CDCC Minutes, March 28, 2005
Call to Order:
Chairperson Jaramillo called the meeting to order at 6:35 PM.
Jo Ann Brannock, Ph.D.
Linda R. Morad, Housing Programs Supervisor
Guillermina Torrico, Clerical Assistant III
Approval Of Minutes
Chairperson Jaramillo confirmed that members had received and reviewed the minutes for March 14, 2005. Committee Member Bambrook pointed out that page three should actually read Committee Member Brannock and not Bambrook.
A MOTION was made by Committee Member Jensen-Purser to approve the minutes with the correction on page three, SECONDED by Committee Member Elliott, and CARRIED by members present to APPROVE the minutes of March 14, 2005, as amended.
IV. 2005-2006 Funding Recommendations
Chairperson Jaramillo explained that if the funding recommendations are completed today, the March 30, 2005 meeting will not be required; making this the last CDCC meeting before presenting to City Council.
The Committee went through the list of applicants to determine funding recommendations. Committee Member Jensen-Purser noted that they should start by: Observing the cap amounts to make sure they abide to these; reviewing agencies whose requests do not meet CDBG guidelines; and noting that the requests exceed the total amount available.
Public Service Recommendations:
Funding was DENIED to the following agencies:
- Hart Community Homes, Inc: A motion was made by Committee Member Jensen-Purser to deny funding to this agency, SECONDED by Committee Member Elliott, and CARRIED by Members present.
- Rationale: This program does not meet CDBG guidelines.
- Womens Transitional Living Center (WTLC): A motion was made by Committee Member Jensen-Purser deny funding to this agency, SECONDED by Committee Member Elliott, and CARRIED by Members present.
- Rationale: The agency failed to appear on the presentation date.
They decided to ALLOCATE funds to agencies/programs as follows:
Funding was GRANTED to these agencies/departments, but NOT AT THE FULL AMOUNT:
- Orangethorpe United Methodist Church-Orangethorpe Learning Center
| $7,000 |
- Orangethorpe United Methodist Church-Youth in Action Program
- STOP GAP Interactive Touring Plays for Seniors
- City of Fullerton Community Centers Project
Rationale: Committee wanted to contribute to these agencies efforts but there were not enough CDBG funds to fund them completely.
Specific to the Orangethorpe United Methodist Church: The Committee wants to continue supporting the Learning Center and they see a real need to create a program for teenagers in West Fullerton (Youth in Action Program).
Specific to the Community Centers: The Committee wanted to fund them since these centers offer diverse and essential collaborative services from other non-profits that otherwise might not be accessible to the community. They opted to cut their request by only 10%, which results in only 5% from each center. This will have less impact than cutting a non-profit from 50-100% of their funding.
Funding was GRANTED to these agencies/departments, AT THE FULL AMOUNT:
- Boys & Girls Club of Fullerton Valencia Park Branch Salaries:
| $10,000 |
- Council on Aging Long-term Care Ombudsman Service:
- Fair Housing Council of Orange County
- Fullerton Interfaith Emergency ServicesNew Vista Life Skills Training Program
- Fullerton Interfaith Emergency ServicesInterfaith Shelter Network Program
- Meals on Wheels Home Delivered Meals Program
- Orange County Bar Foundation Stop Short of Addiction Program
- Southern CA College of Optometry Future in Sight Program
- Maintenance Services Graffiti Removal Program
| Public Services Total:|| $260,490 |
A MOTION was made by Committee Member Elliott to fund the Public Service Category as recommended to meet the 15% Cap amount, the MOTION was seconded by Committee Member Brannock and CARRIED by a majority vote (7 to 1). Committee Member Leon was not in agreement.
Discussions on other Projects:
Committee Member Elliott asked how short, the Public Facilities and other Programs stand with current requests vs. what is available. Ms. Morad said it would be approximately $488,000.
Ms. Morad reminded the Committee that the Admin amount could not go over 20% of the total entitlement. This amount could not exceed $347,330.
Code Enforcement/Admin/Housing Rehab Recommendations and Public Facilities/Improvements Recommendations:
Funding was DENIED to the following agencies:
- Boys and Girls Club of Fullerton Windows and Paint Projects
Rationale: There is not enough money to fund both the windows and paint projects. However, if only Windows is funded the building will still have to be painted, and if Painting is funded, the paint will be damaged when the windows are replaced; so partial funding is not possible. Since CDBG funds cannot be carried over, it is best to deny the entire project and they can either seek other funding or return next year.
- Crittenton Services- Ceiling Renovation
Rationale: There is not enough money to fund all projects. The amount would only help with reducing noise in the television/recreation room; thus the need is not for safety or to provide services. There is greater priority to fund other projects.
- Fullerton Interfaith Seismic Retrofitting
Rationale: There is not enough money to fund all projects. The amount did not cover all of the work required on that home. The amount is too large for the benefit and there are greater priorities that need to be funded.
Funding was GRANTED to these applicants, but NOT AT THE FULL AMOUNT:
- Development Services Housing & Community Development Overhead
Rationale: To meet the 20% cap.
- Development Services Housing Rehabilitation Project
Rationale: Not enough funding available.
Also, the Department stated that if funding was to be cut, this project could take the cut and Housing would only help people until depleting the funds.
- Community Services - Tool Bank Project
Rationale : Not enough funding available.
The Committee voiced concern over elimination of this project since it is a genuine service to helping people maintain their homes. They understand the cost to run it and thought that if the Committee funds some portion, the Tool Bank could seek remaining funding amount through other sources. The Committee recognized that it is being used by people that cannot afford to rent tools and offers service to low-income residents. The main question posed by Committee Members was if eliminating this program will contribute to the blight and lack of property maintenance in the city.
- Development Services - Code Enforcement
Rationale : Not enough funding available.
The Committee sees the value of funding this project to maintain the city. However, they are aware of the vacant position and felt that based on the City presentation; the existing staff could handle the proactive as well as the reactive Code Enforcement cases. According to City Staff they have been functioning with five Officers successfully this past year, one of which is funded out of general funds.
| $346,650 |
Funding was GRANTED to these applicants AT THE FULL AMOUNT:
| Development Services Housing Admin Project || $152,060 |
| Section 108 Loan Repayment |
Rationale: Mandatory loan payment.
| Code Enforcement/Housing & Public Facilities/Improvements Total: || $1,799,972 |
There was further debate amongst Members present regarding cutting Code Enforcement since they are the reason why the city is well maintained. However, there was majority consensus that a lot of funds were already taken from Housing and 20% was taken from the Tool Bank. Further discussions expressed great concern in cutting the Tool Bank or Housing Rehabilitation programs because the Committee recognizes the amount of work that these groups have done, with such small amounts of funding. Members stated that Rehab and Tool Bank do so much with so little; it (funding) goes so much further for quality of life, especially for the elderly.
Committee Member Elliott stated that he was against denying The Boys and Girls Paint and Windows Project but understood that the amount available required that they make this decision. He was not able to offer suggestions of where else to cut and accepted the recommendation to deny funding.
Committee Member Leon also voiced her recommendation to fund the Boys and Girls Paint and Windows Project and to fund the Community Centers at the full amount. In response, Committee Member Jensen-Purser and Chairperson Jaramillo asked her to offer suggestions of where she felt they might cut other projects and she was unable to do so.
A MOTION was made by Committee Member Elliot to APPROVE and accept the budget as recommended, the MOTION was seconded by Committee Member Moreno-Sandy and CARRIED by members present.
The meeting scheduled for March 30, 2005 will be cancelled and the presentation to City Council will be May 3, 2005 at the 7:30PM agenda.
No public comment.
Chairperson Jaramillo adjourned the meeting at 8:15 PM.