According to the December report, the CCLT has just under $708,000 in total assets.
There was $23,650 in restricted donations that came in for the month of December and
just under $141,000 for all of fiscal year 2025. Trotter suggest looking into COMO Gives
as a partner for another source of funding.
Motion to approve treasurer’s report: LaBrunerie
Motion to 2nd: Head
Not Voting: Tabron and Mitchell
Motion passed: 7:0
Administrative Services
Stanton thanked board for the itemize report for January. The attachment is there for
informational purpose.
VIII. NEW BUSINESS
2026 Budget
Staff being reviewing the budget. On paper the CCLT looks pretty good, but most of the
funds are restricted with either ARPA or specifically for the purchase of a home. ARPA
has cost a lot of money with staffing costs along with everything else. Due to this, it’s
causing the budget to become very tight for 2026 and will eventually run out of funds if
something doesn’t change. Hunt set up a meeting with the De’Carlon Seewood, the City
Manager, about the Chain of Houses and ways the CCLT has brought houses in. During
the meeting, Amelunke brought up the City covering staffing cost instead of the CCLT and
was told to bring the idea to city council for approval. This would help the CCLT for the
2027 budget but not make it where it will be affordable the whole time. Staff discussed
other ideas such as raising ground lease fees, cutting back on unnecessary expenses,
not renewing some subscriptions, and cutting back on the process to cut checks so the
CCLT can support the items they have to have.
Stanton did not like that he was not part of the meeting and the executive board should
have been made aware of it. Stanton told the board that not seen a legal document about
the special account for ARPA or has seen an official document on guidance on how the
APRA money can be used post sale. According to Stanton, ARPA has always been a
living process and a document. There were a lot of things that were changed and
manipulated in the process of getting these funds. He argued that the money that came
from the sale of the home is no longer APRA money and has been cleaned as there is no
direct relationship between APRA and that money as the money comes from the bank.
Amelunke told Stanton that was incorrect. Stanton explained how he believes the CCLT
is going backwards from previous years due to not being able to receive the proceeds
from the sale of the home due to APRA and having to ask the City for money.
Stanton proposed that the CCLT forward an invoice to the city based on their fees it cost
to execute the ARPA plans and get the money back in fees or we charge a negotiable
5-10% developer fee. Stanton plans to talk with the City Manager along and possibly the
CCLT lawyer. Stanton expressed his frustration about not knowing about the meeting with
the City Manager and how it will not happen again. Head notated as well that the whole
executive board should have at least known about the meeting. With City budget coming
up right now, Amelunke asked Stanton if he still wanted us to move forward with asking
the City for help and was told yes but the conversation needs to be different. Ascani
proposed bring up the development fees, along with City covering staffing cost and how
the CCLT can become independent.