Nonprofits urge New Britain council to fund youth programs, housing repairs and accessibility upgrades in 2026 CDBG plan

Dozens of local nonprofit leaders and city officials spoke at a public hearing before the New Britain Common Council on the proposed 2026 Community Development Block Grant and HOME program allocations, urging the council to preserve and expand funding for youth services, housing rehabilitation, accessibility upgrades and workforce supports.

Douglas Bray, secretary of the New Britain Lions Club, described the club’s Warm the Children initiative and asked the council to restore municipal funding that his group missed under a three‑year rule. "In winter, no child should have to go to school in a sweatshirt and sneakers," Bray said, noting the program spent about $70 per child in 2025 and served 655 children that year. He told the council the program has no administrative fees and that 100% of donations go to clothing purchases.

Sharice Ponder, director of operations at Friendship Service Center, thanked the commission for recommending $66,000 to replace windows at 59 Arch Street and asked the council to consider similar upgrades at 85 Arch Street, a 12‑unit supportive housing property serving roughly 17 residents, to improve energy efficiency and habitability.

Other requests highlighted specific capital needs and programmatic services. Gabe Dvau, community coordinator at CCARC, requested $249,000 in HOME funds to rehabilitate a seven‑bed group home at 171 Oakwood Drive to address water damage, accessibility and ADA compliance. Neighborhood Housing Services asked the council to support a $150,000 contribution for a Curtain Avenue homeownership project to enable homes to be affordable at 80% of area median income and described a separate REACH eviction‑prevention pilot that needs CDBG funding for a program manager. The New Britain Public Library asked for $131,000 to renovate a deteriorated back‑entrance ramp and stairway to restore safe ADA access.

Speakers also emphasized prevention and supportive services. Ryan Matthews of Big Brothers Big Sisters presented outcome statistics — including improved emotional regulation and school engagement — to make the case that mentoring is a preventive investment. Nancy Rodriguez of Sienna Learning Center requested $19,800 to sustain ESL instruction that serves about 100 active learners and supports workforce access. Daria Keys of NHS described the REACH pilot’s goal of upstream interventions to reduce eviction filings, which she said number between 900 and 1,100 annually in New Britain.

Recreation officials and facility managers described urgent capital needs. Matt Scoffield, recreation program manager, warned that Wolber Pool’s filtration system and chemical controls are past their useful life, that the main interior filter tank has a structural crack and that the site is losing about 2,000 gallons per week (roughly 16,000 gallons over a season) through an underground leak. He said without significant investment the pool risks extended closures within one to two years; the pool serves more than 10,000 residents each summer and employs about 20 seasonal staff daily.

Other presenters described widely varying needs: CCARC’s accessibility upgrades for residents with developmental disabilities, the police athletic league’s requests to renovate a 40‑year‑old building, New Britain Soccer Club’s request to renovate the Willoughbrook Park clubhouse and concession stand, the Senior Center’s request for a community support worker and a 20% local match to replace an inoperable accessible van, and multiple youth workforce and career‑pipeline programs that seek continued or new support.

Several organizations provided data to justify funding: Warm the Children said community donations topped $30,000 last year; CCARC quantified the requested $249,000 scope; Pathway Cinderos was noted for a recommended $15,000 award; Trinity on Main scaled a restroom renovation request from $37,000 down to $23,400 to fit available resources. Presenters repeatedly framed their asks as investments that reduce later costs to the city — for example, by preventing homelessness, improving housing stability, or keeping youth engaged.

The hearing produced no formal allocations; it was the public comment portion of the consolidated plan process. Procedural motions at the start of the meeting included a council motion to waive the reading of the public‑hearing notice (motion made and seconded) and the meeting adjourned after speakers concluded and council business finished at about 8:53 p.m.

The council’s next procedural step is to consider the consolidated plan and the commission recommendations in its formal adoption process; funding decisions will be made in subsequent council meetings when the council votes on the final 2026 annual action plan.