Travis County Commissioners Court
November 24, 2009,
Item 1
Now, number 1 is a public hearing to receive comments regarding the proposed substantial amendments for program years 2006 through 2009 action plans related to the use of community development block grant funds available through the u.s.
department of housing and urban development.
>> move that the public hearing be opened.
>> second.
>> all in favor?
that passes by unanimous vote.
>> good morning.
>> good morning, cdbg planner with the health and human services and veterans service department.
i'm here to provide an introduction of the public hearing to receive public input for the proposed substantial amendments for the program years 2006 to 2009, action plans related to the use of cdbg funds.
every year the progress of projects from previous cdbg action plans is evaluated to determine if any changes to funding project design or the deletion or addition of projects needs to occur.
substantial amendments, according to our citizen participation plan occur when there's a change in the location or beneficiaries of a project.
there's a change in the scope of the project by more than 25%, or there's a change in the funding of a project or the funding of a new project.
substantial amendments must go through a 30 day public comment period and they must have a public hearing which is why we're here today.
so I will briefly go over each of the change projects for program year 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009.
i will start with program year 2006.
and for the project land acquisition for the production of new housing units which is with habitat for humanity, we are proposing for the assistance to be in the form of a 10-year forgivable loan.
this change guarantees that housing units will remain affordable to low income residents for a minimum of five years.
and provides the possibility of program income to create more housing opportunities in the future.
another project that we're proposing to change is the apache shores street improvement projects.
the propose change, the cost savings of that project to be reprogramed to the lava lane street improvement project and the rationale behind this change is for more timely and efficient way of reallocating funds, should there be additional moneys or cost savings available at the end of the program.
we're not sure of whether that would happen or not.
but if that's the case, then we can move on without having to come back again through another substantial amendment.
that's basically the same proposed change for this street improvement lava lane project which is any cost savings from that design phase to go to the construction phase.
usually projects, you know, one wouldn't have to go through a substantial amendment because of the nature of the cdbg projects where we receive public input on a lot of the changes we take, that's why we're coming here.
for the program year 2007, action plans, it's the same changes of the program year 2006 action plan.
it's the same project, which is a funding with funds from py '06 and py '07 so the same changes.
for the program year 2008 action plan for the project again for the affordable housing project with Austin habitat for humanity, we are proposing to reprogram 500,000 from infrastructure development to the development of affordable housing through land acquisition.
so basically, it's the same project, it's only -- it's only -- we're proposing this change because -- for h.u.d., that's a different activity.
but it's remaining for the same project.
and -- and the rationale behind that is that it will allow for a more timely spending of funds while achieving the same goal of affordability.
for the home rehabilitation project, we are proposing to establish a limit of up to $24,999 for households through a five-year forgivable loan.
in the past, the previous limit was $5,000 and staff found that that was not enough to create substantive repairs, especially in the unincorporated areas, so we are proposing that change to a five year forgivable loan.
and another change is for the program to target households at or below 80% of the median family income.
below we established at 50%, now we are also allowing those that fall between 50 and 80% of the median family income to also benefit from the program.
we also believe those homeowners are faced with little discretionary funds from the homeowners maintenance and will also benefit from this change.
for the program year 2009 action plan for the project, home buyers assistance, we are also proposing for the program to target households at or below 60% of the median family income.
initially we had set it up at 60% of the median family income, again, we found that given the current market this change would allow much needed assistance for those that fall between 60 and 80% of the median family income level and will make the project more viable.
the public comment period, we are accepting comments from November 11 -- we started accepting comments from November 11, at 8:00 a.m.
and we're going to end the public comment period on December 10th, 2009 at 5:00 p.m.
to access the full draft of the document visit our Travis County cdbg website.
which is www.traviscountytx.gov s www.traviscountytx.govs lashcdbg.
yougetacopybyvisitin ganyoftheseven travisc yougetacopybyvisitinganyofthesec yougetacopybyvisitinganyoftheser yougetacopybyvisitinganyofthesey to5128543460.
youcansubmityour writ youcansubmityourwrit youcansubmityourwrittencommentsg youcansubmityourwrittencommentsm youcansubmityourwrittencommentsn dhumanservicesand vet youcansubmityourwrittencommentst youcansubmityourwrittencommentss youcansubmityourwrittencomments, Austin,texas, or e-mail it to christie moffett at the e-mail.
>> we have reason to believe, I take it, that h.u.d.
will approve these amendments.
>> yeah.
usually substantial amendments don't have to be approved by h.u.d.
we -- we submit it later with the action plan and they don't need to approve it, but they do see it.
>> and the program changes that we are -- that we are requesting are in alignment with their regulations and policies.
so we don't find that they will have any issues with the changes.
>> okay.
>> we are posted for a public hearing today.
if you would like to give comments, please come forward.
mr.
reeferseed.
>> thank you, sir.
i'm ronnie
>> [inhale] reeferseed, my question is just with the -- with the first the reprogramming.
is that -- where there's suddenly half a million dollars taken from the -- according to what was on the screen there, taken from infrastructure improvements to land acquisition.
i mean, who decided to do that and what's going to happen to that infrastructure that's not being maintained for that half million dollars and I mean so my basic question is who is supervising this reprogramming?
you say it's up to them, you can just do it --
>> well, what happened was that originally land acquisition was funded through program years py 2006 and py '07.
the land that habitat identified needed infrastructure support.
and we found there was an issue with the land and we did not provide site approval for that property.
therefore, we asked them if they wanted to continue with that investment, we needed to spend money more quickly so we couldn't continue to leave it in infrastructure development because it was going to take them some time to identify another piece of property.
so we offered them the opportunity to either move that to additional land acquisition dollars or for us to go and find another project to fund.
so habitat requested that we move the money into land acquisition, the Commissioners court approved that project idea and now it's going through public comment.
so it's the same, it's the same investment with habitat that we were originally going to make.
it just -- they will now be buying developed property.
there won't -- they won't be buying raw land that has to have infrastructure put on it.
>> I see.
it's a cost that's eliminated.
>> right, exactly.
it's the same amount of investment to the same subrecipient.
>> we channeling it.
>> exactly.
>> okay.
thanks.
i wasn't clear.
>> okay.
>> thanks.
>> would anyone else like to give testimony during this public hearing?
if so, please come forward.
move that the public hearing be closed.
>> second.
>> all in favor?
that passes by unanimous vote.
this will be back on the court's agenda after December 11th.
>> yes, we will bring it back on December 15th where we will be requesting that the court approve the final draft.
>> okay.
>> thank you very much.
>> thank you.
>> thank you.
The Closed Caption log for this Commissioners Court agenda item is provided by Travis County Internet Services. Since this file is derived from the Closed Captions created during live cablecasts, there are occasional spelling and grammatical errors. This Closed Caption log is not an official record the Commissioners Court Meeting and cannot be relied on for official purposes. For official records please contact the County Clerk at (512) 854-4722.
Last Modified:
Tuesday, November 24, 2009 1:40 PM
