HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - Minutes - Community Development Advisory Commission - Meeting Date: 1/27/2011 -
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE MINUTES
CITY OF GLENDALE
GLENDALE MUNICPAL COMPLEX
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
5850 W. GLENDALE AVENUE
PUBLIC HEARING/PUBLIC MEETING
Thursday,January 27,2011
6:30 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT: Chris Flippen, Chair
Karen Mankoski, Vice-Chair
Sharon Wixon
Madelin Page
Pattie Johnston
Yolanda Hernandez
Glenn O'Bannon
Shirley Wong
Randy Miller
MEMBERS ABSENT: Mary Jean Eggleston
STAFF PRESENT: Erik Strunk, Community Partnerships Director
Mona Francis-Spellman, Revitalization Supervisor
Charyn Palmisano,Revitalization Supervisor
Gilbert Lopez, Revitalization Administrator
Elizabeth Garcia,Revitalization Coordinator
I. Call to Order and Introductions
Chair Flippen called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m.
II. Roll Call
Chair Flippen noted that all Committee members were present except for Committee
member Eggleston.
III. Business from the Floor
None.
IV. Public Hearing and Comment on the FY 2011-12 Community Development Block Grant
(CDBG)Funding Priorities
Minutes of the Community Development Advisory Committee
January 27,2011
Page 2
As part of the annual CDBG review process, the public is invited to comment on the
grant process and/or the City of Glendale's priorities for the proposed use of the funds.
Chair Flippen opened the floor for public comment.
No comments were made.
V. Fiscal Year (FY) 2011-12 CDBG Physical Improvements Funding Requests, Emergency
Shelter Grants (ESG), and Home Investment Partnerships (HOME) Program Funding
Requests
Mr. Strunk thanked the Committee members in advance for their participation in the
grant process and for their due diligence in review of the applications.
Mr. Strunk reiterated the funding priorities as stated by Mayor and Council in Fall 2010:
1. Keep people in their homes.
2. Keep neighborhoods stabilized.
3. Emergency home repairs are a priority.
4. Provide assistance with food, shelter and utilities.
For the CDBG Physical Improvement Grant requests, there were $2,218,350 in funds
requested with approximately $932,763 in funds available based on FY 2010-11 CDBG
funding levels.
For the Emergency Shelter Grant requests (ESG), there were $115,000 in funds requested
with approximately $93,364 in funds available based on FY 2010-11 CDBG funding
levels.
For the Home Investment Partnerships Program (HOME) grant requests, there were
$455,000 in funds requested with approximately $447,545 in funds available based on
FY 2010-11 CDBG funding levels.
Mr. Lopez stated that once the final figure for the FY 2011-12 CDBG funding levels are
announced by the federal government in April, all awards will be adjusted prorata based
on that final figure.
The Committee agreed to discuss the grant requests, make preliminary recommendations,
make necessary revisions and then motion and vote on the final recommendation package
as a whole.
PHYSICAL IMPROVEMENT REQUESTS
HOUSING RELATED PROGRAMS:
#2-1: A Bridge to Independent Living (ABIL) — Glendale Home Accessibility
$90,850 request
Minutes of the Community Development Advisory Committee
January 27,2011
Page 3
(
Committee member Miller was impressed with the information in the grant proposal and
felt that ABIL leveraged funds well. Chair Flippen agreed and added that this agency
helps to fulfill a core need. Committee member Mankoski stated that ABIL does have
other funding sources, and due to the level of available funds, suggested $50,000 of grant
funding. Other Committee members agreed by consensus for$50,000 funding.
#2-2: A New Leaf, Inc. — Faith House Shelter Renovation-Exterior/Interior,
Landscaping,Heavy Duty Washer/Dryer: $375,000 request
Committee members agreed to table discussion on this request.
#2-3 City of Glendale—Glendale Emergency Home Repair Program (RFP): $350,000
request
Committee member Miller asked for clarification of this program. Mr. Lopez explained
that the Community Revitalization Division is now going to take charge of the Glendale
Emergency Home Repair Program. Initially, Community Services of Arizona ran the
program and completed the original CDBG grant application. However, the City will
now be responsible for the program and it will move forward via the RFP process. Mr.
Lopez added that CSA would still be involved in projects if CSA is selected as a project
contactor through the RFP process. Mr. Lopez commented that this program provides
repair of air conditioners, heating units, roof repair and repair of other emergency
situations for qualifying homeowners.
Chair Flippen commented that this program keeps people in their homes, which is a
Council priority. All Committee members agreed on full funding of$350,000.
#2-4 City of Glendale Community Housing Division—Modernization of Bathrooms at
Three (3)Public Housing Units: $200,000 request
Committee member Page commented that the City of Glendale does a great job of
keeping public housing maintained and in excellent repair. Chair Flippen was pleased
with the method of cost tracking and prioritization of repair projects performed by the
staff at the Housing Division. Committee member Mankoski commented that if funding
is not awarded, there is no other funding source for this worthwhile project. Committee
member Mankoski felt that it was important to maintain public housing for economic
reasons and for residents to have a sense of pride in their homes. Committee member
Hernandez was impressed with the number of annual unit inspections. Chair Flippen
suggested full funding at$200,000 and all Committee members agreed.
#2-2: A New Leaf, Inc. — Faith House Shelter Renovation-Exterior/Interior,
Landscaping,Heavy Duty Washer/Dryer: $375,000 request
Committee member Mankoski noted that the capital campaign for building denoted in the
grant request was held approximately ten years ago and expressed concern that there are
flooring issues already. Committee member Miller suggested that funding be allocated
for the sub-flooring cost of$97,980. Committee member O'Bannon noted that there was
an additional cost of$102,000 for the tile on top of the sub-flooring. Committee member
Mankoski suggested$100,000 in funding and no objections were made.
,
Minutes of the Community Development Advisory Committee
January 27,2011
Page 4
1 \
#2-5 Valleylife, Inc. — Upgrade/Renovate Three (3) Residential Group Homes:
$80,000 request
Committee member Page asked for clarification on the number of Glendale residents
served by the request. Committee member Mankoski explained that overall, Valleylife
serves approximately 18 percent Glendale residents; however, this specific funding
request would be used for 100 percent of Glendale residents. Committee member
Mankoski expressed concern that this request does not fall in line with Council priorities.
Committee member Mankoski added that the agency should have some type of annual
maintenance cost in its budget. Chair Flippen commented that the request comprises a
large amount of money for only three houses and agreed that the request did not fulfill
immediate specific core needs. Chair Flippen suggested no funding and all Committee
members agreed.
PUBLIC FACILITY IMPROVEMENTS
#2-6 Central Arizona Shelter Services (CASS) — Emergency Shelter and Program
Improvements: $14,000 request
Chair Flippen commented that this request by CASS is very small and CASS requests
funding in a very frugal manner. Committee member Mankoski noted that the agency
truly serves the neediest of the homeless population. Committee member Hernandez
noted that, upon a recent visit to CASS, the agency runs a very tight ship. Chair Flippen
suggested full funding at$14,000 and all Committee members agreed.
#2-7 City of Glendale Code Compliance Department—Identification and Elimination of
Code Violations in Residential Areas: $90,000 request
Committee member Mankoski was in support of full funding noting that the staff works
very hard, volunteers are used where possible and the City is reimbursed for the majority
of the cost of the Lien and Clean program. Chair Flippen agreed and added that it is very
important to keep up neighborhoods, which in turn leads to neighborhood stabilization.
Committee member Johnston agreed. Committee member Wixon stated that Code
Compliance Staff responds very quickly to phone calls and other requests. All
Committee members agreed upon full funding at$90,000.
#2-8 City of Glendale Field Operations—Street Improvements (WITHDRAWN)
#2-9 City of Glendale Field Operations — Street Improvements West of the Orchard Glen
Neighborhood: $220,000 request
#2-10 City of Glendale Field Operations — Street Improvements In the Orchard Glen
Neighborhood: $240,000 request
#2-11 City of Glendale Neighborhood Partnerships — East Catlin Court Neighborhood
Construction and Installation — Landscaping, Sidewalk Modifications and Driveway
Aprons: $200,000 request
Committee members agreed to table the discussion on the above grant requests.
#2-12 City of Glendale Parks and Recreation Department — Glendale Community
Center Revitalization Project: $58,500 request
�
Minutes of the Community Development Advisory Committee
January 27,2011
Page 5
Chair Flippen announced support of this request as the community has many
disadvantaged kids who need a clean, presentable facility in the neighborhood to visit.
Chair Flippen felt that this project leans to neighborhood stabilization. Committee
member O'Bannon commented that the deteriorated condition of the sidewalks and
basketball court could present a liability to the City. Committee member Mankoski noted
that the Community Center is in the Heart of Glendale which is a focus area of
neighborhood improvement. All Committee members agreed upon full funding of
$58,500 and all members agreed by consensus.
#2-13 City of Glendale Economic Development Department — Visual Improvement
Program: $300,000 request
Committee member Mankoski inquired as to other sources of funding for the Visual
Improvement Program. Mr. Strunk explained that the recent court case ruling of Turkin
v. Gordon stated that there is a clause in the Constitution stating that the government
cannot give money to a private person. Specifically for this type of program, the
improvements must equal or exceed the contribution. Mr. Strunk noted that funds for this
program were previously received from the City's General Fund, however, General Fund
monies are no longer available due to this ruling. Chair Flippen wondered how many
projects the $70,000 would fund. Mr. Lopez replied that about four or five projects could
be done. Chair Flippen supported funding because visual continuity gives a community a
sense of identity and the businesses assisted are in the core areas of downtown Glendale
which is the face of the city. Chair Flippen suggested allocating the available balance of
$70,263 toward the request. All members agreed by consensus.
#2-8 City of Glendale Field Operations—Street Improvements(WITHDRAWN)
#2-9 City of Glendale Field Operations — Street Improvements West of the Orchard Glen
Neighborhood: $220,000 request
#2-10 City of Glendale Field Operations — Street Improvements In the Orchard Glen
Neighborhood: $240,000 request No funding.
#2-11 City of Glendale Neighborhood Partnerships — East Catlin Court Neighborhood
Construction and Installation — Landscaping, Sidewalk Modifications and Driveway
Aprons: $200,000 request
Committee member Miller felt that these requests did not meet immediate core needs of
residents as noted by Council. All Committee members agreed to no funding of the
programs.
EMERGENCY SHELTER GRANTS
SHELTER OPERATIONS
#3-1 A New Leaf, Inc.—Faith House Emergency Shelter Operations: $55,000 request
Committee member Mankoski felt the agency was worthy of funding, but expressed
concern that in the application,the funds are slated to be used for the salary of a childcare
worker, which was not directly in line with shelter operations. Committee member
Johnston noted that the request is for approximately $26,000 for the salary of a childcare
�, worker and approximately $26,000 for utility expense. Committee member Miller
Minutes of the Community Development Advisory Committee
January 27,2011
Page 6
suggested funding the utility portion of the request. Chair Flippen suggested the
Committee table discussion on the request at this time. All members agreed.
#3-2 Central Arizona Shelter Services (CASS): Emergency Shelter Services for
Homeless Single Adults: $30,000 request
Chair Flippen supported full funding of the request at $30,000 and all Committee
members agreed.
#3-3 Homeward Bound — Utilities Assistance for the Thunderbirds Family Village —
Glendale: $20,000 request
Committee member Johnston supported full funding of the request and Committee
member Miller agreed. Committee member Hernandez was impressed that residents
provided a match to a portion of their assistance. All Committee members agreed to fully
fund the request at$20,000.
#3-4 UMOM New Day Centers, Inc. — Emergency Shelter for Families — Glendale:
$10,000 request
Committee members Page was impressed with the program and also that the shelter will
take in boys over the age of 12, which other shelters will not. Chair Flippen agreed. All
Committee members agreed to fully fund the request at$10,000.
#3-1 A New Leaf, Inc.—Faith House Emergency Shelter Operations: $55,000 request
The Committee members agreed by consensus fund the request at$33,364.
HOME INVESTMENT PARTNERSHIPS
Chair Flippen commented that Mr. Lopez had some information to share regarding the
Newtown Community Development Corporation. Mr. Lopez stated that there has been
some performance and contractual issues with Newtown. Mr. Lopez commented that the
Committee members could still choose to fund the Newtown grant request, could allocate
all of the available funding to Habitat for Humanity or to allocate some available funds to
the City of Glendale Revitalization Department for use in purchasing homes for its
housing rehabilitation and/or replacement program. Mr. Lopez explained that a home
could be identified as a tear down and would be replaced and sold to a qualified
homeowner or a house could be rehabilitated for a current or new homeowner as well.
Chair Flippen asked if the Committee would be informed about the specific projects
planned by the City of Glendale Revitalization Department if funds were granted to the
program. Mr. Lopez replied in the positive.
#4-1 Habitat for Humanity Central Arizona — Infill Acquisition and Renovation:
$255,000 request
The Committee members agreed by consensus to fully fund the program at$255,000.
#4-2 Newtown Community Development Corporation - Newtown Community Land
i'� Homeownership Project: $200,000 request
Minutes of the Community Development Advisory Committee
January 27,2011
Page 7
The Committee members agreed by consensus not to fund this program.
The Committee members agreed by consensus to allocate the balance of available
funding of $192,545 to the City of Glendale Revitalization Department for use in
purchasing homes for its housing rehabilitation and/or replacement program.
Committee member Miller motioned to approve the following funding
recommendations for FY 2011-12:
CDBG Physical Improvements:
2-1 A Bridge to Independent Living (ABIL) — Glendale Home Accessibility
Program: $50,000
2-2 A New Leaf, Inc. — Faith House Shelter Renovation-Exterior/Interior,
Landscaping,Heavy Duty Washer/Dryer: $100,000
2-3 City of Glendale — Glendale Emergency Home Repair Program (RFP):
$350,000
2-4 City of Glendale Community Housing Division —Modernization of Bathrooms
at Three (3)Public Housing Units: $200,000
n
2-5 Valleylife, Inc. — Upgrade/Renovate Three (3) Residential Group Homes: No
funding.
2-6 Central Arizona Shelter Services (CASS) — Emergency Shelter and Program
Improvements: $14,000
2-7 City of Glendale Code Compliance Department — Identification and
Elimination of Code Violations in Residential Areas: $90,000
2-8 City of Glendale Field Operations—Street Improvements (WITHDRAWN)
2-9 City of Glendale Field Operations — Street Improvements West of the Orchard
Glen Neighborhood: No funding.
2-10 City of Glendale Field Operations—Street Improvements.In the Orchard Glen
Neighborhood: No funding.
2-11 City of Glendale Neighborhood Partnerships — East Catlin Court
NeighborhoodConstruction and Installation — Landscaping, Sidewalk
Modifications and Driveway Aprons: No funding.
2-12 City of Glendale Parks and Recreation Department— Glendale Community
Center Revitalization Project: $58,500
Minutes of the Community Development Advisory Committee
January 27,2011
Page 8
2-13 City of Glendale Economic Development Department — Visual Improvement
Program: $70,263
Emergency Shelter Grants:
3-1 A New Leaf,Inc.—Faith House Emergency Shelter Operations: $33,364
3-2 Central Arizona Shelter Services (CASS): Emergency Shelter Services for
Homeless Single Adults: $30,000
3-3 Homeward Bound—Utilities Assistance for the Thunderbirds Family Village—
Glendale: $20,000
3-4 UMOM New Day Centers, Inc. — Emergency Shelter for Families — Glendale:
$10,000
Home Investment Partnerships Program (HOME)
4-1 Habitat for Humanity Central Arizona — Infill Acquisition and Renovation:
$255,000
4-2 Newtown Community Development Corporation - Newtown Community Land
Trust(CLT)Homeownership Project: No funding
City of Glendale Revitalization Department — Replacement Housing and Housing
Rehabilitation: $192,545
Committee member Wixon made the second. The motion passed 9—0.
VI. Reallocation of FY2010-11 CDBG Public Services Funding and FY2006-07 CDBG
Physical Improvements Funding
Committee member Mankoski motioned to approve the reallocation of $13,886 Public
Services Funding from FY2010-11, originally allocated to and returned by the Glendale
Unified School District, to the YWCA Congregate Meals for Seniors Program.
Committee member Miller made the second. The motion passed 9—0.
Committee member Mankoski motioned to approve the reallocation of$65,259.50 from
FY2006-07 CDBG Physical Improvements Funding to be used for the demolition of
buildings owned by the City of Glendale located behind the Sine Building. Committee
member Miller made the second. The motion passed 9—0.
VII. Adjournment
Committee member Miller motioned to adjourn the meeting at 7:38 p.m. Committee
member Johnston made the second. The motion passed 9—0.
Minutes of the Community Development Advisory Committee
January 27,2011
Page 9
r
Respectfully Submitted,
Denise Kazmierczak
0