►
From YouTube: Mountain Community Capital Fund - Operating Committee
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
B
B
So
if
it's
okay
with
you
guys,
we
will
just
jump
right
in
Let's
see
we
have
Christopher
Murray
joining
us
from
Mountain
views.
Works,
hello,
Christopher,.
B
Thank
you
for
joining
us
sounds
like
Yasin
is
out
on
vacation
this
week.
B
Okay,
well
we're
glad
to
have
you
so
we're
looking
forward
to
a
productive
conversation.
B
I'll
just
jump
right
into
the
meeting
agenda,
so
the
first
item
is
to
approve
meeting
minutes
from
our
August
5th
meeting
from
a
couple
weeks
ago.
Has
everyone
got
a
chance
to
look
at
that?
Oh
Rachel
has
her
hand
up.
D
Before
we
jump
into
the
minutes,
let's
do
a
quick
roll
call.
B
Yeah
good
suggestion
that
thought
crossed
my
mind
for
every
second
and
it
just
went
away.
So
yes,
let's
do
that,
so
we
can
go
around
and
each
person
just
introduce
themselves
name
and
whether
you're
a
county
or
city
appointee
or
and
and
or
a
voting
member,
so
I'll
just
go
around
with.
What's
on
my
screen,
we'll
start
with
you
Frank.
B
Thank
you,
Kelly
Foster,.
D
Morning,
everyone
Rachel
Nygaard
here
County
appointee
and
County,
employee
and
secretary
and
voting
member.
G
Thank
you,
D
Williams,
City
appointee
and
voting
member.
B
Perfect
Christopher.
C
Yeah
Christopher
Murray
with
mountain
disc
works,
I'm.
The
chief
credit
officer.
B
Thank
you,
Karen.
B
A
B
B
B
Thank
you
Carl.
Second,
anyone.
B
B
All
right,
a
little
pop-up
about
lowering
my
hand
well
looks
like
the
motion
passes.
Thank
you.
Everybody
we'll
move
right
along
to
old
business.
We
are
the
purpose
of
today's
meeting.
The
bulk
of
today's
meeting
is
to
take
a
closer
look
at
the
loan
request
that
was
presented
to
us
last
time
at
the
August
5th
meeting.
We
just
didn't
quite
have
enough
time
to
really
have
a
robust
discussion.
B
We
had
some
follow-up
questions
and
so
our
partners
at
Mount,
this
works
have
put
some
work
into
getting
us
some
answers
to
our
questions,
but
before
we
jump
into
the
Q
a
part,
Christopher
I
was
wondering
if
you
have
the
loan
request
document
that
Yasmin
had,
if
you
don't
mind,
just
kind
of
going
through
that
again
for
us
real,
quick,
just
refresh
our
memory,
it's
not
quite
the
Q,
a
document
that
we
had
in
Google
Docs.
It
was
okay.
C
You
caught
me:
I
had
the
other
one.
The
questionnaire
went
handy
I'm,
not
I'm,
looking
in
yeah
hold
on
a
second
here,
no.
C
That's
okay:
we
have
a
central
database
for
all
of
our
client
accounts
and
Loan
requests
and
I
don't
see
it
in
there.
Let
me
just
check
and
see,
there's
normally
something
she.
B
C
B
Take
your
time
we
got
the
full
meeting
today,
pretty
much
dedicated
to
just
that
so
and
then,
while
you're
looking
Frank,
are
you
good
to
touch
on
a
little
bit
later
in
the
new
business
section
future
meeting
preferences?
You
have
a
little
bit
more
context
around
that.
E
Yes,
I
will
lean
on
Nikki
a
little
bit
as
well,
but
there
there
is
discussion
about
the
future
of
virtual
and
public
meetings
with
the
expiration
of
the
emergency
order
around
covet
19.
C
I,
don't
have
that
document,
so
Kelly
I,
don't
know
when
Yasin
submitted
it
to
mccf
where
that
gets
headquartered
on
our
end.
So.
C
D
D
C
Can
memorize
the
overall
deal
by
just
you
know
my
own
internal
document,
I
guess
if,
if
that's
helpful
to
do
that
at
the
very
least
yeah.
C
We'll
give
you
a
relationship
summary
and
do
my
best
not
to
to
the
actual
applicant
is,
but
this
is
a
loan
request
that
came
to
us
from
an
existing
client.
C
Originally
we
had
done
a
loan
at
the
65
000
level.
It's
now
paid
down
to
thirty
two
thousand,
none
of
the
funds
that
we've
requested
in
this.
Seventy
thousand
dollar
loan
requests.
None.
J
C
Our
existing
loan
gets
refinanced
for
that,
so
that
loan
still
is
is
stays
in
place.
So
this
is
all
money
for
relocation,
so
I
just
wanted
to
clarify
that
the
the
client
has
been
based
downtown
in
arguably
probably
one
of
the
worst
locations
for
a
retail
business
in
downtown.
C
You
know
that
can
be
debated.
You
know
anyways,
but
they've
certainly
been
challenged
from
construction
standpoints
to
various
things,
and
so
then,
of
course,
the
pandemic,
exacerbated
things
you
know
they
were
able
to
survive
frankly
by
accessing
idle
funds
to
the
SBA
is
a
lot
of
our
local
businesses
did,
and
so
the
business
still
has
continued
to
grow.
C
It's
it's
improved
from
a
revenue
standpoint
every
year,
but
still
hasn't
gotten
to
a
break-even
point
and
I
think
we
talked
about
that
a
little
bit
in
the
questionnaire
that
y'all
submitted
to
us.
C
So
the
decision
you
know
was
like
okay,
it's
you
know,
staying
downtown,
it's
going
to
take
it
just
isn't
going
to
work.
It's.
C
You
know
earlier
this
year
around
that
we,
you
know,
put
a
lot
of
requirements
on
them.
In
terms
of
you
know,
Financial
projections,
you
know
justifying
why
the
relocation
would
translate
into
the
feasibility
of
reaching
a
break-even
point
cetera,
and
you
know
I
was
really
skeptical
that
we
would
get
to
where
we
were
comfortable
with
the
feasibility
of
it.
We
did
get
there,
otherwise
I
wouldn't
have
approved
it
along
with
our
executive
director,
Matt
raker,
and
so
you
know,
the
need
is,
is
just
to
relocate.
C
They've
already
started
that
process,
so
you
know
they
will
suffer
through
a
relocation
and
try
to
nickel
and
dime
it
and
make
it
happen
a
little
bit
by
little
bit
as
many
of
our
local
businesses
do,
but
that
makes
it
much
more
tenuous.
C
So
the
request
for
you
before
you
is
to
you
know
basically
add
to
inventory,
because
it
will
have
a
much
better
retail
space,
provide
some
working
capital
not
by
any
means
a
rich
sum
of
working
capital.
You
know
that
you
know,
but
enough
I
think
that's
meaningful,
given
the
context
provide
some
marketing
dollars.
They've
learned
a
lot
about
marketing
and
so
anyways
and
the
hope
is
and
I
think
you
know
realistically,
given
where
they're
moving.
You
know
it
really
came
down
to
this
being
the
fundamental
decision.
C
What
really
is
a
break-even
point,
and
you
know
our
opinion
is-
is
that
if
they
can't
do
that,
where
they'll
be
located
in
West
Asheville,
then
you
know
there's
some
fundamental
issues
with
you
know
how
they're
running
their
business
and
one
of
the
big
reasons
to
move
to
West
Asheville
is,
is
they
did
a
survey
and
had
about
a
hundred
current
clients
respond
and
26
of
them
are
in
West
Asheville,
so
the
bulk
of
their
client
base
is
there,
so
it
made
a
lot
of
sense.
C
So
you
know
the
the
the
borrower
in
this
case
is
the
moderate
income
women-owned
business.
You
know
really
really
capable
on.
You
know
a
retailer
in
the
sense
that
they
really
understand
their
product.
They
understand
their
target
market
and
I
wouldn't
say:
numbers
has
been
their
Forte,
but
we
do
have
good
Financial
numbers,
but
that's
you
know,
they're,
not
an
MBA
by
background.
Their
degree
is
in
well,
I
got
to
be
careful
what
I
say.
C
The
degree
is
because
I'm
trying
to
make
sure
they
remain
autonomous,
so
anyways
that
said
I.
You
know
we've
got
history
here.
We
we
believe
in
the
operator.
We
think
it
makes
sense
for
them
to
make
this
move,
and
it
certainly
is
predicated
upon.
You
know
substantial
growth,
but
it's
it's
certainly
reasonable.
Within
context
of.
C
If
that's
a
summary
to
kind
of
frame
things
we're
talking
about
from
a
revenue
standpoint,
you
know
going
from
you
know
three
hundred
and
ten
thousand
thereabouts
in
Revenue
to
470.,
so
that
is
a
big
big
growth,
and
so
that's
that's
where
we
had
to
really
wrestle
with.
Could
we
believe
that,
in
order
to
justify
an
approval
so.
C
Yeah,
that's
that
I
mean
so
often
when
you're
dealing
with
projections
and
we
do
a
lot
of
startup
financings,
and
you
know
this
fund
has
supported
Mountain
Biz
works
and
improving
numerous
startup
loans
over
the
past
few
years
and
they're,
always
if
it's
a
startup,
it's
a
best
gas
projection
and
you
you
know:
you're
vetting
it
for
feasibility,
and
so,
in
this
case,
there's
a
benefit
to
having
some
history,
because
you
can
look
at
it
and
see.
Okay,
you
know
how
likely
is
it?
C
You
know
based
upon
historical
record,
for
them
to
grow,
so
that's
a
benefit,
but
it
also
can
be
its
own.
You
know
kind
of
Downer,
so
to
speak
in
the
sense
that
you
know
they're
they're,
almost
handicapped
by
that
in
the
sense
that
you
know
okay.
Well,
if
that's
all
they've
done
how,
how
can
you
possibly
believe
that
so
A
lot
of
times?
If
we
were
starting
from
scratch
and
didn't
have
the
history,
we
probably
wouldn't
be
wrestling
with
the
feasibility,
it
would
be
inherently
believable.
B
C
That
would
be,
you
know
in
the
first
12
months
in
the
new
location,
and
you
know
there
will
be
a
seasonal
element
there,
and
that
was
one
of
the
things
we
addressed
in
the
questionnaire
is,
is
that
we
do
expect,
and
you
see
this
often
with
businesses.
You
know
that
honeymoon
period
and
you
know,
and
of
course
the
fall
season
tends
to
probably
be
advantageous
from
a
tourism
standpoint.
C
You
know
you
got,
you
know
the
holidays
and
so
on,
but
we
do
expect
to
see
a
curtailment
from
a
cash
flow
standpoint
in
in
the
first
quarter
of
next
year.
That
would
be
interesting.
B
Got
it
well,
thank
you
for
that
summary.
At
this
point,
I'm
going
to
open
up
the
floor
for
additional
questions
from
the
committee
I
know
you
gave
us
some
really
good,
in-depth
answers
on
the
Q
a
so
we
you
know
in
the
absence
of
questions,
we
could
go
through
the
Q,
a
document,
but
I
just
wanted
to
give
an
opportunity
for
anyone
else
to
speak
or
have
any
additional
questions
based
off
of
what
you
just
presented.
G
Are
no
other
one,
okay,
single
member,
this
income
flows
to
the
1040.
Is
that
right?
What
what
was
the
net
operating
income
for
2021.
G
Net
income
after
expenses,
we've
got
a
net
income.
Yes,.
C
Okay:
net
income
before
taxes
was
negative.
Ten
thousand.
G
Okay,
was
there
any
section
129
any
depreciation
in
that
in
that
operating
no.
C
There
was
no
depreciation
I'm
looking
at
a
financial
summary
that
yazan
created
here
so
I'm,
not
looking
at
the
actual
Source
document
and
normally
there's.
So
there
was
no
ad
back
for
depreciation,
so
so.
G
C
F
C
G
C
This
one
was
a
startup
we
do
actually
for
we
go
out
to
10
years
depending
on
the
the
size
of
the
loan.
So
if
this
had
been
probably
like
125
000
or
something
of
that
level,
it
probably
would
have
gone
closer
to
10
years.
Okay,.
G
C
Well,
there
would
be
trading
Assets.
In
that
case
there
would
have
been
inventory
that
she
that
they
needed
to
start
their
business
and
I
don't
put
a
whole
lot
of
value
in
trading
assets,
because
you
know
they,
naturally
you
know
revolve
so
there's
not
a
lot
of
recourse
in
the
event
of
business
fails
from
Trading
assets
because
barely
by
the
time
you
know
that
they're
not
going
to
be
able
to
make
their
loan
payment.
Those
assets
are
gone.
Okay,.
G
Great
and
they
had
two
full-time
employees
and
one
part-time
where
they
these
were
W-2
employees.
What
was
the
940
report
of
wages
that
were
paid
in
2021?
Did
you
have
access
to
that.
G
Would
be
good,
so
we
could
see
actual
wages
that
were
paid
I'm
just
trying
to
get
a
an
idea
of
cash
flow
and
I'm
gonna
cease.
With
my
questions.
I
do
have
some
more
we've
got
other
players
in
the
room,
yeah.
C
You
know
this
was
one
where
it
has
a
negative
debt
coverage
ratio.
So
right
what
we
look
when
we
look
at
cash
flow
and
a
lot
of
times
for
these
small
businesses,
their
profit
and
loss
statement
doesn't
necessarily
reflect
what
is
required
for
the
owner
to
live,
and
so
you
have
to
make
an
adjustment
for
that
which
we
do,
and
in
this
case
you
know
our.
You
know
we
came
up
with,
even
rather
than
there
being
ad
backs
to
cash
flow,
which
depreciation
is
a
non-cash
item
there.
G
So,
basically,
their
tax
return
when
they
file
a
1040
is
that
was
that
what
I'm
trying
to
get
it
is,
it
doesn't
look
like
they
have
enough
income
other
than
to
support
themselves.
There's
an
owner's
drawing
account
I
would
suspect.
That's
involved
in
this
fix
is
that
right
and
you
that
was
dad
back
or
whatever.
C
We
look
at
it
and
you
don't
necessarily:
sometimes
they
pay
themselves
more
than
they
need
to
sometimes
laugh
for
whatever
reason,
and
now
that's
so
we
do
look
at
that
and
it
we.
We
get
a
household
cash
flow
statement
to
say
what
is
the
minimum
that
they
need
to
break
even
at
home,
and
we
have
to
assume
that
that
distribution
has
to
come
out
of
the
business,
and
we
have
to
account
for
that
so
that
we
can
really
see
you
know,
what's
whether
it's
feasible
or
not,
for
them
to
break
even
okay.
G
So
my
question:
my
final
question
is
Mountain
Biz
cap
lent
them
65
5.
What
last
three
years
ago
based
on-
and
this
was
60
month
a
66
month
loan.
Is
that
correct.
G
72
months
was
it:
was
there
any
interest,
forgiveness
interest,
only
payments
on
that
term
on
that
term,.
C
G
C
Well,
a
couple
of
things
here:
you
know
you
know,
as
we
have
several
Financial
Partners,
obviously
mccf
being
one
the
SBA
USDA
in
this
case
that
original
loan
was
an
SVA
Community
Advantage
loan,
which
is
a
part
of
their
7A
program,
which
is
probably
the
sba's
flagship
program
right
and
it
wouldn't
be
eligible
under
that
program
for
additional
funding.
C
You
know
there
might
it
just
normally
you
have
to
have
historical
cash
flow
yeah
and
even
though
it's
performed
it
it,
and
even
though
we've
had
the
pandemic
it,
it
I.
Don't
think
that
they're
going
to
make
exceptions
to
the
SOP
and
they
haven't
been
so
that
was
not
a
reasonable
Pathway
to
increase
forming
underneath
that
facility.
I.
C
C
One
was
for
five
thousand
six
Seventeen
and
one
was
for
forty
four
hundred,
so
you
can
actually
kind
of
extrapolate
what
their
you
know.
Payroll
would
have
been.
You
know,
so
so
both
of
those
have
been
forgiven
and
then
they
have
gotten
idle
funds.
C
B
D
C
For
the
business
model,
even
though
it's
continued
to
get
better
and
better
and
better
from
a
growth
standpoint,
it's
got
to
move
from
where
they
are,
which
is
a
hole
in
the
wall.
Frankly,
the
poor
visibility.
G
B
Thank
you
for
your
question,
Steve
and
Christopher
for
your
answers.
There.
Anybody
else
have
questions
or
comment
input.
B
E
Well,
really,
this
question
is
for
Carl.
Carl
I
saw
the
response
to
your
question
in
the
document.
Were
you
satisfied
with
that
answer?.
A
I'm
grappling
with
a
little
different
issue
here
and
that
is
we're
not
really
called
the
Pond
to
approve
a
loan,
we're
a
called
upon
to
manage
the
fund
in
total
and
that
you
know,
given
that
we've
only
had
one
go
south
that
we
have
a
We've
incurred
very
little
risk
I'm
sort
of
inclined
to
work
with
our
partner,
Mountain
bizworks,
because
that
is
where
all
of
our
loans
have
come
from.
A
That
being
said,
what
what's
an
issue
for
me
is
that
raises
an
issue
about
how
we
gain
knowledge,
and
my
understanding
is
that
this
committee
and
I
think
maybe
it
was
you
Tim
that
went
back
and
said
you
know:
can
there
be
a
closed
door
session
to
disclose
more
information
so
that
we
can
make
an
informed
decision?
A
And
at
that
time
the
answer
I
understood
was
no
I
feel
like
that's
a
question
that
needs
to
be
Revisited,
because
we're
looking
for
a
level
of
detail
that
is
in
inappropriate
for
a
public
meeting,
so
we're
stuck
in
this
weird
limbo
of
approving
loans
with
very
little
information.
This
is
why
we're
having
this
one,
because
we
didn't
feel
like
we
had
enough
information,
so
I'm
I'm,
struggling
with
how
we've
constructed
this
organization,
and
maybe
we
need
to
look
at
that
at
some
Future
Point.
B
Thank
you,
Carl
and
I
can
add
a
little
bit
more
color
to
that
based
off
of
a
recent
email
thread
that
didn't
feel
I
didn't
want
to
bog
everyone's
inboxes.
Now
we
didn't
include
the
whole
entire
committee
on
there,
but
we
did
get
a
request
from
our
lending
partner.
Those
works
to
see
if
we
can
do
this
in
a
closed
session
and
we
did
get
some.
Let
me
go
input
and
at
this
time
it
didn't
it
didn't,
seem
like
we.
B
It
would
be
essentially
prudent
and
legal
for
us
to
do
that,
but
I
do
agree
with
their
sentiments
and
I
think
it's
more.
It
warrants
further
discussion,
but
we
we
reconsidered
it
for
this
meeting,
essentially
to
make
it
a
closed
session,
or
you
know
at
least
part
of
it
and
the
input
the
advice
we
got
was
no
at
the
current
moment.
B
Frank
and
Tim.
Do
you
have
anything
to
add
on
that
topic?.
I
I'm
glad
to
chime
in
briefly
and
Frank
feel
free,
but
you
know
we
reached
out
to
both
city
and
county
legal
separately
and
they
came
back
with
the
same
answer
and
I
understand
Carl's
concern,
I
pushed
for
it
myself,
but
the
reality
is
closed
session
is
only
something
that
can
occur
for
reasons
indicated
directly
in
the
statute
and
those
reasons
are
pretty
specific.
It's
you
know,
Personnel
reasons
there.
There
is
an
opening
for
economic
development,
but
that's
for
something
slightly
different
than
this,
and
then
also
for
real
estate
transactions
and
I.
Believe.
I
The
final
is
consultation
with
a
legal
professional
like
an
attorney
so
because
of
the
nature
of
the
state
statutes.
If
it's
not
explicit
that
we
can
do
it.
The
answer
is
that
you
cannot
based
on
how
we
operate
in
this
this
state.
So.
D
D
Is
that
it's
at
this
point
I'm
hoping
to
be
in
an
item
on
our
September
agenda,
looking
at
Karen's
little
box
to
see
if
we're
she's
nodding
that
that
we
should
be
able
to
have
a
a
discussion
at
that
meeting,
and
so
this
is
an
opportunity
for
us
to
make
sure
that
that
fits
I
too
feel
a
little
bit
of
that.
D
Discomfort,
you
know
we,
we
aren't
the
lender
and
we
yet
are
being
asked
to
sort
of
straddle
this
role
of
that
fund
oversight
versus
specific
loan
approval
and
and
It's
Tricky.
And
it's
not
it's
not
an
area
that
I
feel
the
most
comfortable.
B
Yeah,
those
are
all
good
points,
Rachel,
Nikki
and
then
Christopher.
J
And
so
yes,
I,
think
I
think
that's
something
that
we
we
certainly
want
to
clarify
is
to
really
be
clear
about
what
the
role
of
the
committee
is
and
two
what
our
guiding
documents
set
forth,
because
I
think
part
of
what
we're
doing
here
really
functions.
J
What
what
I
would
Envision
to
be
the
credit
underwriting
committee
that
is
allowed
somewhat
of
a
deep
dive
to
really
ask
some
more
specific
questions
that
is
triggered
by
the
amount
of
the
loan
or
any
information
that
is
is
deemed
within
the
the
framework
of
this
credit
underwriting
committee
and
I
know.
J
That's
part
of
our
I
think
it's
part
of
the
mccf
bylaws
that
we
are
looking
at
absolutely,
but
then
to
also
just
make
sure
that
all
of
the
duties
and
services
agreements
the
exhibits
contained
therein
like
that,
we're
all
very
clear
on
exactly
what
our
role
is
and
exactly
what
the
role
is
of
the
lender.
J
Because,
yes,
I
do
think
that
being
clear
that
it's
the
participating
lenders,
standard
risk
parameters
that
we
are
in
a
sense
verifying
at
this
level
is
is,
is
copacetic
without
with
what
I
can
see
being
the
role
of
nccf
to
really
just
verify
that
that
we
acknowledge
that.
J
Yes,
this,
this
loan
is
within
the
lender's
standard
risk
parameters
that
I
think
we
can
ensure
that
our
our
overall
goal
of
of
securing
you
know
up
securing
the
fund
and
maintaining
and
monitoring
the
fund
itself
is
our
our
Guiding
Light,
and
so
with
that
I
think
I.
Think
we've,
we've
kind
of
looked
at
these
further
follow-up
questions
and
again
I
think
that's!
J
It's
been
a
healthy
conversation
because,
yes,
when
we
look
at
a
loan
of
this
size
of
magnitude,
we
want
to
make
sure
that
we
ask
those
questions,
but
I
do
think.
The
the
important
point
is
to
be
cognizant
of
of
what
our
role
is,
what
the
role
is
of
the
participating
lender
and
kind
of
each
each
be
attended
to
that
lane.
So
that
would
be
my
comment
and
I'm.
C
H
C
Yeah
I
I
would
welcome
broadening
with
much
more
detail
that
initial
submission
to
the
fund
I
think
it
I
think.
A
lot
of
these
questions
are
understandable.
Given
the
context-
and
you
know,
my
request
to
go
in
closed
session
was
mainly
because
I'm
paranoid
that
I'm
going
to
actually
blurt
out
the
name
of
the
client
or
something
like
that.
So
there's
no
lack
of
desire
to
you
know
y'all
have
as
much
transparency
as
whatever
the
statutes
require
or
or
whatever.
That
certainly
is
certain
very
much
welcome.
C
C
You
know
that's
got
to
be,
regardless
of
whether
there's
a
guarantee
or
collateral
or
whatever,
and
that's
sometimes
a
real
wrestle
to
come
to
a
discernment
of
that
in
every
situation
is
unique
and
approached
uniquely,
obviously,
with
certain
you
know,
basic
guiding
principles.
The
other
thing
I
wanted
to
just
address
is
is
the
one
that
is
in
default
and
it's
actually
still
a
performing
business
in
this
case,
in
fact,
they've
opened
up
a
second
location
under
what
we
think
at
this
point
is
a
I.
Don't
think
we
think
we're
pretty
sure.
C
Well,
we
don't
know
for
sure,
but
they
formed
another
LLC
to
kind
of
avoid
I
guess
a
connection
to
the
the
existing
LLC
to
whom
we
have
alone,
and
so
it's
not
so
much
that
the
business
failed.
C
It's
just
that
we've
got
somebody
that
has
just
decided
to
really
be
non-cooperative.
At
this
point
so
and
and.
E
C
Kind
of
perplexed
as
to
why
you
know
our
history
is
one
of
really
working
patiently
with
people,
and
you
know
getting
really
creative
to
make
something
work,
so
just
wanted
to
clarify
that
that
you
know
that's
where
that
one
is
was
brought
to
you
last
week
or
two
weeks
ago,
yeah.
B
Okay,
thank
you
for
clarifying
that
Christopher
I
did
want
to
read
a
comment
that
Dee
put
in
the
chat
and
then
share
some
of
my
thoughts
as
well.
She
said
our
job
is
oversight
and
operations
based
on
oversight
stamp
process,
because
taxpayer
funds
are
involved-
and
you
know,
I
I'm,
listening
to
everyone's
comments
and
kind
of
trying
to
you
know,
digest
it
all
into
something
a
little
bit
cohesive-
and
you
know
my
personal
take
on
this
again.
B
Only
having
been
on
this
committee
for
a
little
bit
over
a
year
is
that
while
it
is
prudent
to
analyze,
you
know
the
loan
parameters
on
a
loan
by
loan
basis,
the
way
I
approach.
This
is
more
from
a
portfolio
standpoint
of
you
know.
We
had
a
small
portfolio
and
now
we're
kind
of
we
have
all
this
grant
funding
that
has
brought
in
the
portfolio-
and
you
know
to
this
point:
how
do
we
kind
of
manage
that
overall
portfolio
to
be
the
best
Steward
of
that?
B
You
know
influx
of
funds
and
essentially
the
risks
that
we
assess
are
not
necessarily
the
risks
to.
You
know
the
lender,
but
it's
really
the
risk
to
the
mccf,
and
you
know
in
the
Frank
in
the
in
the
context
of
this
specific
loan
means.
Seventy
thousand
dollars
out
of
three
million
dollars
is
about
2.3
of
the
fund,
essentially,
and
because
we
are
not
a
leveraged
fund
at
this
point
moment,
you
know
we
that
that's
something
to
consider
that
2.3
percent-
it's
not
a
huge
amount,
but
you
know
it
is
not
insignificant.
B
Also
just
a
reminder
that
I
feel
like
we're
setting
precedence,
and
so
you
know
part
of
like
investing
in
general.
You
know,
from
my
background
is
there
is
some
psychology
involved,
and
you
know
we
may
now
that
we
have
this
influx
of
funding,
be
a
little
bit
more
risk-averse.
We
want
want
to
do
well
by
the
fund.
We
want
to
you,
know
to
to
Steward
in
and
make
an
impact,
but
maybe
there's
also
this
new
expectation
to
essentially
perform.
B
You
know
like
for
the
fund
to
perform
well,
and
so
there's
I
just
want
to
add
that
in
that
there
is
a
little
bit
of
that
psychological
component
as
well.
That
may
or
may
not
impact
the
loans
that
we
are
now
approving,
giving
this
influx
of
funding
compared
to
before
when
we
had
a
much
smaller
amount
to
deal
with.
B
So
you
know,
I
think
that
if,
if
and
when,
as
we
continue
to
revisit
these
governing
documents,
that
we
kind
of
keep
that
portfolio
mindset
in
View
and
how
that
actually
plays
out,
you
know
I
think
it's
up
for
discussion,
but
I
agree
with
Nikki
that
we,
it
would
be
good
for
us
to
kind
of
Define
the
lanes
that
we're
in
so
that
we're
not
a
you
know,
doing
duplicating
effort
that
our
lender
is
already
doing
and
also
you
know,
really
kind
of
deferring
to
them
in
the
area
that
they
are
strained
in
and
specialized
in.
B
So
any
other
thoughts
or
comments
or
follow-up
thoughts
to
that
I
think
we're
gonna
have
to
try
to
attempt
to
bring
this
plane
in
for
our
Landing
Tim.
You
have
your
hand
raised
yeah.
I
I'll,
just
chime
in
briefly
I
appreciate
Christopher
and
the
the
mountain
newsworks
team,
sharing
this
additional
information,
and
hopefully
we
haven't
derailed
the
process,
but
I
found
this
informative
and
instructive
and,
as
we
talked
I
heard,
a
suggestion
for
credit
underwriting
committee,
maybe
that's
kind
of
where
this
type
of
information
gets
vetted
and
that
might
be
the
right
strategy.
I
I
I,
don't
have
the
right
idea
in
my
mind,
but
I
do
think
that
we
should
feel
comfortable
asking
these
types
of
questions
and
I
don't
suggest
that
we
read
underwrites
or
anything
like
that.
But
you
know
if,
if
this
is
valuable
information
for
the
committee,
we
should
probably
figure
out
a
way
to
capture
it
more
regularly
either
at
the
presentation
of
the
loan
or
if
we
feel
that
this
is
not
relevant
to
our
work,
then
we
need
to
state
that
just
very
clearly
as
well
so
I
don't
know.
I
I
So
I
appreciate
it
open
to
any
solutions
that
want
to
be.
You
know
supportive
as
well,
so.
J
Nikki
so
I
just
the
grounding
that
I
have
really
does
come
with
our
existing
documentation
and
our
existing
framework
that
we
utilize
and
so
I
was
scanning
both
the
rules
of
procedure,
which
is
a
document
that
I
know
we're
discussing
now:
the
service,
the
duties
and
services
agreement
and
then
what
I,
Came,
Upon
and
I'll
just
drop
it
I
drop
a
link
here
in
the
chat,
is
exhibit
B
to
the
duties
and
services
agreement.
I
hope
this
is
the
latest
version.
J
So
I
may
ask
our
secretary
just
to
verify
if
this
is
in
fact
the
latest
version,
because
I
just
I
can
share
my
screen
for
the
public
to
make
sure
that
I
think
this.
Is
it
yep?
Okay.
So
this
is
a.
This
is
a
public
document
that
I
found
that
again
appeared
as
if
it
was
our
underwriting
guidelines
that
really
helped
me
to
frame
like
what
the
role
is
and
I
encourage
all
of
our
committee
members
just
to
refresh
themselves
with
this,
because
it
really
does
talk
about
again.
J
This
idea
of
loan
threshold
loan
approvals,
and
so
what
I
would
be
interested
in,
is
just
being
able
to
use
this.
Perhaps
we
could
even
convert
it
to
somewhat
of
a
checklist
just
so
that
we
can
see
how
the
loan
measures
up
with
the
The
Guiding
philosophy
that's
set
forth
in
this-
exhibit
B
to
our
duties
and
services
agreement,
and
so
looking
at
again
we're
touching
that
max
amount
with
this
particular
loan.
J
The
credit
philosophy-
that's
that's
referenced
here-
is
to
extend
the
participating
lenders
reach
to
be
able
to
to
provide
these
loans
to
some
borrowers
that
exist
outside
of
the
normal
frame
of
of
of
risk
right
and-
and
that's
even
kind
of
repeated
here.
Under
this
credit
philosophy,
saying
that
you
know,
applications
that
taken
as
a
whole
are
just
outside
of
participating,
lender
standard
risk
parameters,
because
I
think
we
have
to
honor.
B
Thank
you,
Nikki.
That
is
very
helpful
and
thank
you
for
dropping
the
the
link
there
I,
like
your
idea
of
a
checklist,
something
a
little
bit
more
like
Visual
and
like
simplified
and
I.
B
Think
what
I'm
picking
up
on
is
that
some
of
our
points
of
discussion
here
qualms,
if
you
will
maybe
more,
have
to
do
with
our
process,
and
you
know
just
kind
of
grappling
putting
our
arms
around
that
and,
of
course,
that's
also
changing
in
the
process
as
we
speak
and
as
we're
revising
these
documents-
and
you
know
it's-
it's-
maybe
not
even
so
much
the
loan
itself
that
we're
looking
at
right
now,
but
because
we
don't
have
a
really
clear
process
and
understanding
of
our
operations.
B
It's
kind
of
being
brought
to
light
when
we're
looking
at
these
loan
requests,
and
it's
hard
to
you
know
for
us
to
kind
of
reconcile.
So
you
know
with
that
said,
I
think
it
would
be
helpful
for
us
to
maybe
compartmentalize
those
two
a
little
bit
so
that
we
can
at
least
tend
to
the
current
loan
at
hand,
with
understanding
that
there's
a
lot
of
work
to
be
done.
On
our
end,
to
really
fine-tune
our
process,
get
things
more
straightforward,
more
clear,
have
more
clarity
on
our
role.
B
B
So
at
this
time
does
anybody
have
any
closing
comments
or
questions
on
the
loan
request
at
hand,
because
that
is
the
business
that
we're
trying
to
take
care
of
today
and
you
know,
if
not,
then
we
can
move
to
take
a
motion
to
approve
that
loan
if,
if
anybody
I'm
inclined
to
do
so
since
we
are
coming
up
on
the
end
of
our
time
pretty
soon
here.
B
B
B
E
E
B
B
D
You
want
to
count
anyways,
please.
D
B
Thank
you,
everyone,
I
I,
do
believe
today's
conversation
was
really
helpful
because
it
did
bring
to
light.
You
know
a
lot
of
our
the
things
that
we
need
to
work
on
and
improve
on
in
our
on
our
committee
really
just
admire,
and
you
know,
respect
everyone's
input
and
thoughtful.
You
know
input
to
this
conversation
and
I.
Think
it's
it's
it's
good
that
we
didn't
essentially
penalize
the
current
applicant
with
our
you
know
as
we're
working
out
these
processes
on
the
side.
B
So
with
that
being
said,
I
think
I'll
put
some
more
thought
into
how
we
proceed
with
that
process:
side
of
the
house,
how
we
can
streamline
this
whole
process
and
possibly
potentially
even
revisit
the
the
credit
underwriting
committee
and
kind
of
spinning
off
that
part,
so
that
we
can
be
more
efficient
in
these
conversations,
if
any
of
you
have
any
thoughts,
feel
free
to
send
them
my
way
as
well.
B
With
that
said,
we'll
move
on
in
our
agenda
to
new
business
and
Frank
feel
free
to
share
and
and
Nikki.
Both
of
you
feel
free
to
share
some
information
with
the
group
on
what
that
is.
E
So
the
deputy
city
clerk
has
essentially
just
alerted
anyone
who
works
with
boards
or
commissions
that
the
governor's
emergency
order
regarding
covid-19
is
coming
to
an
end
soon
and
with
that
we'll
need
to
get
some
guidance
from
city
council,
certainly
about
whether
or
not
we
will
be
permitted
to
continue
on
with
remote
meetings,
so
we're
waiting
for
that
guidance
from
Council.
E
E
That
is
not
a
capability
that
we
we
have
right
now
that
we'll
be
able
to
support
so
once
we
get
this
direction
from
Council,
then
we'll
be
able
to
provide
more
information,
but
I
believe
they're,
going
to
look
for
a
vote
determining
how
we
intend
to
operate
in
the
future,
whether
it's
continue
with
remote
meetings
or
if,
if
that's
permissible
or
returning
to
in
person,
so
that
is
forthcoming,
but
it
hasn't
been
decided.
Yet.
Nikki
did
I,
articulate
that
well
and
or
miss
anything.
B
Thank
you
Frank
and
Nikki
and
Frank
I
think
when
we
talked
the
other
day,
I
don't
know
if
you
have
any
more
clarity
into
this,
but
there's
a
possible
third
option
of
if
we
could
do
one
for
a
period
of
time
and
then
reassess
and
essentially
take
another
vote
later
down
the
road.
E
E
Selfishly
I
I,
like
the
virtual
format
for
this
meeting
and
I
I,
will
say
that
there
is
a
level
of
support
that
staff
has
to
provide
on
the
back
end,
but
I
do
feel
that
we
get
very
good
participation
with
this
group.
Everybody
makes
the
best
effort
to
show
up
and
I
think
for
the
information
we're
considering
and
sharing,
sharing
that
it's
it's
great
for
transparency,
but
also
that
flexibility.
E
You
know
in
the
past
I've
traveled
and
been
able
to
attend
a
meeting
because
we
are
virtual,
so
I
I
certainly
prefer
it
but
I'm
one
of
many.
B
Yep
Karen
also
made
a
good
point
that
she
is
in
Durham
Karen.
Can
you
drive
up
once
a
month
to
join
us,
or
we
can
all
take
a
road
trip
over
there
to
Durham
it's
nice
from
downtown
Durham
I've
been
there,
which
also
favors
virtual
so
Frank.
Do
you
think
that
this
might
be
something
we
would
potentially
vote
on
in
our
next
meeting?
Yes,.
F
B
B
B
Thank
you,
Francia
all
right,
everybody.
Well,
we
are
coming
up
on
time,
so
I
guess
we
will
end
it
here
for
today.
Thank
you
again
so
much
for
just
all
the
effort
that
you
guys
put
into
preparing
and
showing
up
to
this
meeting
I
will
probably
put
together
an
email
to
follow
up
on
the
thoughts
around
process.
I
know
Karen.
B
You
are
working
diligently,
you
and
your
team
on
revamping
those
documents
as
well,
and
you
know
I'm
looking
forward
to
some
more
discussion
around
that,
but
I
think
today
we
you
know
there
were
some
good
suggestions
on
other
things.
We
could
do
to
probably
fine-tune
this
process
further,
so
be
on
the
lookout
for
a
follow-up,
email
and
we'll
probably
create
another.