Detroit council committee recommends denying six CDBG public-service appeals, refers ethics questions to law department

A Detroit City Council committee on [date not specified] recommended denying six appeals of the draft Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) public-service funding list and referred newly disclosed conflict-of-interest questions to the law department and the Board of Ethics for advice.

Chris Gulak, LPD staff to the City Planning Commission, summarized the City's review process and the appeals before the committee, saying groups that score 80 or above are recommended for funding and that 13 threshold criteria must be met. "Those that are score 80 or above are recommended for funding. Those that are below 80 have a low score and are not recommended for funding," Gulak said, describing why some high-scoring groups were nonetheless found ineligible.

The committee heard background from Housing and Revitalization Department staff, including Tamara Fontaine Hardy, director of the Neighborhood Services Economic Development Division, about how applicants upload documents into the Oracle portal and why late or incorrect submissions are disqualifying under Office of Contracting and Procurement (OCP) policy. "Once the applicant hits submit, the application is submitted," Fontaine Hardy said, noting the system does not validate document contents and that OCP policy bars accepting documents after the application closes.

Gulak reviewed each appealed applicant by name and the department's rationale. Examples included Live6 Alliance (met thresholds but scored 67), Student Advocacy Center of Michigan (high score but application lacked a signed, notarized certification), Southwest Economic Solutions Corp. (submitted a 2023 certificate of good standing instead of 2024), RTTM (uploaded a charitable solicitation registration instead of the required certificate of good standing), Cody Rouge Action Alliance (found noncompliant on timely financial reporting), and Boys & Girls Club of Southeastern Michigan (missing a signed, notarized threshold form). HRD and CPC staff recommended denial of all six appeals.

A committee member moved to recommend denial of the six appeals; the motion proceeded with one recorded objection. The committee recorded the recommendation to deny and agreed to forward that recommendation to the Committee of the Whole for the formal council vote on Tuesday. The committee also discussed the overall NOF (notice of funding) summary: 53 public-service applications were received, staff recommended funding for 35 and not recommending 18, and HRD is estimating about $2,400,000 available for public-service NOF this year (no final allocation had been received at the meeting).

Separately, several council members disclosed relationships with applicant organizations. President Pro Tem James Tate disclosed his wife serves as an unpaid board chair of Teen HYPE; Council member Gabriela Santiago Romero disclosed that a cousin works for Matrix Family Services; Council member Benson disclosed his office rents space from Matrix. Director Todd and Board of Ethics staff had not yet issued final advice at the time of the meeting. The chair and staff agreed to seek formal guidance from the law department and the Board of Ethics; the committee voted to refer the conflict-of-interest questions to those offices for advice.

The committee paused further deliberations to allow the law department and Board of Ethics to review the disclosures and to provide guidance at the committee's next scheduled session. No final appropriations or contract awards were made at the meeting; the committee's recommendations (including the six recommended denials) will be forwarded to the Committee of the Whole for formal action.