Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAGENDA REPORT 1996 0327 CC ADJ ITEM 08AITY OF MOORPARK AGENDA REPORT TO: The Honorable City Council FROM: Donald P. Reynolds Jr., Administrative AICTION: Serviges Man DATE: February 28, 1996, (CC Mtg. March 6, 1996) SUBJECT: Consider the Reappropriation of 1994 and 1995 Community Development Block Grant ( "CDBG ") Funds, Estimated to be $49,984 Consistent with past years, staff is presenting the status of un- obligated CDBG funds from prior allocations with the intent to reallocate the funds to active projects. It is most efficient to consider the reallocation in conjunction with the Council's consideration for uses related to the upcoming CDBG entitlement grant for 1996/97. The annual entitlement considerations are presented to Council in a separate report on this agenda. In its report to Council January 17, 1996, staff identified that there will be surplus funds available to be reallocated, as presented in the attachment. The estimated balance available of $48,984 is currently allocated to four specific inactive projects, and can be used for any form of public improvement, housing, or land acquisition that meets the national objectives of CDBG. In consideration of reallocating past inactive CDBG funds, three federal needs should be referenced in addition to meeting the national objectives, which include: 1) the need to use the moneys in an expedient way, having less than 1.5 percent of past appropriations in the current balance; 2) the likelihood that CDBG may be significantly reduced by Congress next fiscal year, and; 3) allocating funds to programs consistent with the five year Consolidated Plan submitted to HUD in May of 1995. In order to stay ahead of the HUD expenditure requirement, fast moving projects have to be identified. It appears as though the City will not use $208,457 allocated for Wicks Road slope reconstruction and Valley Road improvements during this fiscal year, which places the City in a situation where these funds must be expended in 1996/97 to stay ahead of the HUD requirement. These two projects will most likely be'completed in 1996/97, but the anticipated completion for new projects will not likely occur until fiscal year 1997/98. 1 Last July, the City expressed concern to Congress as it considered reducing CDBG by 50 percent, and the 1996/97 CDBG was cut 10 percent. With anticipation that there will be even less funds available in 1997/98, the Council may prefer to allocate funds now (despite the HUD expenditure requirement) to projects that may not be completed until fiscal year 1997/98. The 1995 Consolidated Plan ( "Plan ") identifies the needs of the low income population in the County of Ventura over the next five years. Projects must be consistent with the needs addressed by this plan. Due to the funding caps placed on public service programs and administration uses, the County has advised the City that it prefers not to re- program the moneys for these uses. In the past, it was assumed that HUD measured these caps per grant allocation, but in a recent audit, it was realized that they measure compliance per expenditures made during the fiscal year. Therefore, the use of capped funds should be completed each fiscal year, regardless of the impact it may have on a particular entitlement award. The County could be at risk violating this requirement if a program subject to this restriction using 1995/96 moneys, is not used until fiscal year 1996/97. This is especially true when HUD reduces funding as it has for the 1996/97 program year, thereby lowering the County's cap for next fiscal year. Two of the four projects listed in the attachment are related to previously capped expenditures and two are not. The funding cap limitation applies to the at -risk teen public service allocation of $6,000, and the administration allocation with an estimated balance available of $13,700. The public improvement projects have been completed under budget, leaving an additional balance available of $30,284. All four balances combine for a total of $49,984. D USE In the accompanying report on this agenda, staff has detailed several proposals for the use of CDBG based upon the proposals received, and City generated concepts. Senior Center Improvements Page "42, objective "9" of the City's Goals and Objectives for fiscal year 1995/96, adopted October 4, 1995, directs the Community Services Department to: "Research the feasibility and funding for: 1) enclosing the rear patio as a senior activity room; 2) increase office space, and; 3) install a drop ceiling." CDBG appears to be the only resource currently available because of the current limitations of the General Fund, and recent federal reductions to the County's Older American's Act moneys ( "AAA Funds"). 2 rf�'t Because the facility was significantly improved in 1991, and because seniors represent a smaller percentage of the presumed low income population in Moorpark than other populations, (18 percent), staff did not portray the senior center to HUD as a high priority need. However, other jurisdictions in the Entitlement program did identify senior centers as being a priority, and with County approval, this use of funds may be acceptable. Nonetheless, a senior center improvement in Moorpark would first have to receive HUD and /or County approval to modify the current Moorpark contribution to the Consolidated Plan, before funds would be released. CDBG could be used to improve the ceiling per the request of Construction estimates have been for design and permits, the total Senior Center by providing a drop the Senior Advisory Committee. received at about $7,000. Adding cost would be close to $9,500. Should the Council consider funding the expansion of the Center at a proposed cost of $150,000, these funds could be used as a portion of this cost as well. The manner in which the expansion project has been proposed allows for the addition of either the conference room /pool table room, the office space, or both. If both proposals are approved, the contract would be more cost effective, adding the the drop ceiling, for a total cost estimated to be $159,500. Street improvement projects are listed as a high priority in the Consolidated Plan, and staff has estimated the total cost of six different eligible projects at a cost of approximately $800,000. Of that cost, $208,457 has already been allocated from last year, leaving a balance of unfunded needs equal to approximately $591,543. These needs could be met in part with funding from Gas Tax and Redevelopment funding. The key concern with the public improvement projects is the timing in relation to proposed federal reductions to CDBG, and the City's need to reduce the current fund balance. Valley Road improvements and Wicks Road slope repair projects will be ready within the next six months, requiring an estimated $250,000. The additional moneys could be added to the current allocation, to bring the total available to $258,441. The other four projects including the alley reconstruction, Wicks Road overlay, Everett Road storm drain, and Bonnie View Drive overlay may not have completed designs until the fall of 1997. These projects, although consistent with the Consolidated Plan and most likely eligible for CDBG, have to be considered with concerns related to future federal budget reductions and the HUD expenditure requirement. 3 '• i Sl! • —Wo -� The development of Villa Campesina Park may possibly be paid using CDBG. The estimated cost is $100,000, after taking into consideration the impact of proposed County flood channel improvements. As a condition of approval, the park was required to be constructed by the Villa Campesina residents. In addition to donated labor, an estimated $40,000 is available. The City would have to receive County approval of the park's service area which may be construed to be larger than the immediate neighborhood because it is intended to be a public park. The City would also have to receive a federal release of funds to build in a known flood plain. The inactive CDBG funds could be used to support project proposals from other agencies, and to address needs in the City which have not been formally addressed in a proposal. Projects identified in the Consolidated Plan but lacking formal proposals may include the removal of architectural barriers, housing, and a day -care facility serving low income residents. Other agencies requesting project funds include ARC of Ventura County, Food Share, and the Foster Home program administered by the County. Food Share received a City contribution in 1991 to expand their warehouse, and all three agencies have used CDBG effectively in the past. •AF - •. • That the City Council: 1) Receive public testimony for consideration in appropriating the 1994 and 1995 Community Development Block Grant funds estimated to be $49,984 and close the public hearing; 2) Defer final appropriations to the March 20, 1996, City Council meeting; 3) Direct the Budget and Finance Committee to review proposals prior to the March 20, 1996, Council meeting and make a recommendation to the Council for final appropriation. Attachment- Summary of Unobligated CDBG Moneys 4 CDBG SURPLUS MONEYS TO BE REALLOCATED TOTAL CDBG CDBG PROJECT ALLOCATION EXPENDITURES BALANCE FIRST STREET IMPROVEMENTS REMOVAL OF ARCHITECTURAL BARRIERS/ MOUNTAIN MEADOWS PLAY EQUIPMENT AT -RISK TEEN PROGRAM ADMINISTRATION* $298,231.00 $269,616.42 $28,614.58 $25,300.00 $23,631.03 $1,668.97 $6,000.00 $0.00 $6,000.00 $21,000.00 $7,300.00 $13,700.00 $350,531.00 $300,547.45 $49,983.55 *THIS FIGURE IS AN ESTIMATE, ALL OTHERS ARE ACTUAL BALANCES.