Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 07311984 - IO.2 TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS FROM: Internal Operations Committee Contra Costa ` DATE: July 18, 1984 CourYty SUBJECT: RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE SPECIFIC REQUEST(S) OR RECOMMENDATION(S) & BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION RECOMMENDATIONS: 1 . Approve the following allocation system for the 1985-1986 program year: Housing 47% "New" Development Assistance 15% minimum Economic Development 20% Loan Fund for Businesses 10% minimum Open Category* 20% Administration 8% Contingency 5% 100% The "open category" would include all proposals which are not housing or economic development. The primary types would be public works and public facilities for specific neighborhoods. But, in order to have an open process which includes eligible public service proposals and other activities eligible for CDBG funding, this category should be labeled "open". 2. Abolish all existing Neighborhood Preservation Committees effective July 24, 1984, with the understanding that individual cities are free to establish whatever project screening mechanism they wish and.that local organizations or the former Neighborhood Preservation Committees can submit proposals from the unincorporated areas of the County. 3. Abolish the existing Housing and Community Development Advisory Committee, effective July 24, 1984. 4. Create a new Housing and Community Development Advisory Committee effective July 25, 1984 consisting of fifteen (15) members selected as follows: A. Each city in the County, with the exception of the cities of Concord, Richmond, and Walnut Creek may submit the names of up to two (2) nominees, excluding members of the City Council. CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: X YES SIGNATURE: RECOMMENDA OF C NTY AD INISTRATOR X RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE X_APPROV TH R S NATURES pom`/P,o s' Nancy C. F den ACTION OF BOA D ON July 24. 1984 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER The .Board APPROVED the above recommendations with the following amendments: 1 . Increase the allocation for "administration" to l0 percent. 2. Reduce the allocation for "open" to 18 percent. VOTE OF SUPERVISORS I UNANIMOUS (ABSENT ) I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE AYES: NOES: AND CORRECT COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN ABSENT: ABSTAIN: AND ENTERED ON THE MINUTES OF THE BO"0382 County Administrator OF SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN. Director of Planning CC: Auditor-Controller ATTESTED Contra Costa Mayors' Conference J.R. O SON COUNTY CLERK Chair, HCD Advisory Committee AND OFFICIO CLERK OF THE BOARD Members=-Board of Supervisors M382/7-83 BY DEPUTY -2- 4. (continued) B. Each member of the Board of Supervisors will nominate three (3) individuals for appointment by the Board of Supervisors as follows: District 1 Three (3) nominees, including one member of the existing advisory committee and two (2) from the names submitted by the cities. District 2 Three (3) nominees, including one member of the existing advisory committee and two (2) from the names submitted by the cities. District 3 Three (3) nominees, including one member of the existing advisory committee and one (1 ) from the names submitted by the cities. District 4 Three (3) nominees, including one member of the existing advisory committee and one (1 ) from the names submitted by the cities. District 5 Three (3) nominees, including one member of the existing advisory committee and two (2) from the names submitted by the cities. 5. A city nominee_ could be an existing Advisory Committee member, thereby creating more appointment latitude for a member of the Board of Supervisors. An appointee need not be a resident of the appointing Supervisor's district. Four appointees should be from cities which have and could continue to have neighborhood preservation areas. These cities are Antioch, Brentwood, E1 Cerrito, Martinez, Pleasant Hill , and San Pablo. 6. The provision for appointment of members of the existing advisory committee applies only to initial appointments. Once the new advisory committee is formed this provision no longer applies. In the case of future vacancies of city nominees, the member of the Board of Supervisors responsible for the nomination may utilize the existing pool of names or may request the cities in his/her district to submit new names for consideration. 7. Terms for members of the Housing and Community Development Advisory Committee will be for four years, expiring June 30 except that the initial appointees shall draw lots; seven (7) of the initial appointees shall serve terms expiring June 30, 1986 and eight (8) of the initial appointees shall serve terms expiring June 30, 1988. 8. The charge given to the Advisory Committee is to work with the County Planning Department to develop recommendations on the use of annual entitle- ment grants consistent with the allocation system and Federal regulations to best meet the needs of lower income persons in the urban county. 9. The members of the Housing and Community Development Advisory Committee - shall receive no compensation, but may be reimbursed for actual and necessary expenses, including mileage, meals, and child care. 10. The Clerk of the Board of Supervisors shall follow existing Board policy regarding notice of the formation of the Advisory Committee and the existence of vacancies. 00.0383 II 1 -3- 11 . The Director of Planning shall advise the cities entitled ,to submit the names of nominees of their right to do so and shall establish a reasonable deadline for receipt of the cities' nominations. 12. The Director of Planning shall poll the members of the existing Advisory Committee to determine which members wish to be considered for appointment to the new Advisory Committee. 13. Each member of the Board of Supervisors is urged to consult with County CDBG staff before making his or her nominations to insure adequate continuity and the overall geographic representation and composition of the Advisory Committee. BACKGROUND:- On May 1 , 1984, the Board referred to our Committee the recommendations of the Housing and Community Development Advisory Committee on a variety of matters relating to the Housing and Community Development Program. Our Committee met with staff from the Planning Department and representatives of the Advisory Committee on June 25, 1984. Supervisor Fanden indicated her concern with the proposal to abolish the Neighborhood Preservation Committees. In addition, the Contra Costa Mayors' Conference expressed concerns about the Advisory Committee's recommenda- tions. Planning Department staff were asked to review the concerns of Supervisor Fanden and the Mayors' Conference and return to the Committee on July 16, 1984. On July 16, 1984, we met with the Director of Planning and his staff, representa- tives from the Advisory Committee, and representatives from the Mayors' Conference. The Director of Planning reviewed the attached July 11 , 1984 memorandum with us. The representatives from the Mayors' Conference expressed support for the compromise position recommended by the Director of Planning. We believe the above recommenda- tions substantially respond to everyone' s concerns and recommend their adoption. We have requested that this report be listed at 10:30 a.m. on July 24, 1984 because we have circulated the Director of Planning's July 11 report to all the cities in case some wish to speak to our recommendations. 000384