January 24, 2013 Minutes (City Commission Room)
|
MEMBERS PRESENT: |
|
Linda Bush, Eric Hethcoat, James Minor, Julie Mitchell, Aimee Polson, Patrick Wilbur |
|
|
|
|
|
MEMBERS ABSENT: |
|
David Teixeira, Vern Norwood, Deron Belt, Quinn Miller |
|
|
|
|
|
STAFF PRESENT: |
|
Danelle Dresslar, Margene Swarts, Rhonda Peterson, Brad Karr |
|
|
|
|
|
PUBLIC PRESENT: |
|
Mike Sizemore, Jeremy Farmer, Brandon Fowler, Susan Oury
|
Chair Polson called the meeting to order at 5:33 p.m.
1. Introductions.
Members and staff introduced themselves.
2. Approval of the January 10, 2013 Minutes.
Mitchell moved to approve the CDAC meeting minutes from
January 10, 2013. The motion was seconded by Wilbur and passed 6-0.
3. Presentation from Shannon Oury, LDCHA.
Shannon Oury with the Lawrence-Douglas County Housing Authority (LDCHA) provided an update on the transitional housing program. Last year, the program took its largest allocation budget cut. They currently support 30-35 vouchers with the grant funded by the City, but they are losing the ability to fund 5-7 vouchers from the last grant year (fiscal budget runs August-July).
The program is graduating transitional voucher holders up to four months early to make room for new participants. Currently, there are 38 families on the waiting list. Allowing participants who have a good history to graduate early helps preserve the availability and funding of future vouchers. There are 21 families in the program now, with room for several additional participants.
Oury stated that there are not many funding options in the Community Housing Vision that fill this particular need. At this point they do not have a way to reallocate funds in the coming year to supplement the TBRA program. LDCHA is looking at options as far as next steps to help fill the service gap.
Polson noted that $155,281 was allocated to the TBRA program last year. She asked if LDCHA had requested the same amount for this year’s allocation.
Oury indicated that they requested the same amount they had requested last year, which was $300,000, and includes funding to cover administration costs. Oury reiterated that there are not many funding options for this population, and that none of the participants are eligible for other programs. This program works in conjunction with the general housing program. It pairs participants with other services, and is a gateway from the shelter and to other housing options. Oury stated that it is important to maintain funding for the vouchers they currently have.
4. Discussion of 2013 Capital Improvement Allocations.
Dresslar distributed the current data for allocation consideration and stated that the Table of Contents from the last four years is available on the web.
Dresslar stated that she had received a call from David Cronin, City Engineer in the Public Works department. Cronin said Public Works is working with the Oread Neighborhood Association on their proposed capital improvement project, and that Public Works will be conducting a site visit to determine how to proceed with the project. There is a possibility that how the application is written may not cover what is needed. David Cronin will be present at the next meeting to discuss the Public Works hybrid beacon project and may be able to speak to the ONA application as well.
Polson opened the floor to the public to discuss particular applications that have been submitted for consideration.
Wilbur indicated he would like to hear more regarding the Planning and Development Services Breezedale neighborhood capital improvement application.
Mike Sizemore introduced himself as the current president of the Breezedale Homeowner’s Association. He is an architect and has been living in the neighborhood since 1998. In the 2002 23rd Street Corridor Study, the monuments in the neighborhood were mentioned as being a “gateway to the city”. Sizemore indicated they are also a gateway to Haskell Indian Nations University. There is a lot of pedestrian traffic between Haskell and 23rd Street, which further increases the need for renovations in the neighborhood. They have been documenting the damage and deterioration in the area and looking at grants to fund the restoration for several years. The stone is disintegrating, and the sculpture has pieces falling off of it; these items need attention, or they may not be there much longer.
Polson asked if there is any way the project could be completed in phases.
Sizemore responded yes, in three phases including stone restoration, sculpture restoration and replacement of metal lettering and concrete skim coat. The stone repair should be concentrated on first to make it structurally stable.
Polson asked if Sizemore had seen the estimates, and if he knew how much it would cost.
Sizemore responded that the costs are approximately $27,000 for the metal sculpture, and $22,500 to repoint the concrete and replace the benches and stonework. The metal lettering could wait.
Hethcoat asked if the stonework could be completed in halves, one half of the street at a time.
Sizemore said yes. The west side monument is in better shape than the east side monument. Sizemore said about four or five years ago masons were contacted for an evaluation and said then that they were concerned about the stonework; it would most likely have to be replaced rather than renovated.
Hethcoat asked if the concrete and stone could be re-tucked or did it require disassembly.
Sizemore responded that the west side could be re-tucked in some areas, and would require replacement in others due to cracking and spalling. The east side would require replacement of all of the stone.
Bush inquired if other funding sources have been pursued.
Sizemore said that a Transportation Grant has been investigated through the State of Kansas, as the neighborhood is a key spot on the transportation route. It is a competitive environment for funding.
Hethcoat asked what subcontractors provided bids for the work.
Sizemore responded that several years ago Keith Middlemass with Deggingers Foundry in Topeka provided a bid; they completed work on the county courthouse. He did not know if Lynn Zollner had adjusted those numbers from the original bid.
Polson asked if the committee could contact the Historical Society for more information.
Swarts indicated that Lynn Zollner is the City’s Historic Resources Administrator and is a good resource for the committee.
Dresslar said she will contact Zollner and see if she will be available to present information at the next committee meeting.
There were no further questions at this time for Sizemore.
Jeremy Farmer with Just Food introduced himself. Just Food partners with Douglas County Food and 43 other organizations in town and around the county. The agency goal is to provide low income individuals and families access to healthy foods. Just Food currently does not actively purchase meat, produce or dairy products due to the cost. The agency is requesting $30,000 of CDBG capital improvement funding to purchase a 28’ refrigerated box truck. This will allow Just Food to coordinate pick-ups from local grocery stores and restaurants who would otherwise be throwing good food away. Farmer said there is an average of $5,000-$15,000 of product thrown away every week at local grocery stores. Purchasing a refrigerated box truck would allow Just Food to infuse the product back into the system, in Lawrence and at satellite locations in Douglas County. Currently Just Food rents trucks 4-6 times per year at an average cost of $3,000 each time. Purchasing their own truck would also allow them to reduce/eliminate waste; the cost versus impact is great.
Hethcoat said he thinks this is a great idea but expressed concerns about covering the costs for fuel, maintenance and upkeep of the vehicle.
Farmer responded that they have allocated funds in their budget for maintenance of the truck. They also have vans and other trucks they can use when a larger and refrigerated vehicle is not required.
Hethcoat asked how the program works with grocery stores; is a call placed to Just Food when there is an opportunity, or are they incrementally scheduled?
Farmer replied that the pick-ups are scheduled. It is not convenient for grocery stores to give away product to their customers. Farmer said typically the product will go to a reduced price shelf before being thrown away. With Just Food’s current vehicles, they are not able to pick up pallets of product; it must be packaged in boxes to be able to fit in their van or truck. With the refrigerated truck, the product can be placed on pallets and loaded directly into the truck without being repackaged. With a box truck, a schedule can then be set up to visit all grocery stores and restaurants on certain days when they are disposing of the near-expired food. Occasionally Just Food does get calls that are not scheduled for items such as wrong product delivery or mislabeled boxes. Currently, they have to scramble to find a truck. Food temperature is also very important. Safety is priority; keeping food at the correct temperature is a requirement. They do not want to divert where the food is being wasted by picking it up and then having to compost it because the safe temperature was not maintained.
Minor inquired about how and from whom bids were obtained.
Farmer responded that they based their budget on resale value. They obtained three bids that are in the $25,000-$30,000 range. They looked at 25-50 truck models and determined the 28’ truck was the maximum they could go without needing a CDL. They utilize volunteer drivers, and have strict regulations as to who can drive for the agency.
Minor asked if the truck they are looking at purchasing is new or used, and if the committee can see the estimates they received.
Farmer replied that they are looking at new trucks, and that he would be happy to share the bids, and will email them to Dresslar.
Polson asked where the composting is done.
Farmer responded that they have barrels in the back of their building that are picked up.
Polson asked if the food stays on the truck.
Farmer answered that the food is transferred to the walk-in cooler in their building. Polson asked if Just Food is regulated like a restaurant and if health inspectors examine the premises. Farmer responded that the state has indicated they were going to perform an inspection, but to date they have not done so yet. Just Food is under no legal obligation to store the food in a certain manner, but they do follow FDA guidelines to ensure that the food remains safe to eat. They do not operate on a “beggars can’t be choosers” principle. The food is checked twice a day with temperature guns.
Hethcoat inquired if Just Food is looking at offsetting their current costs with the additional food, or if they will just be offering more food.
Farmer replied that, hypothetically, grocery stores throw away $10,000 of groceries per week, times four times in a month; that equals approximately eight times what Just Food spends on foot right now. They are looking at being able to save money, and will be able to offer fresh food as opposed to more preserved food. With the new box truck, they will be able to load up to 20 barrels at a time; currently, they can only take six barrels at a time in the van. Some food drives they hold require them to utilize a trailer, and weather can be a factor during transport.
Hethcoat asked if the grocery stores or restaurants ask for any type of reimbursement for the groceries they pick up.
Farmer said that no, the food at that point is donated. They will share the information with the grocery stores such as the number of people they were able to feed and money saved. It will save them time as well.
Polson said that Farmer has done a great job from a marketing standpoint in representing his organization, and in addressing the food issues in the community.
Farmer replied that they are focusing on prevention rather than intervention. If Just Food does not use more resources to address the problem, it will only get worse. Just Food also offers cooking classes to help the recipients use the new option of fresh food responsibly.
Mitchell said that she has a friend that is using the service, and she agreed that what is needed most is more meat and fresh food offerings.
Farmer explained that they use a choice-based system, whereas before it was just a box of food that the family had no input as to what they received.
Mitchell moved to fully fund 9b, Just Food of Douglas County Refrigerated Box Truck, in the amount of $30,000. Bush seconded the motion.
Hethcoat asked if anyone would like to wait and see the estimates first before voting.
Minor stated he would like to get the full application package to review, but did not necessarily want to table the vote.
Hethcoat inquired if donations were being used to help fund the purchase of the truck.
Farmer responded that they were using all of the funds to only purchase the truck. The bids were received from brokers; due to the nature of the specialized use of the vehicle, no local dealerships carry it in stock.
The motion passed 6-0.
Hethcoat inquired about the items in number 15, which were the Community Development Division programs, and which had been fully funded in the past.
Dresslar responded that all items are listed on the provided table of contents, and the items had been funded at varying levels over the past few years. The Comprehensive Rehab program costs about $25,000 per house to fund; any funding less than that average, and less homeowners can be helped. Dresslar also stated that the Energy Savings and Furnace & Emergency Loans had been fully funded last year. Applicants are allowed up to $5,000 to fund their repair; Dresslar explained that the funding for the project is a lump sum and individual contracts are allocated out of the lump sum. Dresslar explained that anything not spent within a grant year rolls back into the grant.
Swarts further clarified by saying that anything not spent becomes part of the fund to be reallocated.
Mitchell moved to fully fund 11a, Independence, Inc. Accessible Housing Program, in the amount of $33,000. Minor seconded the motion.
Wilbur asked if the program could be partially funded; he noted that the cost for ramps was approximately 33% of the funding requested.
Bush noted that there is a math error in the application.
Wilbur also inquired about the $3,000 administrative delivery cost included in the application.
Swarts explained that the administrative cost is a flat 10% of whatever the application funding request is. Staff is needed to help shepherd the projects along.
Mitchell stated that she thought the program offered a lot in return for the cost of the project.
Dresslar added there have been good results from this program in the past.
The motion passed 6-0.
Minor moved to fully fund 12a, Willow Domestic Violence Center Electrical Repair and Maintenance at Shelter, in the amount of $2,066. Mitchell seconded the motion.
Mitchell inquired if the center has plans to fix the plumbing. Polson responded that they plan to fix it using their emergency fund.
The motion passed 6-0.
Hethcoat asked if anyone had any thoughts on the Energy Savings Improvements and Furnace and Emergency Loans.
Polson asked how much would be left to allocate if they fully funded those two items.
Dresslar responded that the total allocated would be $155,066 with $388,050 left to allocate if those two items were approved.
Hethcoat moved to fully fund 15d and 15e, City of Lawrence Community Development Division, Energy Savings Improvements (Exterior Weatherization) and Furnace and Emergency Loans, in the amounts of $50,000 and $40,000 respectively. Minor seconded the motion.
The motion passed 6-0.
Polson moved to partially fund 14a, City of Lawrence Planning & Development Services, Breezedale Monument Restoration, in the amount of $25,000, for a first phase of the project.
Polson said while it is not solving the entire crisis, it still has value to preserve the area. Minor added that it is a highly visible area.
Bush said she would like to wait and see what other funding options might be available.
Hethcoat indicated he would like to see a breakout for bids to complete each side of the street as separate phases; stonework could be done in halves, with the sculpture restoration to be completed later.
Minor said that it should be completed in order as to which side has the higher safety risk first.
Hethcoat said they should wait for Zollner to make a presentation so they would have more information before considering the application.
Polson withdrew the motion as there was no second.
Hethcoat inquired about item 3c, $500 for the North Lawrence Improvement Association application.
Dresslar responded that this item requires approval from the Public Works department before it can be able to be reviewed by the committee. Dresslar said she has contacted Ted Boyle several times but does not have the final department approval yet. Dresslar mentioned that the committee had approved funding to put the bus stop pad in, which was completed last year.
Mitchell indicated it appeared that all items had been addressed that could be; the remainder of items are pending the receipt of additional information prior to making a decision for allocation.
5. Discussion of 2013 HOME Allocation.
Mitchell said she thinks that the TBRA program is a higher priority to fund when there are funding cuts, rather than home ownership. Mitchell said in the long run it saves taxpayers’ money and is a more urgent need.
Bush said that Tenants to Homeowners (TTH) has positively impacted her neighborhood. She indicated that she does not want to short them too much. TTH is another step in the process that needs to remain a priority.
Mitchell clarified that she didn’t want to cut out TTH, but that the priority should be on using funding efficiently. Helping people be more self-sufficient saves more money in the long run, as far as services they might be using, as opposed to home ownership.
Hethcoat stated that they have $238,000 to cut out of the budget and the committee has $356,592 to work with.
Polson said that $60,000 is already obligated because of the CHDO set-aside requirement.
Dresslar said to keep in mind that the $59,000 can fluctuate depending on what the final budget reads.
Polson asked if $59,432 is the minimum that has to be funded for 17a, CHDO Project Funds.
Dresslar responded yes.
Polson asked Oury where the properties are that are used in their TBRA program.
Oury responded that this program uses housing vouchers, so families can rent from a private landlord anywhere in the city. The Housing Authority does have several properties as well.
Hethcoat stated that as compared to years in the past TTH as the Community Housing & Development Organization (CHDO) got cut in half, but they have been fully funded in years past.
Bush added that they only requested this year what they were allocated last year.
Bush asked for clarification on line 17b, if the committee is required to allocate operating funds to CHDO.
Swarts responded that no, you are not required to allocate money for that, but historically the committee has because there is only one local CHDO, and the HOME program required entitlement jurisdictions have to have a CDHO to administer affordable housing in the community. The city has always provided some coverage for operating costs to CHDO. When the City first started getting home funds in 1994, TTH was a fledging organization that the City was able to work with. They eventually became the CHDO. Swarts said as the City has partnered with TTH and worked with them, they have been nurtured into the strong organization they have become today. The City has continued to show them support by funding part of their operating expense.
Bush moved to fully fund 17b, CHDO Operating Funds, in the amount of $19,811. Wilbur seconded the motion.
The motion passed 6-0.
Hethcoat proposed that items 15c & 16a be addressed, which funds the first time home buyer programs. They asked for $200,000 last year, and it was cut to $95,000; and $300,000 which was cut to $97,000 last year. Hethcoat moved to partially fund 15c, First Time Homebuyers Program, in the amount of $97,000.
Hethcoat withdrew the motion.
Polson moved to partially fund 17a, CHDO Project Funds, in the amount of $59,432. Wilbur seconded the motion.
The motion passed 6-0.
Dresslar stated that the committee has $277,349 remaining to allocate.
Polson asked what the breakdown is on the HOME application for administration.
Dresslar made reference to the spreadsheet that was handed out; CDBG and HOME are on the same budget page. It is also on the last page of the application.
Swarts said that the home buyer down payment program is running about $30,000-$32,000 per home; if the committee allocated $60,000-$90,000 the program could fund a minimum of two or three new homeowners.
Hethcoat asked if the committee allocated around $95,000, could three houses would be assisted.
Swarts said yes, three could be done. TTH could also help subsidize the program with some of their funds if needed.
Dresslar said that there would be $182,349 left for the committee to allocate, if $95,000 were allocated to 15c.
Wilbur moved to partially fund 15c, First Time Homebuyers Program, in the amount of $95,000, and to partially fund 16a, LDCHA, Homeless Transitional Housing Program, in the amount of $182,349. Hethcoat seconded the motion.
The motion passed 6-0.
Polson moved to fully fund 15f, City of Lawrence Community Development Division, Administration, in the amount of $39,621. Mitchell seconded the motion.
The motion passed 6-0.
Hethcoat asked if CDBG administration has already been discussed.
Polson responded it had not been addressed yet, and she is not ready to approve it yet.
Swarts asked the committee how they saw the programs being administered if they determine not to fund the department.
Polson responded that she intends to fund administration, but wonders if the amount can be adjusted.
Swarts responded that it is not suggested that the CDAC take the money out of the CDBG administration pot to look at what else they can fund.
Polson said that was why she asked earlier in the meeting where the administration money goes if it is not allocated
Swarts asked for clarification if Polson meant if the money was not “funded” or the money was not “spent”.
Polson said she meant not fully funded.
Swarts clarified usage of funds for Administration. Administration is subject to a cap, which is 20% of the grant for CDBG and 10% of the grant for HOME. If the committee does not allocate for the Administration, then the opportunity is lost to spend the money if you have some item you need to do administratively to run the programs.
Hethcoat asked if item funded Swarts’ salary.
Swarts replied that yes, it funds her salary and additionally it funds Dresslar’s salary directly, along with a little bit of the clerical staff cost and office rent and a small amount for the historical planner. Swarts stated that her position will be filled when she retires and that the City will not leave the position vacant.
Swarts stated that if they cut the grant, then the cap drops. The City will not provide general funds for the program.
6. Miscellaneous/Calendar.
The next meeting is February 14, 2013. David Cronin will be in attendance to discuss the Beacon project. Dresslar will contact Zollner and see if she is available to attend to discuss the Breezedale project.
The date of Swarts’ community retirement reception is March 20, 2013, from 3-6 p.m. at the Lawrence Art Center. Invitations will be sent to all committee members.
7. Public Comment.
There was no additional public comment.
8. Adjourn.
Mitchell moved to adjourn the January 24, 2013 meeting of the CDAC at 7:00 pm. The motion was seconded by Wilbur and passed 6-0.
Attendance Record
|
Members |
Jan 10 |
Jan 24 |
Feb 14 |
Feb 28 |
Mar 14 |
Mar 28 |
Apr 11 |
Apr 25 |
May |
Jun |
July |
Aug 8 |
Aug 22 |
Sept 12 |
Sept 26 |
Oct 10 |
Oct 24 |
Nov 14 |
Dec 14 |
|
Deron Belt |
+ |
E |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Linda Bush |
E* |
+ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Eric Hethcoat |
+ |
+ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Quinn Miller |
+ |
E |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Julie Mitchell |
+ |
+ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Vern Norwood |
+ |
E |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Aimee Polson |
+ |
+ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
David Teixeira |
+ |
E |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Patrick Wilbur |
+ |
+ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
James Minor |
+ |
+ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
E Excused Absence
U Unexcused Absence
X Meeting Cancelled – Weather Conditions
- Meeting Cancelled – Committee Vote/No Business
* First meeting after appointment
** Last Meeting Prior to expired term