HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Statement 1986/05/13 Item 4 COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item .4
Meeting Date //
ITEM TITLE: Public Hearing: Block Grant Application for 1986-87 Program
Year e
Resolution /' ` " 7 Approving Block Grant Application and
Associated Documents for 1986-87 Program Year
SUBMITTED BY: Community Development Director
it-6
REVIEWED BY: City Manager 56 9 , (4/5ths Vote: Yes No X )
Under the Community Development Block Grant Program, the City is entitled to
$720,000 in FY 1986-87. A process has been undertaken to solicit proposals
for projects eligible for funding under the Block Grant regulations, and a
1986-87 Block Grant program is recommended. Associated documents have also
been compiled. The public hearing must now be conducted in order to consider
and approve the application and the Statement of Community Development
Objectives for the 1986-87 Block Grant program year.
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council conduct the public hearing, accept
the attached report, and adopt the resolution approving the 1986-87 Block
Grant application and associated documents and approving their submittal to
HUD.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: During the months of March and April ,
the Human Relations Commission met four times to consider and evaluate the
proposals for Block Grant social service funding. Proposers were invited to
make presentations to the Commission. The Commission, at its last meeting in
the process, chose ten social service projects to recommend for funding and
decided on the recommended level of funding for each project. A copy of the
Commission' s recommendations appears in the attached report (Section III.D) .
That section also identifies the differences between the Human Relations
Commission recommendation and the staff recommendation.
The Commission on Aging held two meetings to evaluate those Block Grant social
service proposals which are predominantly senior-oriented. A summary of their
recommendation ifferences between report
the Commission Ion � n
Aging recommendation and
identifies the e appears
the staff recommendation.
DISCUSSION:
1 . INTRODUCTION
The following documents, which appear in the attached report, are submitted
for approval at this public hearing:
Page 2, Item 4
Meeting Date 5/6/86
1 . 1986-87 Program Year Block Grant Application. (Section IIA)
2. Certifications (Section IIB)
3. Program Year Statement of Community Development Objectives (Section IIC)
4. Program Year Community Plan (Section IID)
5. Program Year Relocation Plan (Section IIE)
6. Project Descriptions (Section IC)
During any program year a minimum of 51% of the City' s Block Grant funds must
be demonstrated to assist low and moderate income households. The proposed
application would clearly accomplish this minimum requirement.
With approval of these documents, the Block Grant application can be submitted
to HUD and be subjected to an evaluation period. If the application is
approved by HUD at the end of that period, the City could be eligible to draw
funds on July 1 , 1986. As a result of the required HUD evaluation period and
the desirability of being able to draw down funds on July 1 , the Block Grant
application is considered at this time, prior to the City budget process.
Appropriations for the approved projects will be made in the City budget
process.
II. COMPILING THE APPLICATION
Potential Block Grant projects were solicited from all City departments, from
numerous social service providers and from Chula Vista citizens through the
public notices and the public hearing. All social service organizations
having previously received Block Grant or community promotions funding were
sent letters informing them of the process for applying for Block Grant
funding and identifying the information necessary for application. Those
organizations were also apprised that ongoing funding for their projects was
not to be expected just as a result of having received previous Block Grant
funding. The same materials were provided to any social service organization
inquiring as a result of the public notice.
The public hearing provides citizens with the opportunity to directly voice
their opinions of the proposed spending plan and of program performance for
the two previous program years. On April 24, 1986, a public notice of this
public hearing appeared in the Chula Vista Star-News. The notice included a
proposed Statement of Community Development Objectives for the 1986-87 program
year and a listing and summary of all project proposals received by the
Community Development Department. The notice also listed the categories of
activities pursued in the previous program year (FY 1985-86) and evaluated how
those activities satisfied the Statements of Objectives for that year.
Citizens were encouraged to contact the Community Development Department for
further information.
The overall process has been effective in making the Chula Vista community
aware of Block Grant funding opportunities and activities.
Page 3, Item 4
Meeting Date 5/6/86
III. ELIGIBLE ACTIVITIES
The purpose of the Block Grant program is the "development of a viable urban
community, including decent housing and a suitable living environment and
expanding economic opportunities, principally for persons of low and moderate
income." To achieve this purpose, all projects must meet one of the following
three conditions:
1 . The project principally benefits low and moderate income persons. This
can mean that all of the direct beneficiaries are demonstrated to be low
and moderate income or that the activity is in a neighborhood which
contains a majority of low and moderate income residents.
2. The project aids in the prevention or elimination of slums and blight.
3. The project meets "urgent" community development needs. These projects
are of an emergency nature and must have prior specific authority from HUD.
IV. PROGRAM YEAR RECOMMENDATION
A. Budget:
As a result of federal reductions, the City anticipates receiving a
1986-87 Entitlement Grant of approximately 29% less than the amount
received in 1985-86. However, funds left over from previous year
completed projects and unimplemented projects are also available to be
used in the 1986-87 program year. The recommendation for the overall
program year budget is as follows:
Revenues
1986-87 Entitlement $720,000.00
Available Prior Years' Funds
Economic Development 91 ,021 .17
Harborside Drainage Payback 36,223.50
Administration 74,750.00
Home Depot Utility Undergrounding 33,000.00
South Bay Pioneers 54,354.19
Letter of Credit Decrease - 33,460.69
Subtotal $255,888.17
TOTAL $975,888.17
Page 4, Item 4
Meeting Date 5/6/86
Proposed Expenditures Available BG
1986-87 Funds from
Proposal Entitlement Previous Years TOTAL
Administration 0 $ 70,000.00 $ 70,000.00
Economic Development Revolving
Fund $ 54,978.83 91 ,021 .17 146,000.00
Fair Housing Program 6,000.00 6,000.00
Five Year Plan on Aging 6,000.00 6,000.00
Social Services:
Salvation Army 19,600.00 19,600.00
Meals-on-Wheels 4,000.00 4,000.00
Ten Over Sixty 900.00 900.00
Lutheran Social Services 2,000.00 2,000.00
C.V. Senior Services Center 25,000.00 25,000.00
Slingerland 2,000.00 2,000.00
South Bay Community Services 24,000.00 24,000.00
Jobs for Youth 2,500.00 2,500.00
YMCA Family Stress Center 20,000.00 20,000.00
SCCOA Shared Housing 18,000.00 18,000.00
Woodlawn Park Community Center 15,000.00 15,000.00
Capital Projects:
Telegraph Canyon Flood
Control 545,021 .17 69,867.00 614,888.17
TOTAL $720,000.00 $255,888.17 $975,888.17
B. Analysis:
In analysis, 15% of the 1986-87 entitlement funding would go to social
services, 75.5% would go to capital improvement projects (Telegraph Canyon
Flood Control ), 7.5% would go to economic development, 1% would go to the
fair housing program and 1% would go to a Five-Year Plan on Aging.
Funds from prior year projects, in the amount of $255,888.17 are available
to be used in program year 1986-87. Included in that total amount are
remaining funds from two completed projects -- Home Depot Utility
Undergrounding and Harborside Drainage Payback. Also included are unspent
funds from previous year administration and economic development
accounts. These funds are recommended to remain in the same accounts and
be used for the same purposes in 1986-87. In two previous program years
Block Grant funds were budgeted to pay for street improvements adjacent to
the Alcoholic Recovery House proposed by South Bay Pioneers. The project
has never been implemented due to the project being denied approval by the
Page 5, Item 4
Meeting Date 5/6/86
City Council on two separate occasions. The South Bay Pioneers wishes to
resubmit the project to the City Council for a third time and have
informed staff that they will propose a 12 unit housing complex as
compared to the original proposal of a 24 unit complex. In the meantime,
the estimated cost of the needed public improvements adjacent to the
proposed structure have escalated considerably. The South Bay Pioneers
has submitted a 1986-87 Block Grant funding proposal asking for an
additional $161 ,500 from City Block Grant funds to pay for the remainder
of the total cost of the public improvements, now estimated at
approximately $218,000. Denial of the 1986-87 funding request for South
Bay Pioneers and reprogramming of the prior years funding for that
project are recommended for two reasons:
1 . It cannot be predicted when or if the project can move forward and
Block Grant funds can be expended. The City is required by HUD to
expend granted funds in a timely manner.
2. The new total estimated project cost of approximately $218,000 yields
a cost-per-client-served factor that is very unfavorable.
The City' s Block Grant Letter of Credit was recently decreased by
$33,460.69 to cover the previously unaccounted-for costs associated with a
previous year Section 108 loan, which has an advance on our future Block
Grants and used to purchase housing sites. An interest-due calculation
was done incorrectly by HUD, and when they discovered the discrepancy,
they deducted the additional interest the City owed them from the City' s
FY 1985-86 Letter of Credit.
Available funds from previous program years are proposed to assist in
paying for the Senior Information and Referral Center, Economic
Development Revolving Fund, program administration and Telegraph Canyon
Creek Flood Control Project.
C. Social Services:
The selection of social service projects is most difficult, in as much as
such projects are seldom unworthy of consideration. Altruistic pursuit of
public good always deserves support. However, limited resources demand
hard choices. The funding size request of one project may make two or
three smaller but equally admirable projects impossible, and a difficult
choice must be made. The choices for the 1986-87 program year have been
made increasingly difficult because of the 29% decrease in entitlement
funds available.
Although it is difficult to make quantitative evaluations of social
service projects, the application of the City's Social Service Funding
Policy to proposals to test their effectiveness in responding to Chula
Vista's social service needs can yield a quantified ranking.
Page 6, Item 4
Meeting Date 5/6/86
The social service projects recommendation was compiled using the
following process:
1 . Project proposals were solicited as indicated above.
2. Proposals were conveyed to the Human Relations Commission and the
Commission on Aging and presentations made by most of the proponents
to those Commissions.
3. The Commissions recommended projects and funding levels.
4. Staff completed a Proposal Benefit Table ( III.B) and a Proposal
Evaluation Matrix (III.C) for the project proposals and formulated a
staff recommendation based on the Committee recommendations and the
analysis forms. Where staff recommendations varied from Committee
recommendations, the decision was usually based on information
obtained in a more in-depth financial evaluation not available to the
Commissions.
The attached report contains the following items from the social service
proposals evaluation process:
1 . The City's Social Service Funding Policy (Section III.A).
2. A Proposal Benefit Table of comparative benefit data on the various
proposals (Section III.B).
3. The Proposal Evaluation Matrix which ranks all social service
proposals on how they respond to individual policy points, with
overall ranking for each project (Section III.C) .
4. An explanation of recommendations made by the Human Relations
Commission and the Commission on Aging (Sections III.D and III.E).
5. In the Project Descriptions, summary descriptions of all proposals,
along with a narrative explanation of why each project was or was not
recommended ( I.C). Considerations other than matrix rankings are
explained in those narratives.
6. Copies of the social service funding proposals and agencies'
financial information (IV.A).
Requests for social service general operating funds totaled $331 ,829. It
should be noted that HUD regulations restrict program year Block Grant
social service funding to a maximum of 15% of the entitlement amount for a
given program year; in this case, that would be $108,000 for 1986-87.
Page 7, Item 4
Meeting Date 5/6/86
VII. CONCLUSION
With the completion of this public hearing and with City Council action, the
Block Grant application process will be complete and all necessary documents
will be submitted to HUD and to clearinghouse agencies for consideration and
approval . Chula Vista citizens will have had the opportunity to evaluate
program performance and to influence the choice of future Block Grant
activities. Amendment procedures exist to create flexibility in the program
year plan, while ensuring public input.
FISCAL IMPACT: Block Grant funds in the amount of $975,888.17 will finance
the approved projects, of which $720,000 is the 1986-87 entitlement amount and
$255,888e11isted excess
below or No pgeneral funds will be previous involved.years. These excess
funds are
FUND/ACTIVITY/PROJECT # ACTIVITY AMOUNT
81/82 630-6300-BG108 Economic Development $ 4,467.81
82/83 631-6310-BG150 Economic Development 15,915.57
84/85 633-6330-BG150 Economic Development 10,637.79
85/86 634-6340-BG150 Economic Development 60,000.00
SUBTOTAL $91 ,021 .17
85/86 634-3440-BG124 Harborside Drainage $36,223.50
Payback
85/86 634-6340-BG131 Administration 74,750.00
85/86 634-6340-BG155 Home Depot Utility 33,000.00
Undergrounding
82/83 631-6310-BG149 South Bay Pioneers $17,634.63
84/85 633-6330-BG149 South Bay Pioneers 36,719.56
SUBTOTAL $ 54,354.19
85/86 Letter of Credit
Decrease
$-33,460.69
WPC 2246H
piptAft //‘:/aul,:,:e.f----C6fs‘cii' - a
/y0i0 the ty Cou.y.:! of
by tai o Ci',.y Council of Chia Vista, California
Chula Vista, California
ted _ 1 Dated