Council questions where HUD grant dollars are spent as city seeks extensions with Buffalo Green Renewal Agency

The Committee on Finance discussed extensions to a subrecipient agreement and a vendor agreement with the Buffalo Green Renewal Agency (BGRA) on Oct. 7, 2025, with staff saying those agreements would continue existing administrative roles for federal HUD grants and would not change the Common Council’s authority over program allocations.

Nadine Marrero, executive director of the Office of Strategic Planning, told the committee the agreements would permit BGRA to assist the city with Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) administration, HOME, the Emergency Solutions Grant (ESG) and HOPWA (Housing Opportunities for Persons With AIDS). Marrero said, “all decisions on how money will be spent will still be made by the common council at the approval of the annual action plan,” and that the city will control accounts and approvals for grant withdrawals.

Council members pressed staff for more detail on where past grant dollars were spent by neighborhood and district. “I just wanna know where the money is being spent,” said Council member White, who asked for a district-by-district breakout for prior years’ spending on rental assistance, mortgage and utility programs. Marrero and other staff said they can provide historical spending by program for the prior federal grant year but cautioned that some details (for example, addresses of individual recipients or information that could identify recipients of HOPWA services) are sensitive and cannot be published publicly. Marrero said the city records this information in the CAPER (the Consolidated Annual Performance and Evaluation Report) that the city files with HUD and that the CAPER will be available in December.

Deputy staff added that the federal grant year ends Sept. 30, so full accounting for the most recent grant year takes additional time. Staff said they can provide the committee the program-level distributions and a district breakout for prior program years when the CAPER data are finalized: “we can provide it concurrent with our CAPER,” Marrero said.

The committee heard fiscal totals from Marrero during the discussion: CDBG funding for the year was described as “about $13,000,000,” HOPWA “about $1 million,” ESG “about $1 million,” and HOME “a little over $3,000,000.” Marrero also said planning and administrative costs are calculated at 20 percent of the applicable allocation, consistent with federal allowances for administrative use of CDBG funds.

The committee opened and then closed discussion on the two agreement items and ultimately took the item forward without recommendation.

Looking ahead, Marrero and staff said they will prepare and deliver the CAPER-based district breakout to the committee after the CAPER is complete in December; the committee’s members requested that breakdown so they can explain historical patterns and program reach to constituents.

Votes at a glance: the item was opened for discussion, questions were answered and the committee moved the item forward without recommendation. No ordinance or appropriation was approved by the committee during this session.