HomeMy WebLinkAboutCommunity Development Block Grant Commission - Minutes - 11/17/19990
CITY OF FORT COLLINS
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT
Meeting Minutes
November 17, 1999
Phil Majerus, Chair
Alfred Flores, Vice Chair
Bill Bertschy, City Council Liaison
The meeting of the Community Development Block Grant Commission was
called to order by Chairman Phil Majerus, beginning at 6:35 p.m., at 281 North
College Avenue, Fort Collins, Colorado. Board members present included:
Chairman Phil Majerus, Vice Chair Alfred Flores, Vi Guthrie, Holly Sample,
Richard Rodarte, and Cheryl Zimlich. Staff present: Ken Waido, Jackie Davis,
Maurice Head, Julie Smith, and Melissa Bauer -Islam. Linda Coxen, Brett Hill,
and David Gordon arrived later.
Moved by Ms. Zimlich, seconded by Ms. Guthrie: To approve the minutes
as written. Clarification was asked and given on the section regarding the Fort
Collins Housing Authority and the Fort Collins Housing Corporation. Motion
approved unanimously.
COMPETITIVE PROCESS UPDATE, APPLICATION AND CRITERIA
Mr. Waido reported on the process of the Affordable Housing Board/CDBG
Commission subcommittee meetings. The consensus that has been developed
is illustrated by the following salient points:
• Criteria is being revised for rankings.
• All City funding would go through a process through the CDBG
Commission.
• The Affordable Housing Board would prepare a list of questions,
concerns, and rankings, to be passed to the CDBG Commission for
housing applications.
• The CDBG Commission would conduct a process of questions and
answers and prepare a formal recommendation to Council.
• Staff would take on a technical advisor role; in February, by inviting
applicants and review the applications and criteria.
• Two funding cycles: one in spring for CDBG funding to be decided by
Council in June, with the mandated guidelines applied; the other
process beginning in July for HOME and City funds, to be decided by
Council in December.
Mr. Waido further noted that the Commission's workload would be essentially
doubled by replicating the already -existing process; the Competitive Process
subcommittee will meet once more to finalize recommendations.
0
Community Development Block Grant Commission
Meeting of November 17, 1999
Page 2
The following issues were addressed in the ensuing discussion. Affordable
Housing Board would review housing proposals and make suitable comments.
The Affordable Housing Board would not be part of the interview or review
process. There are tradeoffs involved in a single funding cycle as opposed to a
dual one; the preference of the subcommittee was for the advantages in a dual
process by making funding available more than once in a year for worthy
projects. It also opens up opportunity for local commitments to aid in securing tax
credits and other possible sources of funding. To some extent, the same
applicants are likely to be seen in both processes. The funding criteria is
designed to be objective and leave less room for subjectivity on the part of
individual evaluators.
Questions were asked based on the statement in the previous minutes of "the
critique that Board members had of those Commission's funding procedures at
which they were present." It was noted that the subject matter of any such
critique has been discussed before. The Affordable Housing Board apparently
did not understand the flexibility that the CDBG Commission has to move money
among different categories.
Ms. Coxen and Mr. Waido noted the proposal that had been made of combining
the Affordable Housing Board and CDBG Commission. Affordable Housing
Board members were opposed to that concept, while Ms. Coxen advocated it.
The history of the Affordable Housing Fund as generated by the rebate program
was discussed and the potential conflicts of interest that some Affordable
Housing Board members may have in a given funding decision. The fund has
grown from $133,000 to $500,000 per year.
Mr. Majerus and Ms. Coxen, subcommittee members, discussed the differences
in philosophies between the two entities. The Affordable Housing Board is
focused on housing and is uninvolved in the public services sector of the CDBG
Commission's mission. Different approaches to different projects — DMA Plaza
was a noted example — are evident in discussions.
The time line is that the Affordable Housing Board would make its concerns,
questions, and recommendations known in its May meeting. That would be
presented to the CDBG Commission either on Friday or Monday. The question -
and -answer sessions would be on the following Wednesday and Thursday. The
input received from the Affordable Housing Board will be limited by the number
of housing proposals that it reviews.
The new application form will reduce the size of the CDBG Commission packets.
The comments concerning the application form segued into Mr. Head's review of
the new application form. He reviewed the ranking criteria and how each section
provides levels of priority in the overall scoring. Some of the criteria is by
Community Development Block Grant Commission
Meeting of November 17, 1999
Page 3
necessity dependent on the judgment of the reviewer. Staff and the CDBG
Commission will be completing this sheet for every applicant.
Comments and wish -list items from the CDBG Commission: Include a notes
section, perhaps duplexed on the reverse side. Affordable Housing Board
comments on the reverse side, with their scoring. The form is friendlier than the
one last year, and likely to be used more. Not all of the boxes in the financial
section are needed for all of the projects. The grayed instruction box on page 11
needs to reflect applications and attachments. Care will need to be taken that
the attachments add up correctly and are not confusing. The date of the post-
mark may be an issue; Staff will ensure that applicants understand that the
packets must be at the City by the deadline. More capacity for applicant history
was requested. It should be clear what other fund-raising means are being
carried out, and applicants should be encouraged to take those routes. The
scoring sheet should be made available to applicants. A category regarding
maintenance should be added to encourage applicants to provide for ongoing
upkeep of their projects. Applicants might be advised that pages 6 and 10
should total together. The application form should be put on the City Web site.
Mr. Waido and Mr. Head noted that Staff will be providing technical assistance to
the applicants so that they will submit an application form that is of maximum
benefit to the CDBG Commission. The timeline is a rough draft and will be
revised. The application will be on a disk.
Reservation was expressed concerning the time line of the fall funding cycle
falling close to holidays and the additional time requirements that the schedule
places on CDBG Commission members. Mr. Waido requested that each CDBG
Commission member assess whether this schedule can be adhered to.
The meeting to be held the next day should be attended by at least one
Commission member. Vi Guthrie will attend.
STATUS REPORT -UPDATES
Ms. Davis presented a written report. The following items were discussed by the
CDBG Commission and Staff:
• The Food Bank has the refrigerated box on its truck.
• The 19-unit project by Neighbor to Neighbor has met unexpected problems.
Completion is anticipated in short order.
• Elderhaus has been delayed another month.
• Coachlight has not closed. It is still looking reasonably solid.
• Concorde is still proceeding through the planning process. Streets are an
issue for the neighborhood.
Community Development Block Grant Commission
Meeting of November 17, 1999
Page 4
• One more unit is left to close in the TRAC project. A buyer is ready.
Confidence is running high.
• Via Lopez has had 19 units closed, 14 pending. It is hoped that the project
will be finished by the end of the year. There have been problems with the
units and getting applicants.
• CARE Housing received tax credits for the Windtrail Project. They are
purchasing water rights and should be moving ahead with infrastructure
improvements.
WORK PLAN, ANNUAL REPORT
In response to questions, Staff noted that the City's CDBG program has not had
problems with carrying over an excessive amount. This year showed the
highest, fueled by the $400,000 for the CARE project, but this is far from
becoming a problem. Guidelines are being developed for handling of the City
funds within that process.
REDUCTION OF MEMBERSHIP
Council is considering a uniform number of people for all boards and
commissions. Reaching quorum is sometimes a problem with the various
meetings. Vacancies will not be filled until some decision is reached on this
issue. There does not seem to be a movement toward eliminating or combining
boards. Terms may run in calendar years; new Council members need to be
better apprised of the boards' missions and applicants before making
appointments. Other issues regard commitments by board members and
training.
DECEMBER MEETING
The next meeting will be December 9, 1999, at Linden's, starting at 6:30 p.m.
OTHER BUSINESS
The Commission expressed its sadness with Mr. Gordon's resignation,
applauded his enthusiastic and valuable service in the past, and wished him well
in his new endeavors.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at 8:25 p.m.