04/26/1982 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

e e - Ellen Miller-Wolfe, 985 Lewis, said she serves as staff to the Jefferson/Far West Neighborhood Advisory Group. She said that a member of that group had researched a number of options before developing the proposal to locate the preschool in a mobile unit at Ida Patterson School. She said one of the reasons that this proposal had been selected was that the school district would donate the land on which the mobile unit would be located. She said that the mobile unit could be obtained for under $10,000, excluding plumbing connections. There being no further testimony, public hearing was closed. Mr. Gleason addressed the issue of the costs of administering the CDSG program. He said that the definition of administration used by HUD differed from a more traditional definition of administration and included a number of items, such as program development and implementation, in addition to the more traditional definition of staff overhead. Councilor Lindberg said that he had discussed the issue of administrative costs with the regional HUD staff and had been told that the City is on the right track and is addressing the concerns raised by HUD. He said that due to the uncertain future of the block grant program, this may be the City's last opportunity to use block grant funds for alleviating blight in the core area. Mr. Obie moved, seconded by Ms. Schue, to approve the Community Development Slack Grant Application for FY 1982-83. Roll call vote; motion carried unanimously. 2. Consideration of Programs, Goals, and Criteria for Economic Development (memo, background material distributed) Ms. Hofmann said that the Council Subcommittee on Economic Development and the Joint COC/EDTT Subcommittee had both met earlier in the day to develop a recommendation on the COBG-funded economic development program. She distributed a memorandum summarizing the recommendations of the two subcommittees. Ms. Hofmann reviewed the HUO criteria for use of CDBG funds and said that these would be treated as basic requirements to be met by any proposals for use of the economic development funds. She then reviewed nine criteria developed by the subcommittees for use in ranking specific proposals. She said that the subcom- mittee hoped proposals would meet as many of these criteria as possible, but recognized that no proposal would be likely to meet all nine criteria. The nine criteria are: 1) clarity of proposal; 2) leveraging jobs; 3) leveraging dollars; 4) maximum use of local resources; 5) coordination with existing guidelines, programs, and services; 6) quick results; 7) long-range benefits; 8) quality of life enhancement; and 9) payback of COBG funds. Ms. Hofmann then reviewed a proposal developed by staff for a three-phase program of assistance to small businesses. She said the staff proposed that phases I and II be implemented this year and that phase III be considered for future COBG funding. Ms. Hofmann reviewed the proposed process and time line for requestinq and evaluating proposals for use of the COBG economic development funds. This time line called for proposals to be submitted by July 1, 1982; MINUTES--Eugene City Council April 26, 1982 Page 3