Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Community Development Budget topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Councilors Press Department of Community Development Over $4.6M Budget Rise, $1.4M for Housing Trust Fund
Summary
City officials questioned Community Development’s jump from about $2.5 million in 2024 to nearly $4.6 million in the 2025 proposed budget, focusing on $1.415 million added to the housing trust fund, a $750,000 right-to-counsel allocation and two positions moved from CDBG to the general fund.
The Cleveland City Council’s budget review turned to Community Development on questions about a proposed increase from roughly $2.5 million in 2024 to about $4.6 million in 2025.
Councilmembers asked why the department’s professional-services and overall expenditures rose sharply; Director Alyssa Hernandez told the committee most of the increase is not for head count but for program dollars, including $1,415,000 added to the city’s housing trust fund and $750,000 for a right-to-counsel contract with the Legal Aid Society. She also confirmed two positions — an administrative manager and an assistant administrator — will move from CDBG (Community Development Block Grant) funding into the general fund, which is reflected in higher full-time-payroll lines.
The increase drew repeated requests from councilmembers for a detailed breakout of the professional-services line. Finance staff agreed to provide line-item comparisons showing how the $1.8 million in 2024 professional services was spent and how the proposed $3.66 million in 2025 would be used. Councilmembers specifically asked for: a listing of vendors and contracts funded in 2024; the planned contracts for 2025; and a reconciliation of HUD/CDBG/ARPA funds and any general-fund support.
Hernandez said the additional dollars aim to expand the department’s asset redevelopment work on the Southeast side (projects cited included Kennedy and Gracemont sites), to fund community engagement specialists (contracted workers housed with CDCs) and to program more housing development. She described the housing trust fund expansion as a response to demand for more local dollars to support stacked financing for affordable housing projects after federal cuts and as a complement to prior ARPA-financed work.
Councilmembers pressed for clarity on four recurring items they heard in the review: how much of the increase is staffing vs. programmatic; the precise amounts destined for right-to-counsel and neighborhood branding; what professional services were paid in 2024; and whether ARPA or other federal sources are being reprogrammed into general-fund items. Finance and Community Development staff committed to returning with a line-by-line reconciliation and with a comparison of 2024 actuals against the 2025 proposals.
The review also flagged operational questions that will return to later hearings: which programs require future ordinances (for example, the community engagement specialists contracts executed by council ordinance) and whether council amendments should move funds between departments in advance of those ordinances.
The committee did not take a final vote on the Community Development budget; staff were directed to provide the requested breakdowns and return for follow-up.
