Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Community Development topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commissioners discuss draft Community Reinvestment and Repair Fund framework; agree on objective eligibility standards
Summary
Deputy County Attorney John Houser presented a draft ordinance for the Community Reinvestment and Repair Fund (CRRF), proposing eligibility definitions and a low‑income area standard (poverty rate >20% or median household income ≤80% of county median). Commissioners debated tighter thresholds and administration; consensus favored objective standards, one‑time capital projects, and county administrator oversight.
Saint Mary's County commissioners on Feb. 10 reviewed a draft local ordinance to implement the state Community Reinvestment and Repair Fund (CRRF). Deputy County Attorney John Houser led the briefing and presented a draft definition for "low income community" based on census-tract data: either a poverty rate exceeding 20% or a median household income at or below 80% of the county median.
Houser said the statutory examples of eligible uses include behavioral health crisis response, after-school programs, truancy intervention, housing and homelessness prevention, transportation improvements, workforce development and programs for families impacted by incarceration. He emphasized the list is illustrative and encouraged flexibility for local needs.
Commissioners discussed alternatives — using school free/reduced lunch rates, SNAP participation, or a lower income threshold (70% of county median) — and raised concerns about intra‑ZIP code disparities and how to ensure funds target neighborhoods in need. Several commissioners favored limiting awards to one-time capital or non-recurring projects to avoid unsustainable recurring obligations.
Participants agreed that administration should sit with the county administrator’s office and that staff should return with a refined draft that sets clear objective standards (including census-tract indicators) and a mechanism to favor new applicants and cost-sharing projects. Houser noted final rules must align with forthcoming state regulations but recommended a local framework now to expedite use of funds.
