Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Community Development topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Washington County staff outline federal CDBG, HOME allocations and risk from federal policy changes
Summary
County staff told the budget committee the Office of Community Development expects a near‑flat HUD allocation for FY2025–26 but warned executive‑order language and program changes could affect project scoring, fair‑housing compliance and environmental review requirements.
Marnie, an assistant county administrator, told the Washington County Budget Committee that the Office of Community Development expects its federal HUD allocations for the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) and HOME Investment Partnerships program to be within about 2% of last year’s amounts for the coming fiscal year. The county’s CDBG program, she said, still comprises roughly 64.5% federal HUD funding and has invested more than $112 million locally since inception.
County staff said those allocations support housing rehabilitation, emergency rental assistance, public infrastructure and public service programming, and that the Treasury Emergency Rental Assistance and other COVID‑era funds are ending—reducing eviction prevention resources going forward. Staff emphasized the office manages CDBG on behalf of an urban county consortium of cities and that the office’s recent consolidated plan was a substantial multi‑year effort.
Why it matters: CDBG and HOME funds are the county’s primary tools for affordable‑housing and neighborhood improvements for low‑ and moderate‑income residents. Changes in federal contract language or scoring could shift which projects are eligible or competitive and affect where limited local match or general‑fund support will be required.
What staff told the committee: Marnie said HUD award notices are ‘‘hot off the press’’ and within ~2% of last year’s awards, and that the office is in conversations with regional HUD staff about how recent executive orders may be reflected in future contracts. Staff also said the environmental justice component has been removed from the federal environmental review process, which could change where projects are sited and create potential disparate‑impact outcomes unless local planning and zoning mitigate that effect. The office noted it has already changed scoring criteria for projects in response to federal direction and is evaluating the effect on fair‑housing testing and compliance.
Program timing and local impacts: Treasury Emergency Rental Assistance and other COVID‑related funds will end in the FY2024–25 and FY2025–26 budgets, reducing some eviction‑prevention resources. The Wood Stove Exchange program is budgeted to end after FY2025–26; Intel and partner cities provided funding that covers stove rebates but not continuing administration in future years. The Housing Production Opportunity Fund (established in FY2016–17 and augmented with $20 million in 2019–20) continues until its current resources are exhausted; staff said there is a limited fund balance that will be spent over the next years.
Local partners and capacity: The county reports reduced general‑fund support would eliminate a limited-duration position that backs Worksystems, Inc., removing $53,861 of support for career development services, and would reduce a Fair Housing Council of Oregon testing contract by $11,374. Staff characterized those impacts as low‑to‑moderate but said they would reduce program capacity.
Outlook and next steps: The Office of Community Development will continue to adjust project scoring and guidance as HUD and the state clarify contract language. Staff asked the committee to submit any budget amendments by noon Friday so they can be analyzed and encouraged questions about specific program impacts.
Ending: County staff urged the committee to weigh the local consequences of flat federal awards and expiring one‑time pandemic funding when considering general‑fund or one‑time budget decisions for affordable‑housing and eviction‑prevention work.
