Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03-16-2011 CDBG Minutes CDBG Minutes March 16, 2011 Page 1 of 6 CITY OF ORANGE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM COMMITTEE MINUTES WEDNESDAY, MARCH 16, 2011 6:30 P.M. Economic Development Conference Room MEMBERS PRESENT Mary Ellen Manning Eva Perez Fernando Rico Robert Tunstall Alternate Darren Smith MEMBERS ABSENT Gina Scott STAFF PRESENT Mary Ellen Laster Aaron Schulze I. CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order at 6:43 P.M. II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES – FEBRUARY 23, 2011 Committee Member Tunstall moved, seconded by Committee Member Perez, to approve the February 23, 2011, Minutes as presented. Motion carried, 5-0. III. PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING CITY OF ORANGE FY 2011-12 ANNUAL ACTION PLAN Ms. Laster stated that for the Committee’s review, they had been provided a copy of the FY 2011-12 Allocations of Funding for the current fiscal year and the Four-Year Funding Allocations History; and noted that for the current fiscal year, there were some funds left over from prior years, bringing the total to $1,607,758. Ms. Laster noted that the cap for Public Services is 15 percent; that the cap for Administrative is 20 percent; and explained that if re-budgeting is to be done, it can only be taken from the capital projects category. She explained that because they still don’t have a final figure for what Orange will be receiving, as with the prior year, staff is recommending they proportionately increase or decrease the funding amounts for the agencies depending on what the final CDBG funding is for Orange. With regard to the FY 2010-11 CDBG Sub-recipient Status Report, Mr. Schulze advised that Orange Fair Housing Council had submitted a request for payment of $8,600, noting that agency has accomplished 41 percent of its goals as of CDBG Minutes March 16, 2011 Page 2 of 6 December 31, 2010. He noted that Olive Crest has yet to complete its construction project; and that they will be paid their allocation once that construction project is complete. He stated that Paint Your Heart Out has completed its goal of working on 5 houses; and mentioned that because the agency has some leftover funding, it will be used to work on a couple mobile homes. He noted that Women’s Transitional Living Center, Inc., (WTLC) should not have any difficulty achieving its goals by the end of the year. He stated because YWCA of Central Orange County has only assisted 13 people thus far, it is likely that agency is not going to meet its goal of serving 22 people; and explained that its total recipient numbers are low because of a low turnover rate of only 2 people at this point. Ms. Laster explained that because YWCA had proposed it would be assisting 22 people for $7,500, the CDBG funding will have to be proportionately paid out to that agency according to the final number of people it ends up serving. She explained that they cannot get funding on duplicated clients ev en with an extended stay at this facility. Mr. Schulze noted that Operation School Bell typically asks for its funding after the third quarter. Ms. Laster highlighted the CDBG Four-Year Funding Allocation History sheet, briefly commenting on the funding granted to the various agencies that have come before this Committee; stated that while the City’s intent is to wean the long-term CDBG funded agencies off this program, if those agencies are operating a good program that is benefiting Orange residents, it is beneficial to continue to fund those. Ms. Laster highlighted the Executive Summary on the reductions that are proposed for CDBG and HOME Investment Partnerships Program; explained that the cuts to the HOME program do not impact the Committee’s decision making process because this Committee is not allocating funds to the agency at this point; advised that this is funding the City uses to allocate to affordable housing projects; and explained that as those proposed projects comes through, the City knows ahead of time how much funding they have to assist and are able to allocate a specific amount to develop and rehab affordable housing projects. Ms. Laster pointed out the City is assuming there will be a 7.5-percent reduction of CDBG funding from last year’s amount and an anticipated 8.4-percent decrease in HOME Investment Partnerships Program funding from last year’s amount. Ms. Laster commented on the Consolidated Plan Priorities, Five-Year Objectives and Annual Goals for FY 2010-11 through FY 2014-15, highlighting the various priorities and eligible activities the City is trying to meet with the CDBG funding; advised that the various goal categories are housing, homeless, community development, and economic development, with each category identifying a level of priority; and advised that targeted population/groups are identified to be eligible to receive program assistance. She also highlighted the objective outcomes and the categories they meet, such as suitable living environment, CDBG Minutes March 16, 2011 Page 3 of 6 decent housing, and economic opportunities; and she addressed the 5-year objectives and 1-year goals for each of those programs. Ms. Laster noted that the Home Investment Partnerships Program has typically been funded with CDBG funds for a number of years, but explained that the City does not have a lot of those loans paid off, so for the current fiscal year, the City will be funding the majority of the program out of the Redevelopment Housing Set-Aside funds; mentioned they will still be using the same criteria for eligibility as they would if these were CDBG funded; and highlighted the various agencies that are assisting in helping to implement these goals. Ms. Laster explained that under Economic Development goals, the City does not use CDBG funds for economic development activity because those are not easy to qualify for, but added that the City is allowed to take credit for any economic activity the Redevelopment Agency generates. She noted that staff will then report in the Consolidated Annual Performance Evaluation Report (CAPER) in September what goals the City has met and what businesses were assisted that have hired low-income individuals. Responding to Chairman Rico’s inquiry, Ms. Laster highlighted some of the projects the City’s Economic Development department assisted for job creation; she noted these funds don’t have to go to a certain demographic area, that they just have to have employees who are low income; and explained just by the nature of the businesses, staff knows that oftentimes, their employees will not be high wage earners. She noted the City has economic incentives for job retention and creation, and noted that over the last 5-year period, the City has assisted businesses with signage, grants, restaurant equipment, and small business loans; and recalled some of those businesses which have received this funding -- such as Chapman Car Care, Arby’s restaurant, Old Towne Grinder and Ice Cream Parlour, Best Buy, to name a few. Chair Rico stated that it would be helpful for the public to easily view h ow the redevelopment funds are assisting in the community and how its elimination can negatively affect communities, suggesting this kind of information should be published in local newspapers. Ms. Laster pointed out that these separate categories are also at the front of each agency application in the Committee’s notebooks, noting the Committee members can use all this information to rank how each agency is meeting the criteria. Ms. Laster highlighted the table of funding recommendations, which reflects a 7.5-percent decrease in CDBG funding from last year, estimating the grant will be $1,323,383; stated that approximately $50,000 is available in contingency money; and stated that these totals provide $1,378,383 for public facilities. Ms. Laster stated that Orange Senior Center provided the Committee members with a revised attachment for FY 2009-10; and stated that the Committee has been given copies of tract maps which reflect public ownership of the proposed alleyway improvements. CDBG Minutes March 16, 2011 Page 4 of 6 IV. DISCUSSION OF FY 2011-12 CDBG FUNDING REQUESTS Discussion ensued with regard to reducing the amount to fund the ADA ramp improvements so the nonprofit agencies can be fully funded under Public Facilities/Improvements/Rehabilitation. Committee Member Perez stated she would like to fully fund Assistance League of Orange, Friendly Center, Inc., and Lestonnac Free Clinic because they are providing great service for the residents of Orange. Chair Rico stated he would like to fully fund Lestonnac Free Clinic because it one of a few medically driven services and that it has not received CDBG funding from Orange. The Committee discussed the number of Orange residents Lestonnac Free Clinic serves and what level of CDBG funding is appropriate given their serving 50 Orange residents with this proposed program. V. FINAL FUNDING RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2011-2012 CDBG PROGRAM AND HOME PROGRAM MOTION: Committee Chair Rico moved, seconded by Committee Member Perez, to allocate $238,569 to Administration for City Departments - Economic Development, Program Administration. Motion carried, 5-0. MOTION: Committee Chair Rico moved, seconded by Committee Member Perez, to allocate $27,108 for Nonprofit Agencies - Orange County Fair Housing Council. Motion carried, 5-0. MOTION: Committee Member Manning moved, seconded by Alternate Committee Member Smith, to allocate to the Public Facilities/Improvements/Rehabilitation, Nonprofit Agencies as follows:  $10,340 for Helping Our Mentally Ill Experience Success (H.O.M.E.S.), Inc. -- Riley House Rehabilitation; and  $20,000 for Paint Your Heart Out, Inc. -- Orange Paint Day. Motion carried, 5-0. MOTION: Committee Member Perez moved, seconded by Committee Member Tunstall, to allocate $35,000 to the Public Facilities/Improvements/Rehabilitation, Nonprofit Agencies -- for Orange Elderly Services, Inc. – Kitchen Appliance Replacement. Motion carried, 3-0, with Committee Member Manning and Alternate Committee Member Smith abstaining due to a possible conflict of interest. CDBG Minutes March 16, 2011 Page 5 of 6 MOTION: Alternate Committee Member Smith moved, seconded by Committee Member Manning, to allocate the following funds to the Public Facilities/Improvements/Rehabilitation, City Departments -- Public Works projects, subtotaling a revision of $848,109:  $300,000 for Tularosa Avenue Neighborhood Alley;  $220,000 for Highland Street Neighborhood Alley;  $215,000 for Compton Avenue Neighborhood Street Overlay from Lewis Street to Manchester Avenue;  $18,000 for Hewes Street Alley Reconstruction; and  $95,109 for ADA Ramps -- New Construction Citywide. Motion carried, 5-0. MOTION: Committee Member Perez moved, seconded by Committee Member Tunstall, to allocate the following funds to the Public Services, City Departments, totaling $163,170:  $43,170 for Public Services, City Departments -- Community Services, After-School Recreation Programs at El Camino Real, Killefer, Prospect/Grijalva Community Park Programs; and  $120,000 for Public Services, City Departments -- Police, Bike Team Program. Motion carried, 5-0. MOTION: Alternate Committee Member Smith moved, seconded by Chair Rico, to allocate a portion of $36,087 to the following nonprofit agencies:  $6,000 to Assistance League of Orange -- Operation School Bell;  $7,500 to The Friendly Center, Inc. -- Emergency Assistance and Supplemental Food Programs;  $7,500 to Lestonnac Free Clinic -- Diabetic Sanctuary Program;  $5,000 to Mariposa Women and Family Center -- Community Counseling Program;  $5,000 to Women’s Transitional Living Center, Inc. (WTLC) -- Independence from Dependence; and  $5,087 to YWCA of Central Orange County -- First Steps at Beverly’s House. It was the consensus of the Committee to have staff proportionately decrease or increase the allocations depending on what Orange ultimately receives in CDBG funding. Ms. Laster noted that the 2010-11 Home Investment Partnerships Act Program, Funding Distribution by Category, is considered each year by the Committee, CDBG Minutes March 16, 2011 Page 6 of 6 noting this money is received from HUD for the City’s home programs during the year; and she pointed out that the amount of this funding is also not known at this time and that the Committee is being asked to authorize staff to allocate whatever funding Orange will receive for FY 2011-12, allocating those funds to the Administrative cap (10 percent), Community Housing and Development Organizations (CHDO – 15 percent), and Capital Developer Allocation (remaining balance), noting these funds are used for affordable housing. She mentioned that the Citrus Grove housing project on Lemon is a beautiful project which was assisted by this funding program. She added that these funds will also be adjusted proportionately according to what the City ultimately receives. MOTION: Committee Chair Rico moved, seconded by Committee Member Manning, to authorize staff to allocate the FY 2011-12 funds Orange receives for HOMES, adjusting the allocations to the three categories in a proportionate amount. Motion carried, 5-0. MOTION: Alternate Committee Member Smith moved, seconded by Committee Member Perez, to authorize staff to proportionately allocate the FY 2011-12 funds, up to the maximum amount each applicant requested. Motion carried, 5-0. Ms. Laster advised that City Council will be considering this matter on April 12 th at 7:00 P.M. On behalf of the Committee, Chair Rico commended and thanked staff for their outstanding work this year with the CDBG program. IV. PUBLIC COMMENT Diane Ferrante, representing Covenant Presbyterian Church, stated that this church has a community outreach program to assist with the homeless population; and that it has also started a network of churches throughout the County to help end homelessness, finding low-income housing for those who need it. Pointing out that while her group had not received any HPRP funds, Ms. Ferrante stated it is her understanding the Homelessness Prevention and Rapid Re-Housing Program (HPRP) program, which is a 3-year program that Orange helped fund, is a very difficult program to operate. She stated that her group has helped to keep a lot of people stable and housed. V. ADJOURNMENT At 8:18 P.M. the meeting was formally adjourned.