CDBG committee adopts annual action plan, advances project rankings pending state scores

The Community Development Block Grant committee voted to adopt its annual action plan and moved to finalize project rankings contingent on state scoring and allocations.

Christy, the committee staff lead, told members the region’s WFRC contract delay had restricted access to the webgrants system and slowed application review, forcing staff to rely on PDFs from the state to complete scoring. "Without that contract in place, I don't have access to web grants," she said, and apologized for the late packet materials.

The committee approved the annual action plan, which lists goals including assisting roughly 150 households and about 10,500 individuals this program year; the plan will be posted for a 30‑day public comment period. Members approved the plan by voice vote with no opposition.

Christy said the most recent CDBG allocation figure provided to staff is $1,111,477 but cautioned that the final distribution of funds will depend on the state’s scores and a newly changed policy on leftover funds that may reallocate unspent money among area organizations this year. "I just barely after we had our meeting got this number, this 1,111,477 number," she said.

Committee members identified specific projects that remain underfunded in the current list: one applicant (Windover) needs about $55,000 more to be fully funded and another scored applicant is short roughly $200,000. Members discussed whether swapping years or adjusting awards could allow a town with a lower award this year to take a larger award next year if state scores shift placements between towns.

Because final state scores could change which local projects receive full funding, the committee approved the rankings and recommended allocations as currently scored but made the approval contingent on the state’s forthcoming numbers. A committee member moved to approve the rankings contingent upon state decisions; the motion was seconded and carried with no opposition.

Christy also noted that contract periods have been extended from 12 to 18 months to allow more time for project completion and that capacity scores in the packet were incomplete due to a spreadsheet formula error; the state will determine final capacity scores and staff will update members when the scores and contract execution are complete.

Next steps: the plan remains open for the 30‑day public comment period, staff will circulate the state scores when they arrive and adjust awards if needed, and the committee will reconvene in May to consider bylaw updates and any required ranking or funding adjustments.