HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes City Council - 02/24/1998 - JointI HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing is a true and correct copy of the minutes of the joint
meeting of the City Council and Planning Commission of the City of Corpus Christi of February 24,
1998, which were approved by the City Council on March 10, 1998.
WITNESSETH MY HAND AND SEAL, this 10th day of March, 1998.
Armando Chapa
City Secretary
SEAL
MINUTES
JOINT MEETING OF THE
CORPUS CHRISTI CITY COUNCIL
AND CORPUS CHRISTI PLANNING COMMISSION
February 24, 1998
12:18 p.m.
CITY COUNCIL
Mayor Loyd Neal
Mayor Pro Tem Dr. David McNichols
Javier D. Colmenero
Alex L. Garcia Jr.
Dr. Arnold Gonzales
Betty Jean Longoria
John Longoria
ABSENT
Melody Cooper
Edward Martin
Brooke Sween -McGloin (Planning Comm.)
PLANNING COMMISSION
Richard Serna, Chairman
Bert Quintanilla, Vice Chairman
Brent Chesney
Ron Guzman
Billy McDaniel
Danny Noyola
Sylvia Perez
David M. Underbrink
City Staff Present
City Manager Bill Hennings
City Attorney James R. Bray Jr.
City Secretary Armando Chapa
Mayor Neal called the meeting to order in the Basement Training Room of City Hall. He
noted that a quorum of the Council was present to conduct the joint meeting of the City Council and
Planning Commission to discuss Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funding guidelines
and other matters related to the Commissioners' duties.
Mr. Tom Utter, Assistant City Manager for Development Services, said he intended to
address three main issues: a history of the CDBG program, CDBG guidelines the City Council has
adopted, and the present funding situation. He first gave a detailed description of the CDBG program
both nationally and locally. He said the program has changed over the years and it is now known as
the Consolidated Annual Action Plan (AAP), which consists of all the CDBG funding, HOME
program (for housing needs), and the ESG (Emergency Shelter Grant) program. In addition, funding
for the Housing Authority falls under the AAP.
Mr. Utter said that since 1976, the Planning Commission has held public hearings on the
AAP and they make recommendations to the City Council, which holds its own public hearing each
year. He noted that over several years the City Council established CDBG guidelines which were
codified on March 22, 1994, and reaffirmed by the Council on November 18, 1997, as follows:
A. No Community Development Block Grant funds be authorized to applicant agencies
for the support of operating expenses.
B. No capital grants will be made without sufficient evidence of the financial capacity
of the applying agency to operate the program.
Minutes
Joint Meeting
February 24, 1998
Page 2
C. Priority will be given to those applying agencies that make substantial new capital
contributions to the project for which they are seeking funds.
D. Housing shall be maintained as the top priority for the CDBG program as well as
placing greater emphasis on public infrastructure (city) in CDBG-eligible tracts.
E. No individually funded CDBG project will be eligible for future CDBG funding for
a minimum of two years from the date of its last funding. (This excludes projects
which are specifically staged for several years of CDBG funding, such as a street
project which has its engineering funded one year and its construction the next.)
Mr. Utter pointed out that the Planning Commission's public hearing for this year's AAP is
scheduled for March 11, 1998. He also referred to a financial listing of the annual allocations of the
three AAP programs (CDBG, ESG, and HOME), as well as other available funds and funding
requests, which he explained.
Responding to Council and Planning Commission members' questions, Mr. Utter said staff
abides by their request to include all of the grant applications --even the ones deemed ineligible --in
the compilation of grant requests; however, the ineligible applications are indicated as such. In
addition, Mr. Utter said staff meets with different groups about their applications to answer any
questions they have. A discussion ensued about one application in particular, and Mr. Utter reviewed
the federal rules regarding funding for religious organizations or entities. He added that staff is
required by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development to monitor the projects that
receive funding.
A discussion ensued regarding addressing infrastructure needs versus human needs. Mrs.
Longoria said the reason this meeting was being held was due to the vast difference between the
Planning Commission's recommendations and staff's recommendations during the grant process Last
year, in that the Commission recommended many more social service agencies be funded. She said
staff's recommendations were based on policies and opinions that have been expressed by the
Council over the years. Mr. McDaniel questioned whether that would result in the Planning
Commission merely "rubber stamping" staff's recommendations.
Mayor Neal said he thought the simplest thing to do was to follow the guidelines, which are
very specific. Dr. Gonzales pointed out that there are a limited amount of funds available and the
Planning Commission and Council have to set priorities on how to disperse that money.
There was further discussion about identifying organizations whose projects are ineligible
for funding. Mayor Neal said he is frequently approached by different organizations with questions
about the funding process, and he encourages them to work with staff on how to properly prepare
their applications. He said he has not had anyone return to him with a complaint that staff did not
assist them. Mr. Colmenero noted that more and more non-profit organizations will be seeking
funding, and their requests often become emotional issues, which makes the funding decisions that
Minutes
Joint Meeting
February 24, 1998
Page 3
much more difficult. Dr. McNichols said the process needs to be formalized so it is clear to an
organization that they will not receive funding if their project is ineligible for a certain reason.
Mr. Noyola said there is a feeling that the funding guidelines are not balanced --that there has
been a shift away from non-profit organizations and toward infrastructure needs. He added that the
non-profit organizations are going to be the loudest critics of that practice. Several Council members
stressed that they did not want the Planning Commission to "rubber stamp" staff's recommendations.
Mr. Longoria pointed out that the Council members receive calls from their constituents all
year long about infrastructure needs, such as lighting and streets, which the Planning Commission
does not hear. Mr. Serna and Mr. Noyola discussed the necessary process of citizens being allowed
to address the Planning Commission and City Council with their funding requests.
Mr. Utter said that speaking for city staff, over the 22 years of the CDBG program, Corpus
Christi's program has the highest benefit to low-income groups of any CDBG program in the state,
and possibly one of the highest in the country.
There being no further business, Mayor Neal adjourned the meeting at 1:25 p.m. on February
24, 1998.