The City Council special committee on the East Side Community Benefits Agreement voted to pursue a nonprofit "cultural council" model to administer CBA funds, the committee chair said, adopting a board structure intended to balance community representation and government oversight.

The decision came after a lengthy public-comment period in which neighborhood residents and nonprofit leaders repeatedly urged either a nonprofit-led model or a hybrid, two‑phase approach. "We are leaning toward the 5 0 1 c 3, the nonprofit route," said Britney Norris of the administration during the committee discussion. Committee members then signaled support for the cultural council draft and the committee adopted that model by voice vote.

Why it matters: The CBA funds were negotiated under the Jaguars agreement and committee members said the city already holds $4,000,000 earmarked for East Side work. Chair Raleigh Arias (District 11) framed the vote as a step to get money into community programs while the committee continues to refine governance and accountability language. "Right now, if we have, which we do have, $4,000,000 ready to use right now," Arias said while asking about the fastest route to deploy funds.

Public comments and competing models
Public commenters were broadly aligned on two principles: protect taxpayer dollars with oversight, and place community residents in decision-making roles. Daniel Nunn, attorney for Nelson Mullins representing Together Eastside Coalition, told the committee the coalition supported a nonprofit model because it "leads to higher community engagement," allows fundraising and "lowers burden on government." Dennis Sanchez of the same coalition outlined a "two‑phase" path that would include capacity building and a later transition to an independent 501(c)(3).

Several speakers — including Leslie Jean Barr, Latavia Harris and James Matchitt — explicitly supported a two‑phase approach that would begin with stronger city oversight and transition to an independent nonprofit after training and capacity building. Others, such as Maya Francis and Lawanda King Butler, argued for immediate nonprofit status to allow tax‑deductible donations and greater operational flexibility. Michelle Brown, chair of LiftJacks, urged a structure "accountable to the city and city council but . . . that most importantly ensures decision‑making authority by community members themselves."

Council and staff concerns
Council members and staff raised competing priorities. Councilmember Ron Salem argued for stronger in‑house control at the start because of the city's contractual obligations under the Jaguars' CBA and the need to ensure federal or donor funds are spent as designated. "Delegating that responsibility . . . to an outside entity gave [staff] some pause for concern from a contract administration perspective," said Mary Stifopoulos of the Office of General Counsel, summarizing staff advice.

Supporters of the cultural council model said it would be more flexible and faster to award smaller grants and multiple funding cycles than the current city grant model. Councilmember Jimmy Paluso voiced concern that an opioid‑style grants approach tended to favor larger organizations already familiar with city grant processes and that the cultural council model could better reach small businesses and new nonprofits.

Board composition and appointments
The committee also reached consensus on an appointment structure for the cultural council's governing board. Members agreed on a nine‑member, voting board with staggered terms and these appointment mechanics: four seats appointed by the council president and subject to council confirmation, four appointed by the mayor and subject to council confirmation, and one appointed by the Jaguars organization (no council confirmation). The committee also added a cap so no more than three board members may come from the same East Side neighborhood, and the appointments must "reside in or have a substantial economic business interest in the East Side," per the draft language discussed by the committee.

Some committee members and counsel signaled legal questions remain about how much appointment authority the council may place on an otherwise independent 501(c)(3); staff said they would research legal implications and suggested more detailed vetting language or a required community‑input process be added to the draft.

Next steps
Committee members directed staff to compile proposed amendments and return with a consolidated list; the committee scheduled a follow‑up meeting for Nov. 13 at 10 a.m. to consider specific ordinance revisions and finalize recommendations to the full City Council. "We have so much work to do . . . but this action we're taking, I want it to be taken up right now before the year ends," Chair Arias said.

Ending
The committee's vote creates a path to form a city‑recognized, community‑focused nonprofit entity to manage East Side CBA funds, while staff and council members continue to negotiate statutory language to protect accountability, add vetting and reporting requirements, and clarify transitional details such as staffing, audit and fundraising rules.