The URL can be used to link to this page

90-824 �� 0 R i G I N A L ` Council F��e � o -�� Green Sheet � ,� RESOLUTION � CITY OF AINT PAUL, MINNESOTA � ��j ,i , � Preaented By � Referred To Committee: Date WHEREAS, the City Council allocated $200, 000 for a Neighborhood Crime Prevention Grant Program for 1990; and WHEREAS, the City Council, by Resolution No. 89-1983 adopted December 14, 1989, requested that the Planning Commission establish and recommend guidelines for the crime prevention grant program; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commi�ssion has prepared guidelines based on discussions with representat�.ves o�-the Police Department, Community Services Department, the Neighborhood Services Committee of the City Council, and neighborhood crime watch groups: and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, on April 27, 1990, recommended the adoption of the Neighborhood Crime Prevention Guidelines to the City Council ; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council approves the Neighborhood Crime Prevention Grant Guidelines; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Planning Commission and City Council will review and amend as necessary these guidelines prior to any future grant cycle. Yeas Navs Absent Requested by Department of: mon on'= Planning and Economic Develonment acca e tm � une i son �� BY� �� Adopted by Council: Date ��'' � Form Approved by City Attorney R� � Adoption Certified by Cou � Sec,�e ary By: , �,,1" f � � � �� By= Appro d by Mayor for Submission to � Coun il ' Approved by Mayor: t,q�` ��!�i.� r #� By: By: - , " t ��c��v�� 9�-�a� �PARTMENT/OFFICE/�UNCIL DATE�NITIATED � P1 anni n - PED 4/30/90 GREEN SH ET�;k C1`j' �`,� 19�. 7 4 5 CONTACT PERSON d PHONE � I��A� �DEPAR71iAENT DIRECTOR J�CIIY COUNqL Tom Harve , ext. 3371 Nu�� GTY ATTORNEY ��'�y� MUBT BE ON WUNGL AOENDA BY(DATE) ROUTNrQ �BUppET DIRECTOR �FIN T.SERVI�8 DIFi. �MAYOR(OR AS8ISTANT) P 1 ann i ng Di rec TOTAL#�OF SIGNATURE PAGES (CLIP ALL LOCATION$FOR SIGNATUR� ACTION REDUESTED: Adoption of Neiqhborhood Crime Prevention Grant Guidelines. REOOMMENOATIONS:Approw(A)or Reject(I� CpUN(,y� E/pEgEApCH pEpppT ppTIpNAL �PLANNINO COMMIS810N —CIVIL SERVICE OOMMISSION �LYBT PFIONE NO. _GB COMMIT'TEE _ �STAFF _ COMiMENTB: _DISTRICT COURT _ SUPPORTS WHICH COUNGL OBJECTIVE? INITIATINCi PROBLEM,133UE,OPPORTUNITY(Who,What,When,Whsro,Why): City Council requested Planning Commission to develop guidelines for crime prevention grants. Grant applications have been requested and guidelines are needed for program. ADVANTAOES IF APPROVED: $200,000 budgeted for program. Guidelines will provide basis to judge grant application. DISADVANTAQE8 IF APPROVED: None. DI8ADVANTA(iES IF NOT APPROVED: Planning Commission and City Council will lack basis to jud!ne proposals. RECEIVED �� CITY CLERK TOTAL AMOUNT OF TRANSACTION 2OO�OOO'�` �gT/I�VENUE BUDOETED(CIRCLE ONE) YES NO *(Guidelines only-program previous y u geted.) FUNDINO SOURCE 100 CDBG ACTIVITY NUMBER 39620 �wwc�n�iNwR�u►noN:�cPwM Funds allocated as part of 1990 Adopted City Budget. Ql� � � :� NOTE: COMPLETE DIRECTIONS ARE INCLUDED IN THE GREEN SHEET INSTRUCTIONAL MANUAL AVAILABLE IN THE PURCHASING OFFICE(PHONE NO. 298-4225). ROUTING ORDER: Below are preferred routings for the five most frequent types of dxumeMS: CONTRACTS (assumes authorized COUNCIL RESOLUTION (Amend, Bdgts./ budget exists) Accept. Grants) 1. Outside Agency 1. Department Director 2. Initiating Department ° 2. Budget Director 3. City Attorney 3. City Attorney 4. Mayor 4. Mayor/Assistant 5. Finance&Mgmt Svcs. Director 5. City Council 6. Finance Accounting 6. Chief Accountant, Fin&Mgmt Svcs. ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER (Budget COUNCIL RESOLUTION (all others) Revision) and ORDINANCE 1. Activiry Manager 1. Initiating Department Director 2. Department Accountant 2. Ciry Attorney 3. Department Director 3. MayodAssistant 4. Budget Director 4. City Council 5. City Clerk 6. Chief Accountant, Fin&Mgmt Svcs. . ADMINISTRATIVE ORDERS (all others) , 1. Initiating Department 2. City Attomey 3. Mayor/Assistant 4. City Clerk TOTAL NUMBER OF SIGNATURE PAt�ES Indicate the#of pages on which signatures are required and pBperCiip each of these pages• ACTION REQUESTED Describe what the project/request seeks to accomplish in either chronologi- cal order or order of importance,whichever is most approprtate for the ' issue. Do not write complete�Menc�s. Begin each item in your list with a verb. RECOMMENDATIONS Complete if the issue in question hes been presented before any body, public or private. SUPPORTS WHICH COUNCIL OBJECTIVE? Indicate which Council objective(s)your projecUrequest supports by listing the key word(s)(HOUSING, RECREATION, NEIGHBORHOODS, ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, BUDGET, SEWER SEPARATION).(SEE COMPLETE LIST IN INSTRUCTIONAL MANUAL.) . COUNCIL COMMITTEE/RESEARCH REPORT-OPTIONAL AS REQUESTED BY COUNCIL INITIATING PROBLEM, ISSUE,OPPORTUNITY Explain the situation or conditions that created a need br your project or request. ADVANTAGES IF APPROVED Indicate whether this is simply an annual budget procedure required by Iaw/ charter or whether there are speciflc ways in which the City of Saint Paul and its citizens will�benefit from this projecUaction. DISADVAN7RGES IF APPROVED What negat[ve effects or major changes to existing or past prxesses might this projeCUrequest produce if it is passed(e.g.,traffic delays, noise, tax in�reases or assessme�ts)7 To Whom?When?For how long? DISADVANTAGES IF NOT APPROVED What will be the negative conaequences if the promised action is not approved7 Inabiliy to deliver service? Continued high traffic, nolse, �accident rate? Loss of revenue? FINANCIAL IMPACT Akhough you must tailor the information you provide here to the issue you are addressing, in general you must answer two questions: How much is it going to cost7 Who is going to pay? . , C,�ya-�� G1TY o�, CITY OF SAINT PAUL ��' ° PLANNING COMMISSION a i� z� o a � ullil lllll � � IIII 111 11 � � ^ James Christenson, Chair �as+ 25 West Fourth Street,Saint Paui,Minnesota 55102 612-228-3270 JAMES SCHEIBEL MAYOR April 27, 1990 Mayor Jim Scheibel Members of the City Council 347 City Hall Saint Paul, Minnesota 55102 Dear Mayor Jim Scheibel and Members of the City Council: The enclosed Crime Prevention Grant Guidelines have been developed by the Planning Commission with input from neighborhood groups, the Police Department, the Department of Community Services, and the Department of Planning and Economic Development. They follow from several discussions with the Neighborhood Services Committee of the City Council. We feel that the guidelines provide for projects that will enhance neighborhood crime prevention efforts within St. Paul and encourage their adoption by the Council. The Planning Commission recognizes that the guidelines were developed on an extremely tight schedule in order to allocate funds to crime prevention projects by July 1, 1990. For this reason, the Planning Commission review process has not included a formal public hearing. We suggest that for this initial round of grants, the guidelines be viewed as "experimental, " and that a more complete review take place prior to any subsequent grant cycles. The initial project proposals will provide valuable experience for future reviews and implementation. Several concerns were raised about working relationships between neighborhood groups and city departments. These issues are beyond the scope of the guidelines, but the Planning Commission feels that they should be explored by the Mayor, the City Council, and appropriate city departments. The guidelines call for close working relationships between neighborhood groups and appropriate city departments. The Planning Commission, city staff, and neighborhood representatives all agree that this is necessary for successful crime prevention activity. City departments should be encouraged to participate fully to ensure project success. . �90��a� Mayor Jim Scheibel and Members of the City Council Page Two April 27, 1990 We have seen no reluctance to do so on the part of city staff, but successful working relationships can can only take place through increased demands on city staff. More block clubs and more active block clubs could strain the city support system. The grant program expands neighborhood capacity, but it does not address how increased demands placed on city departments will be handled. This increased demand will be felt in the project review and selection stage, in establishing and monitoring grant contracts, and in the on-going work with neighborhood groups. The impact may be especially severe on the Police Department and Community Services, through a growing need for data analysis and attendance at neighborhood meetings. The Planning Commission also heard of some frustration on the part of block clubs concerning the placement and cost of neighborhood crime watch signs. The Public Works Department should review its policies regarding crime watch signs and should work more closely with neighborhood crime watch organizations. The Planning Commission asks that these issues be discussed, monitored, and evaluated during the initial phase of the Neighborhood Crime Prevention Grant Program, and that the funding and guidelines for subsequent grant cycles address any serious problems that are identified. Sincerely, „�,� � • ��---�. mes Christianson hair JC:ss Enclosure , , ��90 '��y city of saint paul planr�ng commission resolution f�e number 90-40 �tE] April 27, 1990 NEIGHBORHOOD CRIME PREVENTION GRANT GUIDELINES APPROVAL WHEREAS, the City Council has allocated $200,000 for a Neighborhood Crime Prevention Grant Program for 1990; and WHEREAS, the City Council, by Resolution No. 89-1983 adopted Deceaber 14, 1989, requested that the Planning Commission establish and recommend guidelines for the crime prevention grant program; and WHEREAS, the Housing and Neighborhood Committee of the Planning Commission prepared draft guidelines; and WHEREAS, the Committee has discussed the guidelines with representatives of the Police Department, Community Services Department, the Neighborhood Services Committee of the City Council, and neighborhood crime watch groups; and � WHEREAS, the committee has considered public comment on April 4, 1990, and written comments; and WHEREAS, the committee has modified the guidelines based on that input; ; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Planning Commission approves the Neighborhood Crime Prevention Grant Guidelines and recoanends their adoption by the City Council. moved by HIRTE ' r `�'�d by GEISSER in favor iTnanimniig against . ��o��a� �:.�:-� NEIGHBORHOOD CRIME PREVENTION GRANT PROGRAM GUIDELINES April 18, 1990 I. PROGRAM DESCRIPTION u ose: The Neighborhood Crime Prevention Grant Program is designed to help neighborhood non-profit groups develop programs that reduce crime. Activities may include, but are not limited to, organizing and expanding block club networks for the purpose of neighborhood stabilization. While the primary focus of the program is crime prevention, this is a flexible, multi-use program that recognizes that additional neighborhood activities enhance crime prevention efforts. Supportive activities are allowed under the program. Authorization. Term: The grant program is funded by a 1990 City budget allocation of $200,000. These guidelines are to be effective for this first-year pilot program. At the end of one year, pending future budget allocations, these guidelines will be reviewed and amended as necessary. II. FUNDING Grant Limits: Program grants are available for up to $20,000 each. There is no minimum grant limit. Grants will be awarded on a competitive basis. In order to build and expand crime prevention activity throughout the city, no more than $40,000 will be awarded within any single community planning district. In some instances, the Planning Commission may recommend changes in a proposed budget, If any funds remain unallocated, a second grant cycle will be held in the fall of 1990. Funds must be spent by June 31, 1991. Funding will be on a reimbursement basis due to CDBG funding source requirements. To assist individual block-clubs needing small grants, $5000 will be set aside. Application and administrative procedures for allocation of these funds will- be developed by the City Council and the Planning and Economic Development Department. These will not be part of the larger, competitive grant program. Small grants should require a 1:1 match, and any unallocated funds will revert to the larger grant program. Eligible Expenses include direct expenses related to establishing and � maintaining crime prevention activity (such as staff salary and benefits) , education, communications (supplies, production costs, delivery costs� mileage reimbursement, postage) , and subsidies for the purchase of crime prevention hardware (fixed asset improvements to homes and businesses) . �eligible Expenses include vehicles, equipment purchases, office space rent, phone, food, drinks, and entertainment. (See neighborhood contributions section below) . EliEible Areas include all seventeen community planning districts. 1 , , Gi=yo-�� Eligible Applicants include district councils, residential block club organizations, and other neighborhood-based non-profit organizations. Neighborhood Contributions: Each proposal must be matched with neighborhood contributions at a minimum 1:1 ratio. Contributions must be directly related to the proposed activities and must be contributed during the period following initial application through the duration of the grant. Contributions may include direct financial resources such as supplies and foundation grants, equipment, and in-kind services including volunteer labor. The value of volunteer labor shall be $10 per hour. Time spent in meetings shall not qualify as a labor match. III. APPLICATION rocess: Pre-applications are encouraged but not required. Pre-applications will be accepted until May 11. The pre-application gives staff time to clarify and/or correct any issues before final applications are submitted. Final applications are due May 25, 1990. No late applications will be accepted. Contents: Applications must contain the following: 1. A brief description of the project, including goals, objectives, activities. 2. A budget including how program funds will be spent and an estimate of neighborhood contributions including volunteer labor. 3. If the proposal includes salary for staff, a statement of staff responsibility, including to whom the staff reports. 4. The name of the organization that will implement the program. 5. A map of the proposed project target area. 6. A time schedule for the project. 7. A description of how the program will be evaluated. An application form is attached. Final applications must be received no later than 4:00 p.m. on May 25, 1990. IV. SELECTION Selection Process: The selection process is competitive. The number of projects funded will depend on the quality of the proposals and available resources. Applicant groups should contact their appropriate district council and attempt to coordinate proposals within a district. District councils will be asked to submit comments to PED regarding the proposals and how they meet district goals and objectives. The Planning Commission, working with staff from the Police Department, the Department of Community Services, the Department of Planning and Economic Development, and other appropriate agencies, will review and . rate the applications and identify those applicants which it thinks should be funded. The Planning Commission recommendations will be sent to the Mayor and City Council for final approval. It is the intent that The City Council will make final funding decisions by June 30. 2 . � yo-�� Selection Criteria: Selection will be based on overall program goals . and anticipated accomplishments. The program is looking for: - how pro�ects relate to stated neighborhood needs - effective use of grant funds with existing neighborhood resources - the extent to which volunteer labor is "leveraged" - broad-based citizen participation - District Council comment and support - working relationships with appropriate city departments, including Police and Community Services - target area need for proposed activities V. PROJECT RESPONSIBILITY Contract: For approved pro�ects, the final application and budget will serve as a contract between the City of St. Paul and the applicant. Status Reports: Summary status reports will be due January 15, 1991, and within thirty days of the completion of the project. Evaluation Forum: Grant recipients will be expected to attend a forum at or near the end of the project cycle in order to share experiences. This first cycle is an experimental program. Assessment of funded projects is important to continued success of the program. 3 Neighborhood Crime Prevention Grant Program Use this format for both the , Planning Division pre-application and final Dept. of Planning and Economic Development application. 25 West Fourth Street St. Paul, Minnesota 55102 (612) 228-3371 FINAL APPLICATION DUE: MAY 25, 1990 APPLICATION Please type all responses Group or Organization Submitting Application Name: Telephone: Address: Contact Person: Daytime Phone: roject Description: (Limit this description to one page! ) (On a separate sheet, provide a brief description of the goals, objectives, activities and specific steps that will be taken; any existing crime prevention activities now underway; existing need and how the project addresses that need; and a statement of how your organization will manage and evaluate this project; and staff responsibility. Pay particular attention to the selection criteria listed in the guidelines) . Budpet: Amount of Grant Request: $ (On a separate page, provide a line item budget on how the grant will be spent and the source(s) of matching funds, in-kind services, and volunteer labor. Volunteer labor should be counted at $10 per hour) . Project Location: (Provide a brief description and map of the target area. ) Time Schedule: (What will be the duration of the project?) Will the program be coordinated with any other crime prevention program in the neighborhood? Yes No If yes, identify. � Signature of Individual Typed Name Title Date Completing Application . , �q�-�� NEIGHBORHOOD CRIME PREVENTION GRANT PROGRAM SCHEDULE FOR FIRST CYCLE, 1990 APRIL 27 Planning Commission acts on guidelines and sends guidelines to the Mayor and City Council for final action. The process proceeds based on the recommended guidelines until the City Council adopts final guidelines. MAY 2 Neighborhood Services Committee of the City Council reviews guidelines. MAY 11 Pre-applications (voluntary) due in PED for staff review. MAY 25 Final applications due. * JUNE 1 Housing and Neighborhoods Committee reviews and rates proposals; makes funding recommendation to Planning Commission. JUNE 8 Planning Commission makes recommendations to Mayor and City Council. JUNE 20 Neighborhood Services Committee reviews grant recommendations and forwards to City Council. * JUNE 28 City Council selects programs to fund. JULY 1 Funds available to neighborhood groups. * These are suggested dates. Meeting dates, times, and agendas have not yet been established. The other dates are regularly scheduled meeting dates and are the only practical times for crime prevention grants to be on the appropriate agendas. . _- �_- ��,��-�._�. ... . .. .... . . . . . ��-�.�.. �. _:,: �yo-�� ,a•==�. o�° �� CITY OF SAINT PAUL ; �;;;�;;;; � OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY �e �a • us• JANE A. MC PEAK, CITY ATTORNEY 647 City Hall,Saint Paul,Minnesota 55102 612-298-5121 JAMES SCHEIBEL FAX 612-298-5619 MAYOR May 1, 1990 To: Tom Harvey � Fr: Jim Hart Re: Neighborhood Crime Prevention Grant Guidelines Per request I have reviewed the proposed guidelines and draft City Council Resolution approving the same. The Guidelines recite that the program is to be funded with CDBG funds which is confirmed by the 1990 City Budget, Special Funds, Vol. II, page 903 . You advise that Council Resolution No. 89-1983 adopted December 14, 1989, authorized a $400, 000 program for the years 1990 and 1991 to be funded from CDBG and General Fund sources. It appears, however, that the 1990 expenditure is budgeted entirely from CDBG. This will require a budget amendment tracking Resolution No. 89-1983 unless it is intended that the program be limited to CDBG eligible areas. To the extent that the program is funded from CDBG funds the Guidelines should be amended in Parts II and V to reflect eligibility and subrecipient contracting requirements. As we discussed the question of whether grant recipients would individually provide liability insurance coverage from the recipients grant proceeds or the program purchases blanket coverage for the City, all recipients and volunteers should be reviewed. While the $20, 000 grant limit suggests a blanket policy, most District Councils, block clubs and nonprofits have liability coverage and premiums for policy endorsements covering the Neighborhood Crime Prevention Grant Program activities would likely be more economical. A grant limit which adds the premium cost to the fixed dollar limit might be considered. cc: Councilmenber Thune, Chair t� Councilmember Rettman Councilmember Goswitz Neighborhood Services Committee Bob Hammer G�go-��' :��: CITY OF SAINT PAUL INTERDEPARTMENTAL MEMORANDUM MEMORANDIIM DATE: April 30, 1990 TO: Mayor Jim Scheibel FROM: Peggy Reichert, Deputy Director for Plannin RE: Neighborhood Crime Prevention Grant Guidelines Attached for your review and referral to the City Council are the guidelines for Neighborhood Crime Prevention Grants. A letter of transmittal is attached for your signature. The Planning Commission drafted these guidelines, following input from neighborhood groups, the Police Department, and the Department of Community Services. Because the City Council requested that the Planning Commission develop guidelines, there have been several meetings and discussions with council members concerning their intent for the program. Both the City Council and the Planning Commission would like to see the grants awarded as soon as possible. July 1 seems to be the earliest possible date, and the Council requested that May 25 be the final application date. This has required that the notification to neighborhood groups and the grant application process proceed before final guidelines are adopted by the Council. It is important, therefore, that the Council take quick action on these guidelines. If any substantial changes are made to the guidelines -- for this first cycle at least -- applicant groups could find that their well-intended applications miss the mark. This first cycle may best be viewed as "experimental. " We will learn from the initial applications and from the experience of funded projects. The guidelines should be reviewed before a second grant cycle. We have kept the Neighborhood Services Committee of the Council informed of the guidelines as they were developed and anticipate a smooth review process between now and July 1. cc: Warren Hanson, Acting Director, PED Attachments ��y�-�a� . �t==o. GITY OF SAINT PAUL eR °� OFFICE OF THE MAYOR ., ==i�u � +� �o 347 CITY HALL �"� SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA 55102 JAMESSCHEIBEL (612) 298-4323 MAYOR April 27, 1990 Council President William Wilson and Members of the City Council Seventh Floor City Hall Saint Paul, Minnesota 55102 Dear President Wilson and Council Members: Attached for your review and action are the proposed guidelines for the Neighborhood Crime Prevention Grant Program. The document was prepared by the Planning Commission, at the request of the City Council (Resolution 89-1983 of December 14, 1989) . The guidelines reflect input from interested neighborhood groups, from the Department of Community Services, and from the Police Department. Following the desire of the Council to allocate crime prevention funds to neighborhood groups by July 1, 1990, the grant application process is proceeding concurrently with adoption of the guidelines. The final application date for grants is May 25. Neighborhood groups are drafting applications based on this version of the guidelines. It is important that the Council take quick action to ensure that the first cycle application process is facilitated. I have reviewed these guidelines and recommend their adoption. An attached resolution accomplishes this end. In addition, in light of the compromises in the usual city process of developing new programs, I suggest that these guidelines be reviewed before any future grant cycles. The first round applications, review, and funding experience may suggest necessary changes. Sin e ely, �� Ja s Scheibel Mayor JS/th Enclosures cc: Roy Garza Chief William McCutcheon William Patton Peggy Reichert !�46 Pr(ated on Aecyded Paper