Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Cdbg Action Plan topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council approves 2011 CDBG action plan after questions about Banks Avenue costs and administration cap
Summary
The Common Council approved a resolution to adopt the 2011 Community Development Block Grant Action Plan after staff answered questions about a line‑item cost discrepancy for street improvements and about administrative costs capped at 20% of the grant.
The Common Council approved a resolution to adopt the 2011 Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Action Plan after staff answered questions about a line‑item cost discrepancy for street improvements and about administrative costs capped at 20% of the grant.
City staff opened a public hearing on the Action Plan; no members of the public spoke during that hearing. When the council considered the resolution, Councilor Jeff (last name not specified in the record) and Councilor Dan Olson raised questions about the Banks Avenue Phase 2 street‑improvement line items and project delivery.
A councilor pointed out a $2,400 difference between two entries in the packet for Banks Avenue Phase 2 — $477,519 in one place and $479,919 in another — and asked staff to clarify. Staff acknowledged the discrepancy as an editing error and said the action plan’s budget (the colored portion at the front of the document) contained the correct figure; the earlier number had not been updated after estimate changes.
Councilor Olson and others also questioned whether street work planned under the CDBG would be put out to public bid, citing complaints about delays and business disruption during the Phase 1 work. City staff said they plan to bid portions of the project and may use a hybrid approach: bid the work and, depending on bids and costs, retain city crews for certain demolition or other elements to form a combo project.
Councilors also pressed staff about administrative costs included in the CDBG budget. Staff members Jason and Jean explained that administrative costs include portions of salaries, IT, postage and day‑to‑day administration and are capped at 20% of the grant; Jean said the cap has constrained administrative funding as the grant total has declined over several years and staff levels performing CDBG work have been reduced.
After those clarifications, the council voted to approve the resolution adopting the 2011 CDBG Action Plan.
What happened next: The public hearing had no speakers; the resolution passed on council voice vote. Staff said the Banks Avenue Phase 2 project would be discussed again at the Public Works meeting and that a decision on bidding versus a combo approach would follow.
Why it matters: The CDBG Action Plan directs federal block‑grant dollars toward local housing, infrastructure and assistance programs. Clarifications about administrative costs and procurement approach affect project timing and local businesses along project corridors.
