Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Economic Development topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council approves time‑sensitive CRA allocations, refers some projects to committee
Summary
The council approved time‑sensitive motions to secure Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA) funding for selected projects (31a and 32a) and sent other proposed uses of CRA special revenue funds (31b and 31c) back to committee for review; councilmembers discussed source and availability of roughly $3.6 million in CRA special revenue funds.
The City Council voted to approve a set of time‑sensitive Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) funding motions tied to MTA deadlines while sending two project motions back to committee for fuller review.
Councilmember Walters presented a motion (31c) to allocate $350,000 from CRA special revenue funds to assist the Esperanza Community Housing Corporation’s Mercado (El Mercado La Paloma). Don Spivak of the Community Redevelopment Agency told the council the special revenue funds originated largely from proceeds of a downtown library transaction and that approximately $3.6 million of principal and interest had been refunded to the agency account and was available for project use. Spivak said he did not have detail on the Esperanza project status but confirmed the agency was working on a funding package.
Councilmember Pacheco and others explained that some items were time‑sensitive because they related to MTA funding deadlines. Councilmember Ridley‑Thomas and others asked that motions dropped on the floor late be referred to committee for full vetting so council members could assess sources and readiness of projects. The council agreed: it approved 31a and 32a (to secure MTA‑related deadlines) and voted to send 31b and 31c to committee for further consideration. The vote to send 31b and 31c to committee was recorded 15 ayes; subsequent approvals for the time‑sensitive items were recorded as 15 ayes as well.
Councilmembers emphasized that the funds under discussion had been held for projects that were not moving and that the motion authors were attempting to allocate money to projects ready to proceed. The record shows the council intended a 120‑day review process to vet projects and spending plans for the broader set of special revenue funds.
