Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Community Development Funding topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council splits Yucaipa’s 2025 CDBG public‑service pot among four applicants; motion passes after debate
Summary
Facing a $219,563 allocation from San Bernardino County and a 15% cap on public services ($32,934.04), council voted to distribute the available public‑service funds among four eligible applicants: San Bernardino County Library adult literacy, Family Service Association case management, Partners Against Violence and Girls on the Run.
The City Council on Jan. 13 set funding priorities for Yucaipa’s share of the 2025–26 Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program and voted to allocate the available public‑service portion among four eligible applicants.
Corey Gorham, management analyst, told the council Yucaipa is projected to receive $219,563 from the county allocation; federal guidelines allow up to 15% of that amount to be used for public service programs, which equates to $32,934.04. The city submitted one capital project (an ADA accessibility trail replacement at the community park, total project cost $170,000) and received four eligible public‑service applications: San Bernardino County Library (adult literacy), Family Service Association of Redlands (case management for people experiencing homelessness), Partners Against Violence (victim advocacy) and Girls on the Run (youth empowerment program).
Gorham said staff recommended fully funding the library adult‑literacy program and Family Service Association, increasing Partners Against Violence to $9,000 and allocating a smaller share to Girls on the Run, largely because the city runs or supports multiple youth programs already. Representatives from all four organizations spoke to council about services and local outcomes.
During debate councilmembers proposed different allocations. After discussion, Councilmember Venable made a motion to divide the available public‑service funding among the four applicants (dividing the 15% allocation among the four eligible groups); the motion passed on a 3–1 vote with one councilmember preferring staff’s recommended distribution.
Ending: Council directed staff to implement the council‑approved allocations and to proceed with processing the county CDBG application and any required reporting. Staff noted the recreational scholarship program had been discontinued due to HUD reporting burdens and that expanded learning and other school grants had reduced demand for some city recreation subsidies.
