Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Community Development topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
CDBG advisory committee: demand far exceeds funds; lead program concluding and sidewalk aid limited to LMI areas
Summary
City grants staff and the CDBG advisory committee told council the program is oversubscribed—about $100,000 short in the social services category—and that HUD entitlement notifications for Program Year 26 are in line with the city's estimates; staff outlined eligibility rules for sidewalk funding and noted the five‑year lead hazard grant (about $2.6M plus match) is concluding.
Christine (grants manager) and Emma (chair of the CDBG advisory committee) briefed the council on Program Year 25 accomplishments and Program Year 26 planning for federal Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds.
Committee chair Emma described the advisory board's annual review cycle and scoring process for nonprofit applications; she said the advisory committee evaluates presentations, scores proposals and forwards recommendations to council. Christine reviewed funding levels and constraints and said the social services bucket was oversubscribed by about $100,000 this year (applications roughly $150,000 vs. about $50,000 available). She explained that housing and infrastructure categories also face more demand than available funding and that sidewalk and individual homeowner assistance require households or census tracts to meet HUD low‑to‑moderate income (LMI) thresholds.
Christine also reported HUD entitlement figures for Program Year 26 arrived recently and were close to staff's earlier estimate (Program Year 25 was about $380,000); staff plan to submit the previously presented action plan with only modest adjustments. She noted the lead hazard control competitive grant (about $2.6M, plus the CDBG match) will conclude April 30 and that the program allowed larger, higher‑cost healthy homes projects than the city's renewal grants.
Why it matters: the CDBG program is an important source of federal funding for housing repair, sidewalks, public services and rehabilitation work targeted toward LMI populations. Committee members and staff urged nonprofit applicants to present during the budget cycle and encouraged council to note the persistent gap between need and funds.
Next steps: staff will submit the Program Year 26 action plan to HUD as presented and continue technical assistance for applicants; council members asked staff to continue outreach and consider strategies to prioritize and communicate program tradeoffs.
