Arapahoe County presents HUD consolidated plan, commissioners back recommended CDBG/HOME allocations for consent agenda

Arapahoe County Community Resources presented the county's five-year HUD Consolidated Plan and the companion annual action plan that sets out how the county proposes to spend CDBG and HOME funding in the coming program year.

Staff explained the consolidated plan is a HUD-required document updated every five years and the annual action plan is the year-by-year allocation of those federal funds. The presentation emphasized outreach, changes in entitlement membership among municipalities (some cities opted out of the county's urban-county status), and updates to the county's needs analysis used to prioritize grants and projects.

County staff detailed recommended allocations by jurisdiction and program type. Highlights discussed included: a CHDO set-aside and allocations to Grovewood (predevelopment/affordable housing), a recommended carryover and new HOME funds for the Brothers redevelopment (aprox. $600,000 in combined carryover and 2025 HOME allocation to support 60 affordable units for justice-impacted individuals), recommended CDBG awards to nonprofit public service providers (Project Angel Heart, Integrated Family Services hunger alleviation, severe-weather sheltering, Meals on Wheels, and family-stability programs), a recommended contribution to the Starlight affordable housing project in Littleton, and administrative set-asides for program administration and HOME CHDO requirements. Staff said HUD had recalculated a HOME ERP amount the county expects to allocate toward administration and current projects.

Commissioners asked for clarification about which cities had opted out of the urban-county entitlement (Glendale and Greenwood Village were cited as examples) and how that affects use of funds (county may include population data from those places in analyses but cannot spend CDBG/HOME dollars in jurisdictions that opted out). After discussion the board indicated consensus support for staff's recommended funding slate and for placing the allocation package on the board's consent agenda for a later business meeting (consensus noted; staff said the consent item will be prepared for July 22). No formal roll-call vote was recorded in the study session.

Staff also described unobligated or unfunded applications that were not recommended (Archway Housing & Services, Village Exchange facility rehab in Aurora, Branch House request with environmental mitigation needs) and reasons for non-recommendation (timeliness, feasibility, program eligibility). They noted the county's timeliness requirement for CDBG and the preference to fund projects that will meet HUD timeliness tests.

The presentation concluded with remarks from multiple commissioners emphasizing workforce-development goals, concern about affordability at lower AMI bands, a request for continued outreach to developers (preservation and new production), and staff's note that the county alternates emphasis between tenant-based rental assistance and housing production in successive years.

Next steps: staff will convert the draft action plan and grant recommendations into a formal consent item and public-comment period materials and return to the board for placement on the consent agenda and subsequent public notices required by HUD.