Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Hud Consolidated Plan topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Arapahoe County presents HUD consolidated plan allocations; commissioners agree to advance recommendations to consent agenda
Summary
County staff presented the five‑year HUD consolidated plan and 2025 annual action plan, recommending CDBG and HOME allocations for public services and affordable‑housing projects including a 73‑unit Starlight site and a 60‑unit justice‑impacted redevelopment. Commissioners signaled unanimous support to forward recommendations to the consent agenda.
Arapahoe County officials presented their federally required five‑year consolidated plan and the 2025 annual action plan at the June study session, laying out how Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) and HOME Investment Partnerships funds would be allocated for the coming year.
Kathy Smith, the county’s community resources director, said the consolidated plan “helps to provide some strategy goals, to drive those funds throughout the year.” Smith and staff described recommended awards for public‑service providers, infrastructure and housing development drawn from the county’s urban‑county process.
Staff recommended common public‑service grants such as Meals on Wheels and small public‑service awards for nonprofits. For capital and housing, the county proposed supporting Littleton’s Starlight project (land acquisition for a planned 73‑unit affordable development), a roughly $600,000 combined HOME carryover plus 2025 allocation for a Brothers redevelopment (60 affordable units targeted to justice‑impacted individuals), and smaller set‑asides for energy efficiency and tenant‑based rental assistance programs.
Presenters noted constraints: HUD timeliness rules limit carryover to 1.5 times the annual allocation and several large requests would trigger environmental review and therefore could not be completed within 12 months. Staff also said some cities (including Glendale and Greenwood Village) have opted out of the county urban‑county agreement; county funds cannot be spent inside opted‑out jurisdictions.
Commissioners asked for clarification about how maps and affordability gaps were calculated and pressed staff on workforce development links. Several commissioners said public services targeted to the lowest area‑median‑income households should remain a priority.
After discussion, Chair and commissioners indicated unanimous support to place the funding recommendations on the consent agenda. Kathy Smith said staff will return the item for formal action when the consent agenda is posted.
