Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Housing Grants topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Glendale staff outline HUD grant investment recommendations, council gives preliminary consensus
Summary
City staff presented HUD Community Planning & Development funding recommendations tied to the FY25–29 consolidated plan, highlighting TBRA and residential-rehab investments and recommending 11 nonprofit public‑service awards. Council gave preliminary consensus to advance allocations to a future vote and to submit final plans to HUD.
City staff on April 14 presented the Glendale City Council with proposed investments using HUD Community Planning and Development (CPD) funds tied to the city’s FY25–29 consolidated plan, and council signaled preliminary consensus to advance the recommendations for a future formal action.
Kimberly Hall of community services opened the presentation with program outcomes for the city’s tenant‑based rental assistance (TBRA) and home‑repair programs. “Since the inception of the tenant‑based rental assistant, better known as TBRA, since 2021, we’ve served 129 households, which equates to 334 individuals assisted,” Hall said, noting that 90 of those households (252 individuals) had been housed and most clients average 22 months in the program. Staff said average monthly rental subsidy paid was about $1,315.
Deputy Director Matt Hess reviewed HUD funding streams (Community Development Block Grant, HOME Investment Partnerships, and Emergency Solutions Grant) and explained that the Community Development Advisory Commission (CDAC, also called Sedak) evaluated applications against council‑adopted consolidated‑plan goals: increase affordable housing, expand homelessness services, support vulnerable populations, and advance fair‑housing initiatives.
Staff and CDAC recommended directing approximately $3.5 million toward increasing access to affordable housing, including public housing capital improvements (about $419,000), continued TBRA support (approximately $1.2–2.0 million, as the program transitions internally to the city’s Community Action Program), and $1.6 million for residential rehabilitation. For homeless services, the CDAC recommended $191,172 to continue rapid‑rehousing and eviction‑prevention programs. CDAC also recommended funding 11 nonprofit public‑service applicants from a field of 16; award examples included New Leaf ($94,000) and YMCA Metropolitan Phoenix (about $78,638). Staff noted that awards may be prorated to reflect final HUD allocations.
Council members asked for clarification about definitions and program mechanics (for example, staff confirmed ‘affordable’ in the LITC projects means rent at or below 30% of a tenant’s gross income and that rapid‑rehousing typically places clients at fair‑market rent rather than in public housing). Staff also laid out next steps: a final allocation action at a future City Council meeting and a May 15 final HUD submission deadline.
Chariss DeLo, the city’s human‑services grant administrator, asked the council for consensus to proceed with CDAC’s recommended CPD investments; council members responded in the affirmative, and staff said they would return with formal agenda items for final action.
What’s next: staff will prepare the formal allocation ordinance/resolution for council consideration and finalize the HUD submission after council action.
