15.A.
City Council Meeting - FINAL
- Meeting Date:
- 04/15/2014
- Co-Submitter:
- Justyna Costa, Housing & Grants Administrator
- From:
- Justyna Costa, Housing & Grants Administrator
Information
TITLE:
Consideration and Adoption of Resolution No. 2014-14: A resolution approving the City of Flagstaff 2014/2015 Annual Action Plan and authorizing its submission to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD).
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
1) Read Resolution No. 2014-14 by title only
2) City Clerk reads Resolution No. 2014-14 (if approved above)
3) Adopt Resolution No. 2014-14
2) City Clerk reads Resolution No. 2014-14 (if approved above)
3) Adopt Resolution No. 2014-14
Policy Decision or Reason for Action:
An Annual Action Plan (AA Plan) is a HUD-required document that specifies how the annual allocation of Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds will be spent. The submission of the AA Plan is required to maintain the City of Flagstaff’s annual entitlement allocation of CDBG and is due to HUD on May 15, 2014.
Subsidiary Decisions Points:
Staff is presenting Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funding options to City Council at the April 8, 2014 agenda review for discussion and consideration.
Subsidiary Decisions Points:
Staff is presenting Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funding options to City Council at the April 8, 2014 agenda review for discussion and consideration.
Financial Impact:
The 2014/2015 CDBG allocation is $570,941, an increase of $5,169 from last year. In addition, the City of Flagstaff is able to combine program income and reallocated funds from previous years to increase the funds available for allocation. Total program income and reallocated funds will equal $44,527.73 for a grand total of $615,468.73 available for the 2014/15 allocation.
Connection to Council Goal:
Effective Governance - The City of Flagstaff is considered an entitlement community and receives an annual allocation of CDBG funding. CDBG funds over the past 15 years have provided benefit to thousands of Flagstaff residents.
Has There Been Previous Council Decision on This:
No
Options and Alternatives:
A) Approve Resolution No. 2014-14 and authorize its submission to HUD.
B) Modify the AA Plan and authorize its submission to HUD at a later time.
C) Not approve Resolution No. 2014-14, not submit the AA Plan to HUD and risk losing CDBG funding for 2014/2015 and possibly future allocations.
B) Modify the AA Plan and authorize its submission to HUD at a later time.
C) Not approve Resolution No. 2014-14, not submit the AA Plan to HUD and risk losing CDBG funding for 2014/2015 and possibly future allocations.
Background/History:
Every two years, staff comes to a Council Work Session to request guidance on Council CDBG Priorities and the overall CDBG process for the coming two years. On January 8, 2013 staff received Council guidance to conduct a formal public proposal process to assess the community need for CDBG funds. In addition, Council asked staff to research possible infrastructure options within target neighborhoods. In the 2014 CDBG process, nine external agency proposals were received along with two City of Flagstaff requests.
Housing staff is responsible for determining whether a proposed activity is eligible, and for conducting a risk assessment of the project and applying agency. Federal funds require administrative knowledge and capacity to ensure compliant and timely expenditure of funds. Additionally, a committee comprised of three community representatives (one non-profit representative, one governmental representative, and one representative from a brokerage firm) and three City staff met to review the external proposals and rank them by consensus. Rankings are created primarily to serve as a risk and benefit assessment and are a crucial part of the staff recommendations forwarded to City Council. Below is a list of the proposals in ranking order. The proposals are divided between Housing and Public Service categories as they have two separate funding limits and different criteria. Internal City of Flagstaff proposals are presented to meet City Council priorities or other unmet needs in the community and are not ranked (NR) competitively with the other proposals as the City would administer these projects directly. A comprehensive Proposal Book that included each of the below proposals was distributed to Council the week of March 24, 2014.
Housing staff is responsible for determining whether a proposed activity is eligible, and for conducting a risk assessment of the project and applying agency. Federal funds require administrative knowledge and capacity to ensure compliant and timely expenditure of funds. Additionally, a committee comprised of three community representatives (one non-profit representative, one governmental representative, and one representative from a brokerage firm) and three City staff met to review the external proposals and rank them by consensus. Rankings are created primarily to serve as a risk and benefit assessment and are a crucial part of the staff recommendations forwarded to City Council. Below is a list of the proposals in ranking order. The proposals are divided between Housing and Public Service categories as they have two separate funding limits and different criteria. Internal City of Flagstaff proposals are presented to meet City Council priorities or other unmet needs in the community and are not ranked (NR) competitively with the other proposals as the City would administer these projects directly. A comprehensive Proposal Book that included each of the below proposals was distributed to Council the week of March 24, 2014.
| Housing Activities | Proposal/Project | Request | Ranking |
| BOTHANDS, Inc. | Financial Assist. & Counseling | $150,000 | 106 |
| The Guidance Center | Inverrary House Minor Rehab | $32,651 | 100 |
| Catholic Charities | Shelter Rehabilitation | $27,200 | 90 |
| Northland Family Help Center | Rehab - Sustainable HVAC System | $115,000 | 48 |
| City of Flagstaff | Owner Occupied Housing Rehab | $125,000 | NR |
| City of Flagstaff | Arroyo Park - Phase 2 | $100,000 | NR |
| Public Service Activities | Proposal/Project | Request | Ranking |
| Northland Hospice | Operational Asst. - Olivia White | $20,000 | 106 |
| Catholic Charities | PATH Operational Assistance | $30,000 | 104 |
| Flagstaff Shelter Services | Women's Shelter Operations | $38,911 | 103 |
| DNA People's Legal | Housing Legal Asst. | $25,070 | 85 |
| Big Brothers Big Sisters | Program Recruiter | $24,905 | 80 |
Key Considerations:
HUD requires that funded activities implement strategies from the Consolidated Plan. All recommended activities further this goal. Also important are project eligibility and viability. CDBG funds must be used to further the CDBG Primary Objective to develop viable urban communities by providing decent housing, a suitable living environment and expanded economic opportunities principally for low and moderate-income persons in Flagstaff (80% of the AMI = $47,600 currently for a family of four).
HUD has two funding caps with regard to the use of CDBG funds. Public Service Activities are capped at 15% of the allocation and Program Administration is capped at 20% of the allocation. The rest of the available funding can be spent on Housing/Economic Development Activities.
Staff is prepared to present and discuss the following recommendations with City Council at the April 8, 2014 agenda review.
Public Service Funding Recommendation
Federal CDBG regulations do not allow more than 15% of funds to be spent on Public Service Activities; $91,000 for Program Year 14/15. The top ranked agencies total a recommendation allocation of $88,911. As CDBG regulations prohibit going above the 15% cap, and $2,089 is not enough to fund an additional activity, staff is recommending to add the remaining balance into the Housing Activities recommendations, where there is no cap. Below are the funding recommendations for the Public Service Category:
Housing Funding Recommendation
There is $404,557.73 ($402,468.73+$2,089) in CDBG funds available for Housing Activities. Below are the funding recommendations for the Housing Category:
Administration Recommendation
CDBG administration and compliance are limited to 20% of the allocation.
HUD has two funding caps with regard to the use of CDBG funds. Public Service Activities are capped at 15% of the allocation and Program Administration is capped at 20% of the allocation. The rest of the available funding can be spent on Housing/Economic Development Activities.
Staff is prepared to present and discuss the following recommendations with City Council at the April 8, 2014 agenda review.
Public Service Funding Recommendation
Federal CDBG regulations do not allow more than 15% of funds to be spent on Public Service Activities; $91,000 for Program Year 14/15. The top ranked agencies total a recommendation allocation of $88,911. As CDBG regulations prohibit going above the 15% cap, and $2,089 is not enough to fund an additional activity, staff is recommending to add the remaining balance into the Housing Activities recommendations, where there is no cap. Below are the funding recommendations for the Public Service Category:
| Public Service Activities | Proposal/Project | Request | Recommendation | Ranking |
| Northland Hospice | Operational Asst, - Olivia White | $20,000 | $20,000 | 106 |
| Catholic Charities | PATH Operational Asst. | $30,000 | $30,000 | 104 |
| Flagstaff Shelter Services | Women's Shelter Operations | $38,911 | $38,911 | 103 |
Housing Funding Recommendation
There is $404,557.73 ($402,468.73+$2,089) in CDBG funds available for Housing Activities. Below are the funding recommendations for the Housing Category:
| Housing Activities | Proposal/Project | Request | Recommendation | Ranking |
| BOTHANDS, Inc. | Financial Assist. & Counseling | $150,000 | $150,000 | 106 |
| The Guidance Center | Inverrary House Minor Rehab | $32,651 | $32,651 | 100 |
| Catholic Charities | Shelter Rehabilitation | $27,200 | $27,200 | 90 |
| City of Flagstaff | Owner Occupied Housing Rehab | $125,000 | $110,000 | NR |
| City of Flagstaff | Arroyo Park - Roadway Access Improvements | $100,000 | $84,706.73 | NR |
Administration Recommendation
CDBG administration and compliance are limited to 20% of the allocation.
Total Administration = $122,000
$39,966 = 7% Estimated City Indirect Rate
$82,034 =13% Grant Compliance and Administration
$39,966 = 7% Estimated City Indirect Rate
$82,034 =13% Grant Compliance and Administration
Expanded Financial Considerations:
The attached Resolution 2014-14 is reflective of the recommendations listed above. The 2014/2015 CDBG recommendations are based on a total of $615,468.73 in available funding and an estimated City of Flagstaff indirect rate of 7%.
- The 2014/2015 allocation is $570,941, a $5,169 increase from 2013/2014.
- In addition to the annual allocation, there is $41,844.70 available from prior year program income and $2,683.03 in reallocated funds for a total of $615,468.73 available to allocate. Program income is gathered through the repayment of loans of the Owner Occupied Housing Rehabilitation and Homebuyer Financial Assistance programs. Reallocated funds primarily derive from activities that complete their scope of work but do not spend down all of their funds. This year's reallocated funding comes from the leftover funding of the 2012/2013 Flagstaff Shelter Services - Rehabilitation of Shelter grant.
- Federal CDBG regulations do not allow more than 15% of funds to be spent on public service activities; $91,000. Staff is recommending an allocation of $88,911.
-
CDBG administration and compliance are limited to 20% of the allocation; $122,000.
- Of the $122,000, an estimated 7% or $39,966 will be required for the City’s indirect allocation, leaving 13% or $82,034 to be utilized for compliance and administration associated with the grant.
Community Benefits and Considerations:
CDBG funds, leveraged with other private and public funds over the past 15 years, have resulted in benefits to thousands of Flagstaff residents.
Community Involvement:
The Annual Action Plan process has two opportunities for Community Involvement.
Involve - The public participation process is a requirement of the Plan and encourages public involvement.
Collaborate - The ranking committee is an example of public participation at the collaboration level.
Involve - The public participation process is a requirement of the Plan and encourages public involvement.
Collaborate - The ranking committee is an example of public participation at the collaboration level.