shelters. Is there any way to, like, quantify that impact to show the importance of that?

The, um, we're working with the shelter coordinators to survey the families. The families don't really want to fill out the survey there. They, um, there's like, um, some maybe pride, but also just a little embarrassment. Um, so instead of when we're there, we're asking the coordinators to say like, hey, come over here. How did you like that?

But it's the like repeat families, so they continue to show up. Um, and we've been able to do some Child Find in there as well, which is huge. So can you tell us a little bit about how the playgroups work? Like, yeah, I have, um, it's between 4 and 6, um, resigned teachers who have primarily resigned because they are, they have littles at home, but they work in the library, they work in parks, they work in the museum. And then we have different pot that works with shelters, and then we need additional funds to have pop-ups again.

And they do a whole preschool lesson in that playgroup. And so it's essentially giving the opportunity for these kids who have no exposure to school. But in those pop-ups, we have kids that are— I mean, parents bring infants all the way up to 8. So we are adjusting, obviously, the lesson. Giving them an opportunity to see what a classroom would look like.

When we're bringing it to them, of course, it looks a little different, but there's always a literacy component, a math component, and then some fun activities that get them engaged. And then we have a one person designated to speak with parents, answer their questions and their concerns.. In the past it's been a counselor, so they've been able to work with families and say, this is what I suggest, here's who you can call.

We can't really do that as teachers, but with our early intervention service center, we are receiving a lot more referrals in based on that. So that's where also, like, the 20 students in the 8 classrooms, those kiddos are identified once they're in the classroom. So same process, but, um, I'll make sure the mayor knows about that. Yeah, thanks. The library group, actually, we are trying to figure out a different solution because the library group is becoming too big.

Like, last time was 120 people and the room is for 40, and you don't want it to, like, first come, first serve, and then we kick everyone out. You don't want it to be at a different location because it's a library group. So we're problem solving with different areas of town, what we can do. A lot. 100.

Yeah. Yeah.

So, moving into pilot projects, we tested innovative approaches to expanding capacity, strengthening workforce paths, workforce pathways, and exploring some long-term sustainability models. Um, we received the feasibility study from United Way on employer-supported cost-sharing models. I think there's definitely value in digging deeper into that. Study when we get the chance, perhaps starting with the data committee.

Lots of work happening around cooperative childcare ownership models or different governance structures for childcares, as well as how to expand the professional development opportunities for the workforce. So that's through apprenticeship models, different career advancement pathways, and specific cohorts in training. So these really broke out. I wanted to highlight for everyone systems innovation, workforce development, and capacity expansion.

The other one to highlight was the wraparound preschool models that worked together with the ASD preschool classrooms. And just highlighting, in our proposition there is that language around looking how to utilize school spaces first as an opportunity before other facilities So this is also a way where we can speak about how we're doing that.

And I think purpose of this data review of 2025 and our programs is to really remember as we approach the 2027 budget, the true reach of the programs. We talk about them in their 4 buckets, the different programs, but within each program, As we're looking, we can see they really had further reach into some of these supports to the field that we really aren't speaking deeply about yet. The capital investments really transformed childcare spaces across Anchorage that looked at expanding capacity in some areas, improving safety, and creating healthy quality environments, which definitely speak to sustaining the long-term program, strengthening how those— we replaced some really terrible floors and created space in classrooms to expand capacity, and those are long-lasting effects. So those capital funds really help to do that. Also looking at some technology advancements.

We know some of the things that we touched with capital funds are things that the providers, they're last on their list, but maybe such a high need, or can take that program so much further in providing quality, even streamlining their ability to focus on the classroom and working with the children because they're not working with inadequate supplies or materials, et cetera. So, Thinking about this impact of these capital investments, uh, looking at the categories and the trends that we saw those funds being spent, I think it's another opportunity when we're looking at future programming.

So some key takeaways from 2025, the programs that you all work to implement. Increased operational stability, improved workforce retention, expanded infant and toddler access, strengthened workforce development pathways, improved quality and learning environments. Those are all also within our strategic plan goals. So, congrats to that, because these programs and the strategic plan were happening at the same time. Those are important to note as we look forward into future programming.

We know challenges remain around staffing shortages, affordability, and access. So keeping that on our forefront.

And then I think this slide, um, I think when we get into our conversation around our first discussion around the budget, you all want to keep some of these questions. In the forefront of your mind. We can pull this slide back up as we want, but I'd like to have everyone be able to see each other while we get into discussions. But these are some reflective questions, and I'll just pause and let everyone soak them in.

Hi, I'm gonna stop sharing for the time being. See if there's any questions. I see Trevor's hand. Oh, I'm sorry, it's still up. That was my mistake.

Thank you, Christina. It's really helpful. I think we asked a lot of questions along the way. Yeah. Was there any other comments or questions?

I'll just say thank you, and Christina put this together because at my request to help us just have a sense of what is, what is our current investment going towards, because we have talked about continuing it, uh, and because it takes time for to see real change. If we keep hopping around, we can actually impact anything unless there's real indication that it's not. So this does give us, uh, I'll say a baseline for potential conversation. So thank you very much for this time, and The more data we can get and glean and talk about each program, I think we need to take that. So Christina, we probably should connect and look at the full data or get the data group to look at all of it and really put a more comprehensive thing together to really determine if what we're doing— because it's very clear we're going— we have to make some decisions here, and I want to be able to make them not just by the heart our expertise, but also what the data is telling us.

Sounds good.

I see no more questions.

Um, yeah, so I think that we— I really want to open up space for discussion. You know, I put some reflective questions there on the, on the last PowerPoint. Um, I really was hoping to hear from all of you on, you know, Trevor just mentioned wanting to have We know we have some changes to make with our budget going into a $5.2 million budget is less than what we've had. So we have some changes to make there. I think that, and Trevor mentioned wanting to have space for long-term, you know, looking at some of these programs over time, we're going to look at the benefit of, okay, we've had the Program for subsidy for employers, how many of those employees are still working in the field?

Was there actual retention of them? Are there, you know, how is that program looking? I think that data is definitely helpful. And giving our programs time to really see the impact, what we've currently done. So, I want to hear from you all in your desire to.

Or maybe some of your priorities individually when it comes to next year's budget. We've looked at workforce, we've looked at affordability, you know, how we've reached the sector with current funding and what feels like a priority to everyone individually, I think would be a good start as we look at building the budget.

Hi, um, so this budget runs separately than ASD's budget. Um, and I quickly found out when we were on the alcohol tax and that when it kind of came in question then and was going to the assembly in like November, that maybe the alcohol tax wasn't going to fund my 8 classrooms and I was going to lose funding December 31st, um, but I still have teachers through June 30th to pay. And so it would mean— and Trevor and I had conversations a couple years ago about this, but it was panic-inducing, um, it meant like closing those 8 classrooms January 1st. Um, so I just want that to be on the radar is I still have class and still have students and paraprofessionals, students to serve. So, for taking that into consideration for the first 6 months of 2027.

And, you know, of course, I would love to see it continue on. Whether it's out of this pot or alcohol, I think the impact is large. I think you all know where I stand on that and where the data shows, but happy to bring it again.

Do we have a visual of the budget, what it was last year, so we can kind of see the numbers and how we could maybe move it around to accommodate those? Can I do a point of order? Oh, I'm sorry. Uh, no, no, before we go into questions, just point of order. We just need to recognize that, uh, Jesse is part of the board as well as receiving, and we're starting to go into a conversation that other grantees don't have that same access.

I'm just thinking about that conflict, that we should talk about what we need, but just being aware that we're not creating a space that other grantees don't have in as we're having these conversations, although what she's sharing is still very important, and I just want us to be careful of that. That's the only point of order, and then I've got some thoughts on conversation.

Do I have to do anything with point of order? No, I just wanted to bring that up and just make sure that we're being careful with it and just being aware of that conflict. And how do we— making sure that as we go this way, that Jessica's also— or Jesse is recognizing— I know you recognize it, but what is that role and how do we make sure that her as a board doesn't influence and/or change the directory. We just need to be very conscious of that. Absolutely.

And then you said you had something as a comment as we go into this discussion. Yeah, I'm—. So we have some really big decisions to make and What I'm walking away from the mayor is that there is a very strong chance that the expectation is the current funding for ASD, if continues, would come out of this budget, that it would not go back to the alcohol tax. Now, that could change. We can also— that we're going to have to really develop potentially two budgets, and then we as a board have also talked that we may not be aligned with the mayor and what are the conversations we may need to have with also the assembly and looking and sharing our priorities and what does that look like as well and just being aware of that and looking at the alcohol tax.

So with that said, I'm wondering if part of this conversation— I appreciate Christina like going, oh, what do we want to fund? What are our priorities? I want to be careful that we don't start going down that path and finding, or maybe having a conversation of how do we want to have this conversation? Like, what is the data that you want in the room? What are the questions we need to ask?

How, what is the best framework that we want to use to come to our decisions just versus what do we think and/or how we feel? And I think that's going to be really important for us because this isn't just changing by $100,000 or $200,000. It could be completely the elimination of programs or greatly reducing them that they may actually not even have an impact if we proceed with them.

Thanks, Trevor. That is definitely— I was coming into this wanting to leave it open for you all to have input. You know, we talked at the end of last meeting of what, what information do you want to have? What questions will you have? What kind of approach do you want to see us take when we have these discussions?

I think Trevor succinctly shared that now. So this is, this is an ongoing conversation we'll be having to develop next year's budget. So what are the questions that we have now or information we're going to need to—. For you all to feel like you're participating in that conversation at the best of your abilities?

I was just going to ask a clarification related to the timing of the alcohol tax budget planning. Is that happening starting now, like parallel to ours, or is that something that's like an update in the fall?

My understanding is all budgets are— I'm sure they're engaging in the alcohol tax same process now of looking at what their budget will be for 2027. So early stages.

So your question is more like, when will we know that answer? Yeah. I'm not sure that it will be sooner rather than closer to. And remember, with the alcohol tax, there's not a board, so it's actually— and Bill, correct me if I'm wrong, you are in the room, you should, uh, you probably know these timelines— is that is decided by the proposed by the administration and not by like a group like us that then goes to the mayor. Do you want to share that?

Yeah, sorry about that, I stepped out for a second, so I'm missing the beginning. Oh, I'm sorry, I, I stepped off as well. I didn't see you step off and then come back. Do you want to— they were asking about the timeline for the deciding of how the alcohol tax money will be used and who is deciding that. Yeah, from the tail end, I think you got it essentially all correct, which is that there is no board.

So it's just proposed by the administration. It's part of the usual budget build process, which comes to light in October. Assembly ultimately disposes to whatever. I do think we will know the revenue projections that are going into that budget sooner, and we already had a preliminary number that I was trying to fish out of my email, was not succeeding. Um, so we know that the alcohol tax side of the equation is also constrained.

Um, we could just try to keep each other informed as we're having these regular board meetings going forward. Um, can I ask what, like, what in the budget is displacing the AST funding from the alcohol tax? Like, where's that money? Is that just that there's a decline and that's where the cut is coming from, or is there a new program or something else that's displaced the AST funding? Uh, there's a couple ways to answer that.

So, one, it isn't necessarily a tracing. It's not exactly one for one. I mean, the whole pie just has to get built. So I don't think it's just the case that it was, uh, $2 million got added for Project A and that meant AST had to over. It was the case that the alcohol tax got pretty strongly reprogrammed.

We could pull those last few budgets. That was actually pretty easy to see because in the municipal budget, same appendix that you are in, it's R, that's all of the alcohol tax and all of the marijuana tax. So you can see what the changes were over time. But even beyond that, I'll say it's even more complicated because it isn't as though things can only live in alcohol or marijuana. So, alcohol, marijuana, or general government is all one big pot of money.

And there are restrictions on what you can spend alcohol and marijuana for, as you know, but ultimately, ASC could come from general government too. It's just that there's not enough mana to go around. Thank you. I'm willing to chime in next if nobody else has anything to say. I think the question, the reflective question, Christine, that you put out, the third one has been sticking with me, the role that we should play in supporting public-private partnerships and system-level innovation.

I mean, like, I'm coming— I keep coming back to like, what do these partnerships look like, right? Like, and how do we form them? Because I think on top of that, like Trevor mentioned, we need to do things long enough that we have data on whether or not they even work. And we've got strong reason to believe, right? We have reason to believe, not strong necessarily, that the operational assistance, the childcare subsidies, and the ASD funding all are having an impact.

We don't have a decade's worth of data to see where kids who wound up in those programs wound up as far as 3rd grade reading levels and all the fun stuff we'd love to see about— we made more literate kids who are more quantitatively able and everything else. We don't have that yet, but I think it'll be there. And so I'd be concerned when we go through the budgeting process about making dramatic changes to any of those 3 programs. Some of the pilot stuff to me seems a little bit easier to start stop, just because if we don't do a pilot project this year, it doesn't mean that it never happens. Or if we don't do a capital project, it doesn't mean necessarily that a center immediately closes down.

But if a teacher leaves the sector or a kid gets kicked out of pre-K, that's a pretty permanent change. And we also then don't get data on what would have happened if they'd stayed in that program for a full— I mean, if they're starting as infants, 5 years. And so my tendency in all of this is to be a bit more conservative and try and avoid making changes in any of those programs and trying to think about how we can most effectively do data collection to understand if they're working. Because if they don't, I'm all for cutting them tomorrow. But I'm just—.

I think that having watched the data presentation a moment ago, we've got evidence all those three things exist. And that, like, looking for these partnerships, the ASD thing feels a bit like a public-private partnership. So even though you guys are public and we're public, I can't figure out who the private partner is in that. It feels a bit like one of those leverage points. And similar with the, the childcare subsidies too.

It feels a bit like we're leveraging each one of these parents. We're offering them something they really need and we get them to watch 3, 4, 5, you know, other kids instead of their own too. So that's where I'm kind of falling back when I reflect on this trade-off is I think those 3 programs to me are the highest priority. Just because we also will get the best data on their impact if they're able to operate for years on end. The capital stuff, you have a new room with new toys and new materials, or you don't, right?

You get sort of an immediate impact, but that's very individual place and project specific. Whereas like, did we pay somebody's childcare for 5 years so they could stay in the sector? Like, you got to wait 5 years to see what the impact of that was, at least. Cut somebody off, they just disappear.

Potentially leave the state. I mean, even we've looked at other states and what they have done. And, you know, when we were building the child care subsidy, and it's just interesting that that's the priority because they probably don't have the data yet either, right? It's not been long enough.

So in preparation of what— and I agree everything that Kevin was talking about— is we almost have some specific questions that we need to ask. Is like, and I'll start with ASD because it's center in the room, is one, um, asking the ASD if they could present a budget and showing if they had— because right now it's $2 million, and I'd have to give this greater thought, but you get the concept. If you received $150— $1.5 million or $1.75 million, how would that impact the budget? What would be lost if it was 1 point— like going down down the line. I think the— and just outlining and looking at impact, because no matter what, something's going to be at a loss potentially.

So it would help to know ahead of time, because in some past years, I don't think ASD spent all the money, although this year you did. So what could be— how do we hold on to the core if we lost anything else and again relying on the experts providing that service that we see very important what that looks like. Um, same with the implementation of the child care subsidies that we might have to cap it. So if we capped it at X number of people so we always knew it was this amount, like what that looks like., and asking what would be impactful or not impactful to figure out what that cap is, because we not good— and I think we have enough data to be able to do that. Um, I think philosophically some of the questions we may ask around pilot projects and/or capital, uh, as going back and maybe prioritizing based off of what we're— our priorities are, which is stabilizing So does buying new equipment stabilize it versus X?

So I think there's some things that we could be doing that creates a little bit of a system to prioritize where we think the funding and how it may be cut or invested, and then open us up for that larger conversation, which we always want, which is also what's important to us or what's in the heart, to also move things forward.

I appreciate that, Trevor. Yeah, and I want— I think if we can talk more as a group about what that looks like so that I can help facilitate, have these questions answered or this information prepared for conversation, the more specific of what you all want. The better. We've had conversations with AFS already, and so pulling back that information for everyone to have it top of mind of what's the number that can be reached at 75% of their, you know, the family is 100%, you know, there's some— that's still a process that we continue to work with AFS on. Is, are we reaching the cap, how that's looking.

So these are, um, you know, I can work with these different programs to make sure we're bringing that information forward for conversation if I know exactly what you're looking for. I had the same thought that Trevor did, you know, with, uh, with the programs around ASD. Like, if they add X dollar amount and a reduction, like, would that mean popup plays weren't an option, or like, how would they adjust?

And, you know, I know in like prior years with the childcare subsidies, right, gave extra thought, right? So how would they change that? You know, agreeing with a lot of what Kevin said, that those seem to be the biggest impact and we shouldn't change them a ton. We heard from providers in designing these programs that operational assistance was like needed desperately and let us adjust, right? So wouldn't want to make a ton of changes there.

I'm wondering if there are questions we do want to know from the operational grants, perhaps. One of the things I just— I'm still stuck on that public-private partnership question too. I wonder if in some of the— when we're crafting our own questions about what data we need and everything else, are there other opportunities like like philanthropy and other places to look for money, those metrics, would they be looking for these things too? Because one of the leverage points we could do is like that data collection. We're talking to the whole sector and we can figure out, you know, some statistic that's useful for also going to private funding.

Maybe we can help support people seeking other funding as well through being kind of a data clearinghouse a little bit. I know that's not a business that we have like a mandate to get into, But on that note, weren't we looking at partnering with Rasmussen at some point, kind of building on what Kevin was saying? And then just a side note, going back to the alcohol tax, because I think, Kevin, you might have asked about, you know, what was moved around. I mean, I looked up a Muni presentation about the 2025 proposed, so could have been tweaked a little bit, but the overview was emergency cold weather shelter unified funding for a set of shelters like Catholic Social Services and others, uh, municipal staff, mobile crisis team 24/7, housing and case management, uh, grants for the providers, camp abatement through that Healthy Spaces program, um, and then grants to address domestic violence and sexual assault, and then training modules for the police department. So that was like the overview of their, um, so I mean, that kind of gives us the Big picture, which I think we actually seen it.

I think that you had given us a little chart that I didn't remember the fall, but we are still working with Rasmussen. So one of Issa and I are supposed to come together after we get through this RFG process on whose the process is final. Um, so that we can share and look at what kind of applications we received, what were the needs. Because they are interested in designing supports to childcare and thinking that that kind of information and data will help them form what those supports look like. So we can, I think that's a potential, uh, for sure what you're talking about.

Part of my role also is I'm looking at other opportunities for funding, just like the Rural Health Transformation Application, et cetera. Um, So I think, like, some of those things can be continued to work on, to be worked on outside of this specific budget process. And then if those opportunities form, then it would be the time to look at what kind of effect that may have on our future budget programming.

I had another thought, but it left me. Was there another question besides that?

I have one more comment. This is gonna suck no matter what we do. Yeah. All these programs are good programs. And even when we talk about, you know, when I ask where the money went as far as alcohol, all the homelessness programs are good programs too.

They're helping me. This just sucks.

Is there any way if we say we can only just say, example, we can only give ASD $1 million so they can keep the other programs are important. Is there any way for that other million to come out of a different pocket, or is that just like a kind of like a nightmare? I don't know what that would look like. But I do agree that the operational and the subsidies and the work agency is doing just for continuity and the impact from what we see in the data presentation. I think makes sense to prioritize that, especially the operational funding, in my personal opinion.

Um, because I think that the pilot and the capital, they're doing good work, but also I think it's funding that could maybe come from private partnerships or other sources, and also The impact is different each year because it's different projects. So maybe it won't be as much of an impact statewide. I can't say.

And I think the more we learn from Rasmussen and what they're looking to support, whether it's temporary programs and funding like the pilot capital opportunity or something more long-term. Would also be helpful information.

Um, I did remember what I was going to say, which was that you were talking about, um, this clearinghouse for data and that how I think us being able to conduct that community needs assessment is really important to prioritize. That is where it opens the door for the partnerships to, you know, once we have data and can share that, that will open the door to see who's interested in what data we have and what problems we're trying to solve and bring us to some future opportunities, perhaps, but also gives us more of a relevant decision-making tool when we're looking at the, the tough decisions that are at hand of, you know, we, we're seeing some of these outcomes that when we have that needs assessment, we'll see what's the greatest need and be able to align those with the outcomes that we're seeing from these programs.

And to be honest, the philanthropy and corporate, they're also strained. There isn't some magic relationship that's going to give us $2 million to do. So us hoping, uh, we're obviously always want to do that. I absolutely agree with Kevin, but usually that is one-time funding. We'd be back in the same spot.

It's regular. It's not like Rasmus is going to give $2 million to this pot on a continual basis, so it might stop a little bit now, but kind of to the mayor's point, is really it will come down to revenue and how we as a city, which is a larger question than for our group to really look at how do we generate the revenue to do the things, which goes back to with Christina is outlining and understanding what the need is and putting that plan together to that, that can be then used to the public to justify why we, why we need to invest in this and potentially how new revenue could be utilized. And it really positions us. 'Cause whether it happens soon or later, we're going to be talking revenue and/or somehow get an influx of revenue, and then we're in a good position to be able to utilize it. So, but this is going to be exactly like Kevin said, it's going to suck, but that's why we chose to be on this, and we will make the best decision we can with the information that we have.

To hopefully keep the sector stabilized as the larger community is also figuring out what is the next step, and we'll help facilitate that.

I think just having it on the radar when we, when we're carving out. Do we know how much it would cost? Do a really good community assessment. Trevor, I think when we were talking about it, we were looking at like $100,000 to $200,000 would be ideal. Yeah, we would need to put out an RFP, but it's not a $50,000 thing for the depth that we would want.

But again, we may also have to scale that back, or that could be the partnership that we find with Rasmuson, because that is a one-time thing. So we could look at partnership in that sense.

Did other board members have questions that would be helpful to get answered as we go into the 2027 budget discussion?

Uh, I was just gonna suggest, I was thinking about, um, this spreadsheet that we used a couple years back where I'm not even sure at what point in the process we were using it, but I just shared it in the chat where it went through kind of each program and the, the columns would look a little different for this part, but, um, maybe we could take some time to collaborate where we could go through each program and really kind of list out what questions, what more data do we need to really look at this program. So it's in, 'cause to me right now, the, the questions that we're asking are like too broad. I can't even focus on, I mean, I'm focusing, but I, I'm not sure where to start in terms of, okay, what should we do about the budget? And I thought that that might be a helpful way. I think I mentioned I sent it to you at one point, Christina, but then I never found it and gave it to you.

But I don't know, can you guys see that link? I didn't open it. I can't open a Google Doc, but maybe you guys, you can share screen if you want to do that. It's okay, it's okay. I'll just email it to you because it's not something that we would, and then we can kind of think about that in between the next step here.

It might be helpful to use. That would definitely be helpful for everyone to look at that and be able to. By program, see if there's specific questions we want to have.

But it'll also be helpful to just like leave space that if we come up with a question that we want answered as we're going into this discussion, to send notes to Christina. If you have them after we adjourn, send them to you so that next time we get together. Absolutely. And I think we'll look at— I'll get to working on these questions and some of this information. Ideally, we could have answers out before our next meeting, just some more information sent for everyone to review and hold space to have those discussions.

So, but definitely the window is open, like, continue to send me any questions you may have. And I love the idea of using the spreadsheet to organize those pieces. And I'm thinking just a little snapshot of each program, um, providing information on either what questions we have or the remaining data pieces, uh, as Trevor mentioned, him and I can look at. We're circling back again with the data committee and that's really talking about what's the most useful data in what we've collected so far.

Is there any other comments or questions? Agenda item. Are we able to— I'm trying to think of procedural— if we take that document, if Christine and I just kind of work out framework that I had and questions and share that out with the entire board, that then you could add to it, suggest things like that. Are we able to do that? That doesn't create any problems with boards or anything, I don't believe.

And Bill's not in the room. I don't know if anybody else—. As long as we're not making decisions in that document, then it's okay. It's a working document for discussion. So we can all use that document and ask questions or provide responses.

The decision-making has to be left for the public meeting.

If that works for the group, I think Christine already has some, but we can take that document and do it and get it out hopefully in the next week. So we can finalize it and start collecting that data and hopefully have some, and/or maybe that bigger conversation will happen in July because it will take some time to get the information together. Does that work for the group?

I'm seeing nodding yeses. Fantastic. Okay. So then we have process for the annual selection of the chair and vice chair. Yes, and that's me.

So we are approaching October. Um, we have 3 members whose first term will be up in October, and that's Branwyn, Khalil, and Trevor. The process for being reappointed is if you are interested in continuing to serve on the board, you would send an email to me identifying that and including your resume. You can also express interest in that on the boards and commissions application, on board application process, which you probably did the first time that you were applying for the board. So, um, those—.

The process is that it would come to me, I provide a recommendation to boards and commissions with the attendance information as well, and knowing that you're expressing interest to continue, and that goes to the mayor, which then is forwarded to the assembly. The timeline for that is is September and October. So the lead-up is it will be shown to the assembly either in September or October. So you will want to get that application or that express of interest into me probably by August if possible. Um, and then we can also look at our annual selection of chair and vice chair.

Those can be done. So actually, let me rewind back to say, even though the terms end October 15th, there's a 120-day process that allows for that transition period. So you can continue to serve on the board until February 12th, or when someone else starts, whichever happens sooner, to allow for that transition period. So some, some boards do their selection of chair and vice chair in the October timeframe when that process comes up, and others wait till January so they can see if there's going to be new members or not. So we have that choice.

We can do it at either timeframe. And I know Trevor provided a recommendation of our selection for, for chair to be Jessica, who's been serving as vice chair, and us selecting a new chair. So that's also a recommendation that's been made. The next—. For the next year.

Looks like—. Well, and for clarity purposes, what we would do is people can either nominate themselves or nominate. All I did was I talked to Jessica to see, as respect, as co-chair— not co-chair but vice chair— that it is typical that they would potentially go into that, but that's the board decision. But it's also not a requirement. It was something that I just wanted to make sure that we actually had somebody to step into that role and not just leave it open and hope somebody would.

So that does not prevent anybody from putting their own name forward or recommending somebody else.

Thank you, Trevor.

So I think first and foremost, as a board, if we want to recommend doing the selection in October or January is a good starting point for the decision—. The discussion, so we can make sure to create space in those agendas when the time comes. Did you or Trevor have a—. Or anyone have a recommendation between those two?

In the sense of the process for clarity? Yeah, between October, January, did you have a suggestion? Uh, my suggestion would be is probably in, uh, July or August, what we do is put it out to the group to please, uh, submit your name of interest or nominate. Encourage people prior to nomination, please check with that individual to see if they would like their name put forward, because we will not only need a chair, but we'll need the vice chair. I've been doing chair for 2 years, and I totally support sharing leadership in the room.

And so that is why I won't be putting my name forward, although I'm hoping to stay on the board for another full term and be available. And then in October, it would be voted on, and then that individual would be prepped and ready to take over as of January 1. That's what I would propose, but open to changes or other thoughts.

I have to go, but I think that makes sense. I agree that we could do that, make that decision in October, and then maybe put forward names in the summer. That would be—. That seems like a Sorry, I'm process.

And Christina, we should document this process and include it in the procedural manual that's being created for historical purposes. Yes, for sure. I also just wanted to say, I think sooner rather than waiting till the last minute would be best.

And I heard Trevor's recommendation of putting forward names in October or sooner and then making the decision in January. Is that correct that I heard that? No, no, no, I was suggesting August, right? And then we vote in October, an individual would be in a position to— so if it's not an individual that's been leading the meetings, that it is— they have the time for transition and be prepped for January to take over. Yeah, in reading the process in the boards and commissions piece, I think the only, um, that approach Sounds good and has its benefits, like you said, of that crossover, but that would also prevent Branwyn, you, Trevor, and Khalil, if you were to remain on being in that vice chair seat, because we wouldn't know at that time if they were going to be reappointed, if they were interested.

Hmm, that's a good point. When is the decision made to keep somebody on? They know by September? They know by the end of October. And I guess we would do nominations in November and a vote in December.

It would be just have to be fast. But yeah, that's very true. I wasn't calculating that piece in.

Nominations and voting have to be in two separate. No, they can be in one. So could we nominate and vote in November? So we did the last two times. I feel like we did.

We talked about it ahead of time. True.

There's not yet been like extensive campaigning or anything.

Yeah, there's no yard signs printed just yet. Yeah, would like to see some. Trifold, though. Okay, so if it all sounds good, we'll move forward with perhaps nominating and voting in November. And if the 3 of you are interested in continuing to serve on the board, then send that information prior to August would be best.

You could even get early approval maybe and then do it in October.

Any other comments or questions about the process of data collection to make sure our board stays really healthy? Okay, then we get member comments. Want to go around the room and do member comments?

Sure, I'll start with Kevin. Yeah, I guess we can go around this way.

Um, revenue, right? In the end, it feels like all these conversations we're having come back to revenue. And I think, you know, Bill said a few times we're in a resource-constrained— and the mayor said as well— in a resource-constrained environment. So I think Things are going to suck for a little bit. We've got to make difficult choices, and to the extent that we can go through and do data collection and make them in an informed way, we can be really responsible with the resources we've got.

That's really the best we can do when we're revenue-challenged as a city right now.

Yep. I'm gonna second that. Anything to add?

I appreciate the conversation and want to be as helpful as possible to getting you all what you're looking for. So thank you for being willing to have some of that convo now and reflecting and sending me requests.

Yeah, well, thanks for all the work by Carlos and Christina. We really appreciate it. And then just, I think this theme has been mentioned a couple times going into the— couple times going into the budget, but I think we've heard it from public comment multiple times from providers about the continuity theme that we've touched on, and that is a priority for me, for the— especially in the first few years. I mean, I think, well, we're going to be collecting data to update our plans, but I, yeah, I'm going to place a priority on continuity for the first couple years. That's my personal view, and I appreciate the work by Trevor and Jessica as well.

Thanks. And then do we want to go to Trevor, do you have any comments?

I look forward to the conversations we have coming up. They're going to be tough, but thank you all.

I definitely second the idea that continuity is really important and trying to just keep the things that we have started going in whatever capacity we can.

And I'll just close this out. I know I agree with you all that it sucks and that resource constraint sucks and that continuity is really important. I'm glad I'm doing it with people who are so dedicated to coming and making the best decision that we can.

Chair, I know public comment is closed. Just before you close, I do see a hand by a public, and I don't know, since we have a few minutes, if you wanted to entertain a brief comment or not. I'm okay with it if you all are okay with reopening public comment. Thanks. Go ahead, Jessica.

Hi, thank you so much. My name is Dr. Jessica Parker. I'm the superintendent of Little Mountain Movers. We're the biggest childcare center in Anchorage, and I just wanted to encourage you to invest funding in where it's needed most, most, which is infant and toddler care. I think I speak for all of my fellow directors.

Our waitlist is close to 80 for my infants. Year and a half out. And it's even greater for toddlers. And the reason for that is because of, um, they move up into toddlers pretty quickly because they can walk usually before a year. And, um, but it takes them longer to be potty trained.

So that toddler group is actually growing at a faster rate than the infant rate. So, um, that's the biggest greatest need for sure. So as you're making these decisions, that's where parents are crying on the phone to us the greatest is in those two areas. Thank you. Go ahead, Trevor.

Oh, thank you, Jessica, for sharing that, which makes me think, you know, we've done this in the past, is one of the things we may want to also do as we're thinking about How to use the funds and constraint is maybe trying to think of a provider survey out to hear what is the need, or even get their opinion. We were funding this, would that actually be helpful versus this? That kind of stuff, because I think what Jessica just shared is really important. And then we can also help that because again, knowing the current need versus just our expertise can be different. So it's something to also consider.

Christina, make note of that and we can always draft something.

Okay, thank you. Noted. I think we're ready to adjourn a little early.

Okay, thank you all. Thank you, everybody. Have a nice day. Adjourned at 10:46. Thanks.