Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - Minutes - City Council - Meeting Date: 9/3/2002 * PLEASE NOTE: Since the Glendale City Council does not take formal action at the Workshops, Workshop minutes are not approved by the City Council. MINUTES CITY OF GLENDALE CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP September 3, 2002 2:30 p.m. PRESENT: Mayor Elaine M. Scruggs, Vice Mayor Thomas R. Eggleston, and Councilmembers Joyce V. Clark, Steven E. Frate, David M. Goulet, H. Phillip Lieberman, and Manuel D. Martinez ALSO PRESENT: Ed Beasley, City Manager; Terry Zerkle, Assistant City Manager; Rick Flaaen, City Attorney; and Pamela Oliveira, City Clerk 1. ASSESSMENT OF WORLDPORT EVENT CITY STAFF PRESENTING THIS ITEM: Mr. Chris Zapata, Deputy City Manager; and Mr. Vern Biaett, Special Events Manager. OTHER PRESENTER: Mr. David Howell, Director of Marketing, Thunderbird - The American Graduate School of International Management. WorldPort is an annual City-sponsored event produced on the campus of, and in cooperation with, Thunderbird — The American Graduate School of International Management (AGSIM). As part of the City's business plan, the Special Events Division of the Marketing/Communications Department was asked to assess this event and report to the City Council. The City Council removed WorldPort from the Fiscal Year 2002-03 budget reduction plan and placed it on hold. The City Council instructed staff to redesign the event emphasizing the need to reduce the cost per participant, secure additional monetary and staff support from AGSIM, and to give it a fresh look. Further instructions were given to complete this project by September of 2002. Meetings which were held with AGSIM have resulted in a redesign of the WorldPort event. The cost per participant will be reduced from $3.54 to $2.12 the first year. AGSIM has agreed to provide additional monetary and staff support. The name of the festival will be changed to "The Glendale World Music Festival". Event dates will be changed from the third to the fourth weekend in March so as not to conflict with Luke Days. Event hours will be changed from 10 a.m. to 10 p.m. on Friday and Saturday to Friday from 6 p.m. to 1 a.m. and Saturday from 10 a.m. to 1 a.m. The 10 p.m. to 1 a.m. hours would be limited to an indoor concert/dance on campus to maintain the City's sound ordinance. The event is targeted more to adults between the ages of 25 and 54. This issue was discussed at a Workshop session held on April 16, 2002. 1 Special Event staff held four meetings with Mr. David Howell, Director of Marketing for AGSIM, and his staff during the past three months. The budget to reinstate the WorldPort event would be $42,500 — the same amount that was previously put on hold. Funding would be ongoing. There are no additional staff requirements. AGSIM has agreed to increase its previous contribution from $3,000 to $20,000 and assist with sponsorships through its alumni network. Staff recommended that funding for the WorldPort event be reinstated. Mr. Biaett stated that music will be the primary focus. He noted, however, that international food and beverage booths, international performers, international merchandise, the children's discovery pavilion, and international specialties will also be included. He said the Parade of Nations will be downsized, with groups parading through the audience during the half-hour breaks between acts. He noted that the community stage, resource booth, kid's play area, South America Wind Band stage, and the event's old style decor will be eliminated. Mr. Howell said it was their hope that the festival will help Glendale understand the international community found at AGSIM. He stated that AGSIM has committed up to $20,000, as well as the use of their resources in terms of public relations activities and sponsorship recruitment. With regard to event promotion, Mr. Biaett said they would continue with their year- round media partners, Channel 12, the Arizona Republic, and the Cool Town Radio Stations. He said posters will also be sent to West Valley newspapers and alternative media. Councilmember Lieberman suggested approaching the City's summer orchestra, high school bands, and the Sun City Symphony about performing at the festival. He said they might be willing to perform at little or no cost and would attract their own audience to the festival. Mr. Biaett explained that they hoped to attract young adults, similar to those who are attracted to the Jazz and Blues Festival. Councilmember Clark asked for a breakdown of the budget. Mr. Biaett explained that the City budget is divided by the number of people attending the event. He said all money received from sponsors, vendors, and partners are used to enhance the event and attract more people. He stated the City's budget covers all costs, including marketing, production, and City services. Councilmember Clark asked what the contribution made by AGSIM would cover. Mr. Howell stated that, since their objective was to make the event more attractive throughout the Valley, their funds would be used to attract better known, higher quality music acts. Councilmember Martinez questioned whether the music acts suggested by Councilmember Lieberman would be appropriate for the event. Mr. Biaett noted that they could be scheduled during the day. Councilmember Martinez asked if dances would be held on both nights. Mr. Howell explained that AGSIM's student community regularly holds after-hours dances in the hangars on campus. He stated that their intent was to attract more of the student community to the event by moving the dance to the hangar that is closest to the event. He noted that a small cover charge would be assessed to help manage the number of people attending the dance and to raise money for the school's student government organization. He assured Councilmember Martinez that the outdoor activities would cease at 10:00 p.m. and all noise resulting 2 from the dance would be contained in the building. Councilmember Goulet asked if the food and retail booths would continue to be emphasized. Mr. Biaett stated that the international food booths will be continued and possibly expanded, while the retail bazaar will be downsized to include only high-quality retailers. He noted that there would only be one stage located along 59th Avenue, with the sound going towards the campus. He stated that, while they look for free entertainment during the early hours of the event, the evening acts cost an average of $15,000 to $20,000 per act. Mr. Howell said he did not envision the event taking up any more physical space than it has in the past. He noted that, by reconfiguring the space, they hoped to provide a larger seating area focused on the stage. Councilmember Frate pointed out that lack of shade has been a problem in the past. He asked Mr. Howell what he foresaw the cost of future events to be in light of potential sponsorships. Mr. Howell noted that a majority of their alumni graduated within the last 15 years and they hoped the event would help draw them back to the campus. Mr. Biaett explained that by starting with the event on Friday and Saturday only, they could reduce the participant cost. He said, rather than reduce the amount charged at future events, they would likely use the additional money to expand the event to Sunday. Vice Mayor Eggleston said he would like to see WorldPort continued. He stated that it is the only major special event not held in the downtown area. He thanked AGSIM for their participation. Councilmember Clark stated that this appeared to be a much better structured event. She commended those involved in its planning. She expressed her appreciation to AGSIM for their renewed commitment to the event. Councilmember Clark stated that it will ignite the community's interest in AGSIM. She said she would be interested in seeing the actual cost of the event and the number of participants to see what effect there will be on future budgets. Mayor Scruggs said the focus on music is reminiscent of the original WorldPort event. She stated that, while the Council always looks at the City's cost, their eyes have been opened as to what is involved in putting on such an event. She said the discovery pavilion allows children to have fun while learning. She suggested that they market it directly to the scout groups. Mayor Scruggs noted that this is the only event the City sponsors that goes past 10:00 p.m. She said she would also anxiously be awaiting a final report after the event in March of 2003. Councilmember Lieberman thanked AGSIM for increasing its monetary contribution. Mayor Scruggs asked how many cars could be parked on the property. Mr. Howell said they have 78 acres of undeveloped space that can be used for parking. Mr. Biaett said they typically blade off 20,000 to 25,000 parking spaces for the event. 2. LIGHT RAIL TRANSIT GOVERNANCE CITY STAFF PRESENTING THIS ITEM: Mr. Tim Ernster, Deputy City Manager; and Mr.Jim Book, Transit Director. OTHER PRESENTER: Mr. John Farry, S.R. Beard & Associates; Mr. Wulf Grote, Project Manager, Light Rail Transit; and Mr. Ronald K. Blake, attorney-at-law. 3 The cities of Phoenix, Tempe, Mesa, and Glendale are moving forward to complete light rail transit (LRT) projects. The first element of a regional LRT system is a starter corridor that extends 20.3 miles from Spectrum Mall (formerly known as Chris Town Mall) through downtown Phoenix and Tempe, and into Mesa. The targeted completion date for this starter corridor is 2006. The City of Phoenix made a commitment to voters to extend the LRT system to Metrocenter by 2010. In 2001, City of Glendale voter approval of a half-cent sales tax for transportation included an extension of the LRT system to downtown Glendale. Valley Metro (formerly the Regional Public Transportation Authority) has been managing preliminary engineering efforts to develop the starter corridor, including track alignment and engineering design concept. However, the Federal Transit Agency requires a firm commitment on the organization that is going to own and operate the starter LRT system before providing funds for final design. Preliminary engineering is typically 30% of final design and is nearly complete for the starter corridor. Therefore, a decision is needed now on rail governance or the project could be delayed. Management and technical staff from cities with an interest in light rail transit have been meeting over the last 18 months to discuss light rail transit governance options. The recommended governance option is a public nonprofit corporation to be known as Valley Metro Rail, Inc. The cities of Phoenix, Tempe, and Mesa have already taken action to join Valley Metro Rail and Glendale is the remaining city to consider joining at this time. Representatives of the cities of Chandler and Scottsdale were part of the discussion, but have deferred joining at this time due to the lack of a dedicated funding source for LRT in their communities. Since the starter corridor is not located within the City of Glendale, from a Federal perspective, it is not necessary for the City of Glendale to join Valley Metro Rail at this time. However, as a participant in the Joint Powers Agreement, the City will have direct input into the initial decision-making process for the design, construction, and operation of the Light Rail Transit Project for the benefit of the City of Glendale. Some issues of note in the proposed bylaws for Valley Metro Rail include the following: • All votes will be weighted votes. Weighting factors include annual budget. contribution to the program, miles of committed track, and planned miles of LRT. No member would have more than 50% of the vote and no member would have less than 2%. Initial estimates of the weighted vote proportions are 50% for Phoenix, 37% for Tempe, 9% for Mesa, and 4% for Glendale. These shares would be adjusted each year to reflect the latest information on budget and mileage. • Members agree to acquire real property within their boundaries needed for the light rail systems, including the use of eminent domain, if necessary. The cities will need to acquire right-of-way for this project since Valley Metro Rail will not have the power of eminent domain. • Cost of extensions to the starter corridor will include reimbursement for regional facilities such as LRT vehicles and maintenance facilities. 4 • The contribution of each member agency shall be a minimum of $50,000 each year, as specified in the Bylaws. The City of Glendale has sales tax funds programmed in each year in the Capital Improvement Plan(CIP) to complete the design and construction of LRT, with the corridor from 19t Avenue to downtown Glendale. • It is anticipated that Valley Metro Rail will enter into an agreement with Valley Metro to employ a portion of the staff needed to implement the program. • Each member of Valley Metro Rail, Inc. shall appoint a representative to act on behalf of such member as to all matters concerning the Corporation and each member shall appoint between one and three alternate representatives who may act when the representative is not available. Each member's representative shall be a director and the Board of Directors shall consist of the representatives of all the members. Representatives and alternate representatives shall serve for two years, commencing with the first day of the fiscal year for which they were appointed. On November 6, 2001, voters of the City of Glendale approved a half-cent sales tax to fund transportation projects, including a light rail transit connection to downtown Glendale. The City Manager and staff have met numerous times over the last 18 months with managers and representatives from other cities with an interest in light rail transit projects to address rail governance. The cost of joining Valley Metro Rail is a minimum of $50,000 per year for Glendale projects. The 2003-2012 Glendale Capital Improvement Program includes federal funds and transportation sales tax funds to design and construct a light rail system to downtown Glendale. Funds are included in each year of the Capital Improvement Program, with up to $265,000 in sales tax funds for initial design studies in 2003. The recommendation was to direct staff to include the City of Glendale in a Joint Powers Agreement with the cities of Phoenix, Tempe, and Mesa, as a member of a non-profit corporation to construct and operate a light rail transit system as an agenda item for the City Council at its regularly scheduled Council meeting to be held on September 10, 2002. In response to Mayor Scruggs' question, Mr. Farry explained that the governance documents require a regional decision as to where extensions would occur and funds would have to be available in the Maricopa Association of Governments (MAG) Transportation Improvement Program. He said the City would have an opportunity to fund the extension if local funds were available. Mayor Scruggs asked how they could be assured that Glendale has an equal opportunity to get an extension. Mr. Farry stated that the 20-year plan assumes that the regional half-cent sales tax is extended and that local taxes are put in place to fund the extensions. Councilmember Clark asked if an extension would ultimately be funded by the region if a city was unable to fund the extension itself. Mr. Grote explained that the extensions of the cities of Mesa and Tempe were included in the program because both cities had money on the table for preliminary design. He said the cities of Mesa and Tempe would have to fund the extension locally or obtain a regional commitment for it to 5 become a reality. He noted that MAG is developing a new High-Capacity Corridor Plan, identifying corridors and establishing priorities. Mayor Scruggs said the line has always been considered a Phoenix/Tempe/Mesa line, even though the City of Mesa has never contributed any money. She said it was difficult for Glendale residents to understand that, given the fact that they had voted to contribute. She asked if the environmental work being performed would have to be redone if the City of Mesa extension was ultimately not funded. Mr. Farry stated that the focus of the first corridor was 20 miles. He noted that the piece to downtown Mesa was not studied as part of the initial record of decision and would not effect any environmental work being done today. Mayor Scruggs said the City of Phoenix presented its voters with a possible extension running to the west in the vicinity of 1-10. Mr. Farry explained that the Phoenix plan included over 60 miles of potential rail corridors, only 24 miles of which were actually funded by Transit 2000. He said additional funding would be required for Phoenix to complete all 60 miles. Mayor Scruggs pointed out that Mesa's Quality of Life Tax did not include a rail component. Mr. Farry said, because the cities of Phoenix, Tempe, and Mesa are providing the local funding for the 20-mile project, MAG decided that the Regional Public Transportation Authority (RPTA) Board would be the appropriate place for policy decisions to be made. He said the Memorandum of Understanding also created the Light Rail Transit (LRT) Agency Oversight Committee, with members from the participating agencies. He explained that the City of Phoenix is the regional recipient of Federal Transit Administration (FTA) funding and, as such, is responsible for compliance with grants that go to the federal government to be funded. Mr. Farry discussed potential challenges and issues, the first of which was the expiration of the Memorandum of Understanding. He said they had also discussed a "pay to play" attitude, wherein cities that invest significant funds in the project maintain control over decisions. He said the cities of Phoenix, Tempe, and Mesa provide the local share of the 20-mile project funding. He noted, however, that Glendale will also have an LRT component as approved last year in the Revenue Package for Transportation. Mr. Farry said decisions will need to be made on a timely basis during the final design and construction phases, with delays possibly costing millions of dollars. He stated that the governance structure also has to be acceptable to the FTA. He noted that, as a result, after looking at existing statutory authority and peer agencies around the west and southwest, considering local and federal funding sources, and considering the existing structure, as well as future extensions, they decided to establish Valley Metro Rail, Inc. He explained that Valley Metro Rail, Inc. is a public, non-profit corporation whose members include the cities of Phoenix, Tempe, Mesa, and Glendale, with the City of Phoenix maintaining its role as the FTA designated recipient. He said Valley Metro Rail's responsibilities include planning, designing, constructing, and maintaining the light rail project. He said cities will retain the power of eminent domain and Valley Metro Rail will have to have agreements for the use of the property. He explained that light rail alignment and station location will be decided through the city and the regional process. He stated that the Board will contract for the design and construction of light rail, spending local and federal funds assigned by the cities. He noted that the bylaws include a provision stating that there is no obligation for the cities of Mesa or Tempe to move forward with the project should federal funding not materialize. He said they would be looking next year for a Full Funding Grant Agreement. He explained that it is 6 a contract with the Federal Government to provide 50% of the project costs to the region. He said, although the local funds for the starter segment are going to be paid for by the cities of Phoenix, Tempe, and Mesa, the bylaws include provisions for admitting new members. He said the cost of regional components of the system, such as the light rail vehicles and the maintenance facility, will be divided among the cities on a per-mile basis. He said the calculation will be reconsidered at the time an extension occurs, with reimbursements made to those cities that paid to build the maintenance facility and light rail vehicles. Councilmember Martinez asked if each city's percentage was based on the amount of money they contributed. Mr. Farry explained that the Board determined that all votes would be weighted based on funding contributions, the miles of light rail in design, construction, and operation and the planned miles of light rail in the regionally adopted plan for which there is a local funding commitment. He stated no city would have more than a 50% weighted vote and other cities that do not qualify under these criteria could join and receive a 2% weighted vote by paying $50,000. Councilmember Martinez asked how many miles the City of Mesa has in comparison to the City of Glendale. Mr. Book stated that the City of Glendale has programmed funding for 3.5 miles. Councilmember Martinez expressed his opinion that the weighted votes are not equitably distributed. Mr. Farry explained that, although the City of Mesa has 1.1 mile, they have already committed funds to its design and construction. He said the City of Glendale's funding will be considered as part of the weighted vote at such time as it moves a project into preliminary engineering and starts contributing funds. Mr. Book pointed out the fact that the weighting is re-evaluated annually. Councilmember Lieberman asked if the $157,000 that the City of Glendale contributed to the Mayor Investment Study (MIS) ensured the City of Glendale that it would be part of the process from the start. Mr. Book replied in the affirmative. He stated that the City of Glendale will proceed towards a higher weighting when it goes into preliminary engineering. Councilmember Lieberman asked how much the City of Mesa contributed towards the MIS. Mr. Grote said he was unable to recall the amount of the City of Mesa's contribution. He noted, however, that they had committed approximately $1.5 million for preliminary engineering. Councilmember Lieberman asked if the City of Phoenix would contribute to the three miles of line that would have to be located in the City of Phoenix to bring light rail to the City of Glendale. Mr. Book said, although they were hoping for 50% federal funding, they had programmed 1.5 miles in the budget. He stated that the City of Phoenix could decide to utilize some of its seven uncommitted miles to help bring the line to the City of Glendale. Mayor Scruggs noted that the voters were told they would pay no more than 50% of the cost of the City of Phoenix miles. She asked if the MIS would have to be redone since it was done for Glendale Avenue, branching off to Lamar Road or Glenn Drive. Mr. Grote responded that it would. He explained that one of the purposes of the MIS was to define the specific route. He said they would need to do another assessment to determine the route to downtown Glendale before the project can be moved into preliminary engineering. Mayor Scruggs said the election pamphlet identified Bethany Home Road or Northern Avenue as the intended route. Councilmember Lieberman pointed out the fact that the number of miles would not change, regardless of the route. He asked if a new study would be necessary. 7 Mayor Scruggs responded in the affirmative. She stated that the original MIS only considered the Glendale Avenue route. Mr. Grote said they need to know the specific route that will be taken in order to identify the environmental impacts and assess the costs involved. Councilmember Goulet asked if the City of Mesa's dedicated revenue source came from the city itself. Mr. Farry responded that it did. Councilmember Goulet asked if the federal criteria for funding could change during the next Congressional session. Mr. Farry explained that the Full Funding Grant Agreement guarantees that the federal government will supply that level of funding to the design and construction of the project. He noted, however, that the funding is subject to annual appropriations. Councilmember Goulet asked if inconsistent annual appropriations could result in construction delays. Mr. Farry said this would be taken into consideration in the financial plan and capital program being developed. Councilmember Goulet asked if the agreement requires the federal government to stay on track in terms of funding. Mr. Farry explained that it would be difficult to get Congress to commit to a certain amount of funding on an annual basis. He said, ultimately, the amount of funding the federal government is committed to will be met. Councilmember Goulet stated that the situation in the West Valley has changed and they need to look into the future to see what will be necessary to meet the needs in that area. Mayor Scruggs clarified that, since the City of Glendale is not part of the original 20-mile plan, the City would not be affected if the money does not come from the federal government. She expressed her opinion that it would be less likely for the funding to be removed once the original 20-mile corridor is operating. Councilmember Clark asked what the $50,000 annual contribution would buy. She pointed out the fact that the City of Glendale will not begin to see a corridor for several years. Mr. Book said the $50,000 contribution gives the City an opportunity to give input, vote, and to receive advanced planning studies. Mr. Beasley asked Mr. Grote how much MAG federal money had been placed with the Mesa alignment. Mr. Grote explained that they were using Maricopa Association of Governments (MAG) Congestion Mitigation & Air Quality Improvement Program (CMAQ) monies throughout the project. He noted that the City of Mesa was committing $25 to $30 million in General Funds to do their mile. Mayor Scruggs asked if the City of Glendale would have the ability to drop out of the program once it agrees to join. Mr. Grote responded in the affirmative. Mayor Scruggs said she had discussions with Messrs. Flaaen, Ernster, and Book regarding the City's responsibilities and questions concerning liability issues. She said, as Valley Metro Rail, Inc. moves forward and liability issues are more clearly defined, the City of Glendale could decide it would be in its best interests to withdraw its participation. Councilmember Goulet stated that, while he supported the City of Glendale's involvement, he remained cautious to see if the City of Mesa actually allocated such a staggering amount of money to the project. Mayor Scruggs voiced the Council's consensus to move forward. 8 3. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT AND HOME INVESTMENT PARTNERSHIPS PROGRAM FISCAL YEAR 2003-2004 APPLICATION PROCESS CITY STAFF PRESENTING THIS ITEM: Ms. Pam Kavanaugh, Deputy City Manager; Ms. Gloria Santiago-Espino, Community Housing and Revitalization Director; and Mr. Gilbert Lopez, Neighborhood Revitalization Manager. OTHER PRESENTER: Mr. John Turbridy, Chairman of the Community Development Advisory Committee. Each year, the Chairman of the Community Development Advisory Committee (CDAC) meets with the City Council to establish funding priorities for the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) and HOME Investment Partnerships (HOME) Programs. A summary of the Council's funding priorities for the past five years was presented to the Council. Activities eligible for CDBG funds include public service programs, housing-related activities, infrastructure improvements, and public facility improvements. The HOME funds may be used for activities that increase or preserve affordable housing. Grant- funded activities must primarily benefit low and moderate-income individuals and families. The Chairman will present the Council's funding priorities to the CDAC at its September 24, 2002 meeting. The City began receiving CDBG funds from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development in 1978. Since that time, the City has received $32,886,000 in CDBG funds. In 1992, the City began receiving HOME funds; $5,054,369 has been received to date. Last fiscal year, following the City Council's guidance, the Neighborhood Revitalization Division administered the following activities: • Assisted 301 residents with housing rehabilitation and emergency home repairs. • Demolished 15 blighted structures. • Partnered with 7 non-profit agencies on physical improvement projects. • Partnered with 24 non-profit agencies to provide social services to approximately 20,000 Glendale citizens. The CDBG funds leveraged approximately $2,432,910 in additional funds for these programs. • Assisted Habitat for Humanity with lot acquisition for the Infill Housing Program. Construction was completed on 5 homes in the Heart of Glendale neighborhood. • Constructed 2 homes in the Heart of Glendale neighborhood and surrounding area through the Replacement Housing program. • Entered into an agreement with Los Vecinos for infill housing in the Orchard Glen neighborhood. 9 A public notice will be published in The Glendale Star on September 5, 2002, notifying interested parties of the availability of CDBG and HOME Funds for Fiscal Year 2003- 2004. The Neighborhood Revitalization Division of the Neighborhood Services Department will send written notification of the upcoming grant cycle to previous CDBG and HOME applicants and other interested parties on September 6, 2002. A press release will be distributed to the media on September 12, 2002. An orientation meeting will be held for potential applicants on September 20, 2002. In Fiscal Year 2003-2004, it is estimated that the City will receive approximately $2 million in CDBG funds and $500,000 in HOME funds. The City will receive notification of actual funding allocations in January of 2003. In Fiscal Year 2002-2003, the City received $2,097,000 in CDBG funds and $552,308 in HOME funds. The recommendation was to review the information and provide guidance to the Community Development Advisory Committee regarding funding priorities and the process for requesting funding for the City's housing rehabilitation programs for Fiscal Year 2003-2004. Mr. Turbridy explained that, last year, the Council had identified housing-related activities, programs for seniors and youth, clearance and demolition activities, employment services, programs for the homeless, and programs for essential services as priorities. He said the Committee followed the Council's guidance by allocating the maximum allowed for public services, 15% or $314,550, as follows during Fiscal Year 2002-2003: senior programs, 20.7%; youth programs, 23.2%; employment services 6.9%; homeless services, 39.7%; and essential services, 9.5%. He said the remaining CDBG and HOME funds were allocated to physical improvement projects as follows: housing-related projects, 85.7%; clearance and demolition activities, 1.9%; homeless projects, 10.3%; and essential service projects, 2%. Councilmember Clark said she would like to see money programmed for meaningful after-school programs, especially for teenagers. She stated that she would also like to target programs that address the increase in domestic and sexual abuse, as well as elder care services. She said she was surprised to find out that only 15 blighted structures were demolished. She said she believed more effort should be made to remove burned out and blighted structures throughout the City, with the owners' permission. Councilmember Martinez asked about the revitalization activities at 52nd Drive and McLellan Road. Ms. Santiago-Espino explained that exterior improvements were made to the public housing complexes that are owned by the City. Councilmember Martinez said he agreed with the comments made by Councilmember Clark. He asked if the funds have to be spent in the same year. Ms. Santiago-Espino stated that federal guidelines require that a certain percentage of the funds be spent each year. Councilmember Martinez referred to a neighborhood in the City that continues to have problems with flooding, despite limited efforts by the City to correct the situation. He said Mr. Larry Broyles, City Engineer, told him that constructing new streets with curbs and gutters would completely eliminate (mitigate) the problem, but doing so would cost at least $20 million. He said Mr. Broyles stated that they could also raise the mobile homes that are at ground level. He noted, however, that this would also be a costly effort. 10 Councilmember Goulet stated that the Commission was doing great things. He thanked Mr. Turbridy for his leadership and Ms. Santiago-Espino and Mr. Lopez.for their efforts. He said he would like to see the City continue with infill housing and redevelopment. He stated that he would also like to see more demolition to improve the look of many neighborhoods. He said he supported senior programs. He pointed out that it is a growing and often silent part of the community. He asked how they gauge the City's return on certain intangible programs, such as the Empowerment Workshop. He asked if funding for the parking lot study for the Neurodevelopment Center could come out of the City's Visual Improvement Plan. He suggested that the City look for partners to help fund the $200,000 request for a security system and site improvements at Faith House. Councilmember Lieberman stated that Faith House's request was a small portion of the cost of the overall operation. He noted that he was on its Board of Directors and has been involved in a number of its fundraising efforts. He pointed out the fact that Faith House is the only place in the City of Glendale where abused women with children can go to find shelter. Mayor Scruggs clarified that the Fiscal Year 2002-2003 program funds have already been committed. She suggested that they increase the amount allocated to employment services. She stated that it is one of the City's biggest problems. She said essential services are also important because unemployed residents will need assistance in those areas as well. She stated that she would support redirecting some of the money allocated to youth-based services towards family-based programs. She also voiced her support of the blighted structures demolition program. With regard to the HOME fund program, Councilmember Frate said he would like to see the City purchase five or six properties and then partner with organizations to build the homes. Councilmember Clark pointed out that the Council consistently allocates funds to certain programs. She suggested that those programs be automatically allocated a small percentage of the CDBG funds, but that the majority of the funds be directed towards the City's immediate social ills. Vice Mayor Eggleston thanked the Commission for its service. He said he would like the Commission to continue looking for programs that serve youth and help prevent domestic violence. He said he agreed with Mayor Scruggs about the importance of employment services. Councilmember Martinez reiterated his request to have the neighborhood flooding problems he mentioned addressed. Councilmember Clark asked if CDBG funds were supposed to be used within targeted, defined areas of the City. Ms. Santiago-Espino explained that the funds have to remain in census tracks with 51% or more low-to-moderate-income individuals. Councilmember Martinez assured Councilmember Clark that the neighborhood he referred to meets that standard. 11 Mayor Scruggs stated she would need to see a plan outlining how the money would be allocated and used before making any decision on how to address the flooding issue. She said she would want more information on the rules that govern how the money can be used. Ms. Santiago-Espino said they have to spend 1.5% of the annual entitlement by the end of the third quarter of each fiscal year, with the remaining funds turned around within two years. Mayor Scruggs questioned whether it would be feasible to make the required improvements within a two-year period. She suggested that Councilmember Martinez pursue the issue with the Bond Committee. Councilmember Martinez commented that he had thought about bringing the issue to the City Council Goal Setting meeting in November. Mayor Scruggs responded that the Council needed more information in order to fully understand the proposal. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 5:00 p.m. 12