West Sacramento council reviews 5‑year consolidated plan, seeks public input on 2026 CDBG allocations
Get AI-powered insights, summaries, and transcripts
Subscribe
Summary
City staff presented goals for a new five‑year Consolidated Plan and an estimated $576,333 in 2026 Community Development Block Grant funds; council opened a 30‑day public comment period starting March 6 and discussed whether funds should prioritize motel rehabs or smaller, resident‑driven housing solutions.
City staff on March 4 outlined draft goals for West Sacramento’s 2026–2030 Consolidated Plan and proposed uses for the city’s anticipated Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) allocation, opening a 30‑day public comment period.
"CDBG stands for the Community Development Block Grant, which is a federal funding source provided by the US Department of Housing and Urban Development known as HUD," said Isaiah Alfred, associate community investment planner, as he explained HUD eligibility rules and program caps for public services and administration. Alfred told the council the city anticipates an award close to last year’s amount of $546,333 plus an estimated $30,000 in program income, for a preliminary total of about $576,333 for the 2026 program year.
The draft Consolidated Plan sets priority goals including supportive services for people experiencing homelessness, expanding low‑barrier housing, reducing housing discrimination and evictions, supporting affordable housing opportunities, and stabilizing households exiting homelessness. Staff also recommended specific 2026 activities, notably a homeless emergency housing rehabilitation project (the former Westwood site) with proposed funding of $385,118 to support safety and security improvements and case management at emergency housing sites.
"These efforts support the city's goals related to homelessness and housing stability and meeting our national objective," Alfred said, noting the plan draws on HUD, census and local data plus community engagement.
At public comment, Robin Davis urged the city to invest in proactive, resident‑driven small‑unit production — such as ADUs, tiny homes or nonprofit‑owned tiny‑home communities — rather than relying predominantly on motel conversions. "What if we did something different with these funds? Something more impactful long term," Davis said, proposing infrastructure support, preapproved designs and scaled fee waivers to make small‑unit construction feasible for income‑qualified homeowners.
Council members pressed staff on outreach and data: Alfred said the online survey used in plan development received "over 40" responses during a 30‑day posting and that the consultant had also held stakeholder meetings and reached out to local organizations. Council members suggested broader translation and distribution strategies, including school‑district channels and faith‑based partners, to increase participation before the April follow‑up and the formal public hearing.
Staff also proposed two amendments to the city's citizen participation plan: raising the city manager’s sign‑authority threshold for a substantial amendment from $20,000 to $100,000 (to expedite use of program income such as loan payoffs) and formalizing a council workshop before the final public hearing. Alfred said staff plans to post the 30‑day public comment period starting March 6 and, if adopted by council, to submit the consolidated plan and annual action plan to HUD by May 15.
The council did not take a final vote on the plan at the March 4 workshop; staff will return in April with recommendations and any edits following the public comment period.