Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02/21/1977 Meeting e M I NUT E S EUGENE CITY COUNCIL February 21, 1977 Special meeting of the Common Council of the City of Eugene, Oregon, was called to order by His Honor Mayor Gus Keller at 7:30 p.m. on February 21, 1977, in the Council Chambers for the purpose of consideration of the Community Develop- ment Block Grant application for 1977-78. Council members present were: Eric Haws, D. W. Hamel, Tom Williams, Ray Bradley, Jack Delay, Scott Lieuallen, Brian Obie and Betty Smith. Mayor Keller opened the meeting, saying this meeting had been called to hear public testimony on the HCDC 1977-78 Community Development Act application. He asked Chairman Jack Delay for some introductory comments. Mr. Delay expressed appreciation to the hardworking people in the community, especially to Neil Murray and Tom Williams, Charles Kupper and his fine staff, and all the membel's of HCDC. He said this was the third and final public hearing, and indicated some adjustments had been made based on previous hearings. The application reflected what he felt was the best allocation of scarce resources for many needed services in the community. Public hearing was opened. - Jim Lemert, 10 East 40th, spoke on behalf of the South Hills Neighborhood Association. He said he felt there were problems in terms of the way certain neighborhood groups were encouraged to develop proposals under this funding, when actually they had no chance for getting the funds. He said he did not oppose the allocation of funds, but that perhaps some changes should be made in advertising for proposal development and a better statement of the criteria used to judge th~ proposals. He said his group had submitted two proposals, for a total of $9,000, and neither were approved or funded. He felt HCDC appeared to depart from its own guidelines, as according to HCDC materials received by his group, 15%-20% of the funds were to be available to other areas (excepting BetheljDanebo, central city, and the University areas). He said that considerable time had been spent by his group developing these two proposals, and reiterated his belief that advertising should be changed and description portions of the program needed to be changed. -- Will Carlstrom, 1091 West Broadway, spoke regarding the general priority of the program in regard to community development funds. He felt there was a lack of attention to definitions between priority and needs, indicating he was in favor of more social services being funded: heal th, dental, pre- and post-natal care. He said there were many people with less resources available to them than others, and funding these social services would provide a resource not otherwise available to them. He felt the present funding put a priority on phys ical stock--houses and their development --and said very Ii ttle money had been allocated to social services. He said he sees people who need health care, and going without it. He said he thought it was the intention of federal 13't . funding to be available to people and has not seen evidence of that happening. He felt there was need to look at the priorities for funding, especially in terms of needs for people. He also indicated he had not received any infor- mation concerning public hearings, and wondered if the Council should not make better efforts to see that citizens in the community are informed through better newspaper advertising of such items of interest and public hearings held. He again cited what he felt to be a discrepancy between what is being provided and what is needed. He said the funds should be locally distributed, and that HCDC delegate the power to the neighborhood groups to allocate the money. He asked that priorities be set and have the neighborhood goups distribute the money as they see fit, with much less restriction from HCDC. Al McWayne, 745 West 20th, Executive Board member of the Friendly Area Neighbors, said his group had been working on a park proposal to be located at 22nd and Madison since 1975. He said the plans had been submitted to both the Parks Department and the Planning Commission, and that $60,000 had tentatively been allocated for the park. Later they were informed that the Commission decided not to use the money for that site as there already were too many parks in the area. He said the proposal had been presented at the HCDC hearing two weeks ago, and he felt the funds were put back into a contingency fund. He indicated this was a 2-acre parcel for a park in the neighborhood, and that it was one of few sites which could be used for a park in that area. He said the group was worred that the few remaining parcels would be cut up and sold as small building sites. He requested that Council put the $60,000 back into the budget for its original use as a park site on Madison Street. '- Public hearing was closed, there being no further testimony. Mr. Charles Kupper, tiC De , addressed the concerns. To Mr. Lemert's concerns, Mr. Kupper acknowledged a good point had been made which showed the dilemma faced in advertising. He said HCDC felt an obligation to advertise to all neighborhood groups, and that under regulations they have to advertise in a newspaper of general circulation. To Mr. Carlstrom's concerns, Mr. Kupper indicated there was concern over setting priorities. He said it was true that the application concentrates on physical programs, but that the very nature of the Act points it in that direction as it calls for physical developments in blighted areas of a community. Social services are permitted, but they are not to exceed 10% of the total grant. He said the neighborhoods have to decide which way they want their mon-ey to be spent. In regard to the Friendly Park proposal, he said it was decided to hold the money aside to allow review of whether the site is the best place to put a park. Manager indicated that $62,000 in the proposal is ear-marked for social services. He said this is a substantial change in Council policy, where in the past most social services were funded out of federal revenue sharing monies. The allocation in the grant application provides some effort for social services, although HCDC took the position that these social services are not likely to be funded beyond a year, and therefore has allocated the money in the best way it sees fit to accomplish the most for neighborhood groups for one year only. Manager stated that this Community Development Act money cannot and should not be used to fund social services on a continuing basis and that appeared to be the intent of HCDC. ~ Special Council Meeting 2/21/77 - 2 \35 - Mayor Keller indicated a concern as to the appropriateness of allocating $62,000 for social services when large amounts of funds are allocated for such services through federal revenue sharing. He said those who receive these funds will be anticipating receiving them in the future. Mr. Delay answered there were not enough funds to meet all the demands. He said, however, that this is a very specific allowable objective of the Block Grant. He also indicated that HCDC has made it clear to the groups that this is simply "seed money" to get programs started. Ms. Smith said it was her understanding that this was simply money to get programs going, also. She indicated it is very difficult to free up any existing monies in other programs to start new programs from revenue sharing. Mr. Lieuallen called attention to the Westside latchkey program, which is a very specific program not being funded through any other city program. He said the need exists and this money would provide an outlet for this need. Also, he said that there is no such program currently in the federal revenue sharing fund program. He also noted his understanding was that the money has to be aimed at programs which the city will not be funding otherwise. Mr. Kupper said this was not entirely correct, that money can be put into programs the city wants to develop further. It does, however, prohibit substituting block grant money for programs the city is currently financing. - Mr. I-laws moved seconded by Mr. Hamel to approve the application as presented for the 1977-78 Community Development Block Grant for the City of Eugene. The motion carried unanimously, with all Council members present voting aye. Meeting was adjourned. c~r?/~ City Manager e Special Council Meeting 2/21/77 - 3 \3b .'" ._",.