Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Development Funding topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Greater Portland Family Promise tops development ranking; committee flags HUD funding uncertainty

CDBG Allocation Committee · February 5, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Staff presented development activity rankings led by Greater Portland Family Promise and said the committee is using last year’s HUD allocation as a working estimate; awards will be proportionally adjusted if HUD funding changes.

At its meeting the CDBG Allocation Committee reviewed development activity rankings and the staff-prepared funding spreadsheet, which uses last year’s HUD allocation as a working estimate until HUD announces the current-year allocation.

Staff member Rowan said the committee’s average scores for development projects ranged roughly from 90 to 72 points. "Greater Portland Family Promise at the top," Rowan said when reciting the ranked list, which also included community gardens/parks, a microenterprise grant and training program, a port resources group-home generator project, the Portland Recovery Community Center parking lot, and the Trustees of First Parish retaining wall.

Rowan cautioned that the spreadsheet assumes flat funding and that allocations could increase or decrease; if HUD funding changes after the council’s final decision, staff will proportionally adjust awards. "There's always a chance that it could go up. There's always a chance it could go down," he said.

Committee members noted that fewer applications this year increased the committee's ability to fund a broader portion of the ranked list; Rowan said at full funding the list could fund a significant portion of the Portland Recovery Community Center parking lot but would still leave some projects unfunded.

Members discussed whether partially funding a project is useful, with one member noting concerns that partial funding may not allow a project to move forward, and another suggesting spreading funds more evenly might better support more applicants. Staff and members agreed these are trade-offs the committee can discuss in its recommendations to the task force and the city manager.

Rowan said he will include finalized development and social-service sections in the draft letter to the city manager once member scores are received.