Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Housing topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Gila County accepts $4.4 million HUD lead testing and abatement grant, adds $421,889 match
Summary
The board accepted a $4.4 million HUD grant (AZLHB0843‑25) to test and abate lead in approximately 250 lower‑income pre‑1978 homes through 2030, with a county match of $421,888.91 and a $400,000 healthy‑homes component for related repairs.
The Gila County Board of Supervisors voted March 17 to accept a $4,400,000 U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) grant to provide lead testing and abatement for lower‑income pre‑1978 housing units.
Josh Beck, Community Services, told the board the grant (AZLHB0843‑25) includes a county match of $421,888.91 for a total program budget of $4,821,888.91 that would run from March 1, 2026, through Feb. 28, 2030. The program emphasizes testing and abatement of lead hazards for roughly 250 qualifying homes and includes a $400,000 “healthy homes” allocation to address related conditions such as mold, weatherization gaps and minor electrical or structural repairs while crews are in the units.
"This is the one that Kaylee reached out for and received for us," Josh Beck said, praising staff work on the application. Beck said HUD requires designated program roles; the county assigned a program manager and an authorized official to handle monthly HUD calls. Program staff said they would use existing outreach channels such as WIC and Community Services client lists to identify eligible families and would target children under age 6 for priority service.
Board members commended grant staff and the employee spotlighted earlier in the meeting for their grant development work. The board approved acceptance of the HUD award and the county match and directed staff to begin implementation planning, including staffing and outreach. Officials said the program could potentially serve more than 250 homes if need and capacity allow.
The grant acceptance does not require matching funds beyond the specified local contribution, and staff said the match will be satisfied in part with in‑kind resources and staff time allocations.
