Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Cdbg topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Finance Committee approves Wausau’s 2025 CDBG allocations and 2025–2029 consolidated plan
Summary
The Wausau Finance Committee voted to approve the city’s 2025 Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program year allocations and the 2025–2029 consolidated plan following Citizens Advisory Committee recommendations; the committee discussed a small adjustment after the federal allocation was finalized.
Get email alerts on the Cdbg topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Wausau Finance Committee on May 27 approved the city’s 2025 Community Development Block Grant program year allocations and the 2025–2029 consolidated plan, following recommendations from the Citizens Advisory Committee.
The vote followed a presentation from Tammy of the Citizens Advisory Committee, who said the committee held public hearings and a work session in the fall to rank requests and that the city had initially anticipated $580,000 in CDBG funding but was notified “a few weeks ago that the true allocation that Wausau is getting is $578,864.” She said the committee adjusted the budget and covered the small shortfall from the program’s administrative fund.
Tammy described the CAC process: public applicants present at hearings, the committee ranks requests in a work session, and staff waits for the final HUD allocation before finalizing awards. “So that’s why we don’t bring it to you ahead of time because we don’t wanna have to bring it twice,” she said.
Alder Henke moved to approve the plan; Alder McElhinney seconded. After members voiced assent, the motion carried.
The committee discussed administrative fees briefly. Tammy said the administrative portion covers staff salaries, clerical work on CDBG tasks, supplies, and continuing education related to administering the program. The committee did not alter the administrative fee breakdown at the meeting.
The approval implements the CAC’s recommended allocations for the program year; specific award amounts and individual grantees were included in the packet provided to the committee but were not read into the public record during the motion.
Committee members did not record opposition during the voice vote and the motion carried.

