Loading...
264469 WHI7E - CITY CLERK 1 PINK - FINANCE COUI1C11 264469 BLUERY-'MAVORTMENT GITY OF SAINT .PAITL File NO. ouncil Resolution Presented By Referred To Committee: Date Out of Committee By Date WI�REAS, the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974 entitles the City of Saint Paul to $18.8 million in 1975 to implement community development activities upon the submission and approval of an application; and WHEREAS, the community development application requirea citizen participation; and Wf�REAS, the City of Saint Pau1 presently does not have a formally structured city-wide citizen participation process; and WHEREAS, the City Council is desirous of having significant citizen input in the formation of the cocrrtnunity development plan and application; now therefore, be i.t RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Saint Paul approves the attached Position Paper on the Community Development Revenue Sharing Application Process, as prepared by the staff task force and reviewed by the Planning Commiasion and approved by the Mayor. COUIVCILMEN Requested by Department of: Yeas Nays H�t Ghristensen on atzkiHp� � In Favor L ine LEV111@ � � dith R��er � Against By pra a Tedes o Sytvester Mme. resident Bu��CO Ado ted b esidentif�dt�t �(;T �4 ��74 Form Approved by City Attorney P Y Ce ' ied se y ouncil Secretary BY BY ♦ �Approve Mayor: ate 4 Approved by Mayor for Submission to Council By BY PUBIISHED NOV 21g74 . � CITY OF SAINT PAUL OFFICE OF THE MAYOR . . \ . GRANT-IN-AID PROGRAMS � WILLIAM Q. PATTON COORDINATOR ������ MEMORANDUM To: Mayor I.awrence D. Cohen • am . Patton Grant-in-Aid Coordinator ����C���� From. Mr. Willi Q , Chair, Community Development Revenue Sharing Task Force � Date: October 15; 1974 � Re: Citizen Participation in the Planning Process for the Community Development Revenue Sharing Program Application As you have requesfed, I am enclosing a paper prepared by the Community Development Revenue Sharing Task Force which refines and develops in detail the City's planning process for the first co�nunity development � program application. As you know, several members of the Task Force, as well as interested citizens and community organizations, share your � concern about a number of matters regarding the specifics of citizen participation in the community development revenue sharing planning process presently underway. I feel strongly that action by you and members of the City Council is necessary to clarify and formalize this planning process. If you ase in agreement with such action, and with the process outlined in the enclosed paper, I would appreciate it if you would transmit the suggested process to the City Council for its formal endorsement. You and the members of the City Council should be aware of the feeling among several task force members that the eventual establishment of a formal city-cai�e citizEn �articipation protess is an absolute necessity for the effective planning of community development programs, as well as other City programs. While the task force realizes that such a process cannot be set up overnight, and is thus not a possibility in developing and implementing the planning process for the first community development revenue sharing program application, we feel that it is important that you and the City Council realize that most questions raised about this planning process have occurred precisely because of this lack of a formal city-wide citizen participation process. If you have any questions about any aspect of the suggested planning process, please contact me. 918 City Hall, Saint Paul, MinnEStr�tg ���fl� WQP/klm (612) 298-5586 �� .� . �� �. �'64��9 POSITION PAPER ON COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT REVENUE SHARING PROGRAM APPLICATION PROPOSED PLANNING PROCESS Because of the comprehensive nature of community development activities, a number of individuals and organizations have a strong and legitimate interest in the planning process which will result in Saint Paul's first coimnunity development revenue sharing program application. These � individuals and organizations include, but are not limited to, the Mayor and City Council, employees of public agencies formerly involved in planning and implementing programs funded through categorical grant programs which have been enfolded in community development revenue sharing, various public and private human service agencies, the business community, the labor community, residents of the city, various city-wide and neighborhood citizen organizations, and official citizen boards like the City Planning Commission. Any planning process for community development revenue sharing must recognize the role all of these individuals and groups have to play, and must provide � the opportunity for these actors to make their thoughts and wishes known in ' an orderly and timely fashion. Mayor Cohen has proposed a general planning , process for the program application in a speech to the City Council on August 21, 1974, as well as in a subsequent letter to the Planning Conanission (copies attached) . The purpose of this paper is to develop this planning process in more detail. The Federal legislation establishing the conanunity development revenue sharing program mandates citizen participation in the planning and the f . • � ' . preparation of the program application, but also explicitly notes that responsibility for the program falls on the shoulders of the Mayor and City Council. Because of the recent passage of this legislation, the City � must prepare its application in a very short period of time in order to take full advantage of the legislation, while still insuring citizen involvement in the planning process, It is clear that these severe time constraints simply will not permit the kind of in-depth planning process, involving all community development actors, which is desirable. It is assumed that sufficient time as well as a decision by the Mayor and Council regarding a formal, city-wide citizen participation structure will allow more effective involvement of all of the community development participants in the preparation of the second and third year program applications. The planning process suggested in this paper is directed specificallq at the preparation of the first community development revenue sharing program application. � This planning process must take into account the following factors: 1. The first program application must be completed in a very short period of time. 2. Many individuals and groups have a legitimate role to play in the � preparation of the program application. The Federal legislation mandates citizen participation in the preparation of that applicatian. In addition, previous experience in Saint Paul has demonstrated generally that community develo��ent programs are mtirE successful when there is effective citizen participation in the planning process. 3. The Mayor and City Council constitute the only formal city-wide citizen participation structure at the present time. The final responsibility for the co�unity development program, generally, and the program application, specifically, rests with them as the elected representatives of the citizens � of Saint Paul. . i � -2- � � � t . f , 4. Any additional formal city-wide citizen participation structure, ; which would be acceptable to both elected officials and the citizenry, could not conceivably be established within the time period within which the first i ' program application must be prepared. 5. The only legally recognized citizen body now involved in the � comprehensive planning process on a city-wide basis is the Planning Commission. i i 6. The only legally recognized community or neighborhood bodies involved � in the lannin , P g process at present are the four Project Area Committees and r the Model Neighborhood Planning Council. 7. A major city-wide housing rehabilitation program will begin in late 1974. These factors in turn imply the following general characteristics for a planning process for the first program ap�lication: 1• The Mayor and City Council have final responsibility for the program application. 2. The Planning Commission should be the principal city-wide citizen component in the planning process, 3. The bulk of the technical planning work involved in the preparation of the application should be performed by an inter-agency staff task force appointed by the May�r under the leadership of the City Planning staff. Citizens should be able to attend and observe at these meetings. �. Both city-wide and community forums should be created by the City Council and the Planning Commission for participation in the planning process by all affected individuals and groups, Participation should be understood as the opportunity to recommend general program goals and objectives and specific program activities, as well as the opportunity to review and make recommendations on program goals and objectives and program activities -3- � . f . � �64�69 developed by the Staff Task Force, the Planning Comanission or the Mayor and City Council. , 5. The process should be open, visible, and understandable to all affected individuals and groups. 6. The staff involved should work to foster citizen participation in the preparation of the first program application, and to develop a long-range planning and participation process which will maximize the opportunity for citizen participation in the planning of subsequent program applications. The planning process should be separated into two major segments: (1) determination of program goals and objectives in the context of a three- year general plan; and (2) development of the actual program application. Goals and Objectives (already underway) The staff task force should develop a first draft of community develop- ment goals and objectives, in the areas of both program process and program content. These draft goals and objectives should be widely distributed to the citizens through a series of public meetings sponsored by the City Planning Conenission. These meetings, which should also include general informational material on the community development revenue sharing legislation, should allow for citizen conanent both at the meetings and at subsequent times through the use of written feedback sheets. Similar meetings should also be held for otiter cen�enunity deveivp�+�ent participaTrta, such as the business and labor communities. The draft goals and objectives should be refined by the staff task force in light of citizen comments obtained through these meetings, and then submitted to the Planning Commission for its consideration. The Planning Couanission should refine the goals and objectives in light of its review and �� light of citizen comments obtained at the public -4- . � • � - informational meetings, and then transmit its adopted goals and objectives to the Mayor. The Mayor should then review the draft goala and objectives . and transmit his recommended goals and objectives to the City Council with the recommendations of the Planning Conanission. The City Council should review the draft goals and objectives and hold a public hearing on them. The Council should then formally adopt a set of community development goals and objectives in light of its review and in light of citizen comments obtained at the public hearing. Detailed Program Application (should begin approximately November 15, 197�+) The staff task force should continue to assemble and integrate all necessary data, at this point with the guide of formal City community develop- ment goals and objectives. At the same time, these policies should be widely distributed to the citizenry, accompanied with a summary of eligible and ineligible program activities as defined by Federal legislation. This distribution should be accompanied by a request for suggestions for program activities to be included in the first community development program year. This request should emphasize that available funds are clearly insufficient to perform all eligible and desirable program activities, and should also emphasize that no program activities will be considered which are clearly not capable of being carried out to a reasonable degree during the first program year. Besides satisfying lrederal requirements and the City's policies, program activities should clearly address identifiable community needs and should be the product of a careful planning process involving the full participation of affected individuals and groups. The staff task force should then develop a draft program application in light of the data it has assembled and integrated and in light of citizen -5- - .-. _- � " "' � � . . � � suggestion of program sctivities. This would include the general three year ' plan and the detailed program application for the approximately $18.8 million available to the City for the first community development program year. This draf� program application will be reviewed, prior to distribution.to affected � community development participants, by the Comznunity Development Coiranittee of the Planning Commission. These participants should include legally recognized groups like the Project Area Committees, as we11 as other identifiable community groups. After a thirty day review period, the staff task force should hold public meetings on the draft program application in each community in which any . program activity is proposed. Additional review and comment should be sought from other community dedelopment participants. The staff task force should then refine the program application in light , of citizen recommendations and review by the Planning Commission Community Development Committee and transmit the application to the Mayor. The Mayor should then refer the application to the Planning Commission for its review and recommendations. The Mayor should then review the draft application in light of the recommendations of the Planning Commission and submit his recommended program application to the Council with the reconanendations of the Plsnning Commission. The City Council should review the draft application and hold a public hearing on it. Zhe Counc�il should tllen formally approve the program application in iight of its review and in light of citizen co�nent. The Mayor should then submit the final community development revenue sharing program application to the Department of ftousing and Urban Development -6- M � ' �_ �A . . , . , '��j���� . ' '�e v and other required review bodies as soon as is practicable, with a target � date of February 1, 1975. ... . , . . , � , PREPARED BY: ' Community Development Revenue Sharing Task Force � William Q. Patton, Coordinator ' October 15, 1974 I -7- a� � . � �- 26��6g ��I lY O1� S�1I \1' PACI7. N ee�a�u O 1�lr I O E O 1'' 7'I I 7: DI.11'O I2 � a cceueao� � e�e��e _-.,, Lnwx�;ra�. D. co��N October 22� 1974 ri,►�o$ Council President Ruby M. Hunt and Honorable Members of the City Council City of Saint Paul, Minnesota Dear President Hunt and Council Members: I am pleased to submit to you for your consideration a position paper which details citizen involvement in the general planning process for our first community development program application. I requested the Community Development Revenue Sharing Task Force, under the direction of Mr. William Q. Patton, to develop this position paper because of concerns which members of the task force, �as well as a number of citizens, had raised about our first year' s community development planning process. It was necessary to develop this special planning process because of severe time constraints which we are under in preparing our first program application. I strongly endorse the proposed detailed planning process and feel that it �aximizes the amount of citize� �nvol�e�ent �n the preparation of our community development program application, while still dealing realistically with the time constraints we face. I would point out that this proposal has also been endorsed by the steering committee of the City Planning Commission. I would urge you to formally endorse this proposed planning Q�s as soon as possib�� sc that we can clarify ±�e roles and responsibilities of all participants in the community develop- ment planning process and move forward with this important planning effort. I am enclosing with this letter a copy of the proposed planning process, as well as a proposed resolution of endorsement. �—�- 22 . � ' �" ���� Council President Ruby M. Hunt and October 22, 1974 Honorable Members of the City Council Page 2 You will note that Mr. Patton' s memorandum of transmittal to me indicates the strong feeling of several members of the Community Development Revenue Sharing Task Force that a formal city-wide citizen participation process be developed as soon as possible. I want to take this opportunity to again state emphatically my support for the development of such a process, and would urge you to move forward with the development of such a program, based, at least initially, on the report of the Committee on Citizen Participation entitled "Making Democracy Work. " Sincerel , WRENC D. OHE Mayor LDC/j fr cc Frank D. Marzitelli Roger Ryan William Q. Patton Carolyn Cochrane Rose Mix✓ attachments �� +� 2���� � __ �i I '1'Y OI�' �A I N'!' ��A li I. r "'' `j U1°I�'I(3I: OIr 'l'1f 1': �1A1'OIl I.nwiii:NUi: 1). (;�►iii;nr Mnvuu �111};ll'ir 22� 1��7�F Mrs. Carolyn Cochrane, Chairman City Pl�nning Commission 421 Wabasha Street St. Paul, Minnesota 55102 Dear Mrs. Cochrane: Within the next few monttis the federal-city relationsliip re�urdin�; coamiunity development programs will be drumatically chnn�;ed. This chrxn�;c r��sui.ts from the. inuninent Signiii� and implementation of tlu� }lo�i�;i.n�; a►id Cu��nuunity Development Act of 1974, which placeg tl�e respuns i.hi.L:Lt.y t)L P I t111T1�11}; e�nel ��r.c��;r��mmtn}; tl�c.4c f�md� u�►on city �c�v��rnmci�t. A rzumnr.itton nf tl�c Ic:�;-Lsl.l�tion aricl ci cu��y �if ury rr.niiir.kr� i�f Au};t.tyt 2'I i.�� Tl�r Ct.ty Cc�unc9.1 .irc c.ilcLosed tor your rev:i.ew. Iii iuy ��r.c���iitrit.i.un ta Cli�� Cuiaictl I stress tliat to pruperly implement tl�is pro�;ram, ". . . rm ur.dcrl.y nnd couipreliensive pl�nn:tn�; process whicli determines, from :� city-wtde� pc�int ufi vicw, ltow tl�ese funds should best be r�ll.oeeited" is necess:try. Tc� ,iccomp:l:LRli tliis tnsk, I have designated the City Plnnning staff tu piny tllC' l���id ru1�, in the Prepnration of our community development plrin and :fundiii�; Fl�)�I.I.C.itiun. As part of this process, I would li,k� to reauest that the Citv Plannin� Commission svonsor a series o communitv informational me�tin�:s to discuss �he le� slation and its imvact uvon the Citv_ These meetings qhould Ue held during the early part of September and will provide a forum for th�� City staff to expl.ain and clarify this rather ccmiplex and confusin�; legisl:�tion. Thunk you for your anticipated cooperation. ce-rely, .�� ..,-�- , � Cl: D. CO M�iy or LDC/k l.w i:ttc. cc: Council Presid.ent Ruby Hunt Mr. Rofier. Ry<in . � �s��� f�1AY0R LA�,JRENCE D, C!�NE;". Au�usT 21, 1974 g REMARI<S TO THE CITY COUfdCIL WEDNESDAY, IO: OO A�M, CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS THF HOUSI�dG APdD COMMUP��ITY DEVELOPMENT ACT OF 1974 IidTRODUCTIO�d AND OVERVIEW MADAME PRESIDENT AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL, YOU HAVE RE�UESTED ME TO MAKE A PRESENTATION TO YOU REGARDING THE HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ACT OF 1974� AS ITS NAME SUGGF�STS, THE ACT ADDRESSES SEVERAL ISSUES INVOLVING THE FEDERAL f�OUSING �DMINISTRATION, PUBLIC HOUSING, SUBSIDIZED HOUSING, COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING, AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT. OUR MAIN IfJTEREST TODAY LIES WITH THE LATTER TOPIC OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT, WHICH FORMS TITLE I OF THE ACT AND IS POPULARLY KNOWN AS COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT REVENUE SHARING , SPEAKING GENERALLY� SPECIAL REVENUE SHARING WAS DEVELOPED AS A CONSOLIDATION OF EXISTING FEDERAL CATEGORICAL GRANT PROGRAMS INTO IiROAD BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM AREAS SUCH AS MANPOWER, EDUC�TION, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT, AND OTHERS � AS WE DISCUSS COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT REVENUE SHARING TODAY, IT IS IMPORTAPJT TO KEEP IN MIND THE PRINCIPLES AND GOALS WHICH FORM THE BASIS OF SPECIAL REVENUE SHARING : 1) ELIMINATE THE RIGIDITY OF CATEGORICAL PROGRAMS, Z) INSURE CONTROL OF FEDERAL FUNDS BY LOCAL ELECTED OFFICIALS, A�1D �) PROVIDE FIRM FUNDING LEVELS FOR SEVERAL YEARS � : �. �����c� REMARKS TO �ITY �OUNCIL - HOUSING AND AUGUST 21, 1974 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ACT OF 1974 PAGE Z THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT TITLE OF THE ACT CONSOLIDATES A NUMBER OF EXISTING HUD CATEGORICAL PROGRAMS EFFECTIVE �ANUARY 1, 1975� IT ESTABLISHES AN ALLOCATION FORMULA FOR FUNDS, AUTHORIZES TOTAL FUNDING OF $�, 4 BILLION, DEFINES ACTIVITIES ELIGIBLE FOR FUNDING, DEFINES APPLICATION REQUIREMENTS, AND COVERS A NUMBER OF OTHER TECHNICAL AND HOUSEKEEPING MATTERS� E�lidD I P�G TO DISCUSS FUNDING UNDER THIS PROGRAM, IT IS USEFUL TO M�KE A COMPARISON WITH GENERAL REVENUE SHARING . GENERAL REVENUE SH/1RING IS MEY�I MONEY, WHILE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT FUNDS ARE REPLACEMENT FUNDS, QLp FUNDS IN A NEW PACKAGE � GENERAL REVENUE SHARING HAS NO FUNDING APPLICATION REQUIREMENTS, WHILE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT MONEY, UNFORTUNATELY, HAS A VERY DETAILED APPLICATION PROCESS � FINALLY, THE TWO PROGRAMS HAVE HIGHLY DIFFERENT FUNDING FORMULAS � GENERAL REVENUE SHARING IS HEAVILY DETERMINED BY THE FACTOR OF LOCAL TAX EFFORT, WHILE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT REVENUE SHARING IS BASED ON COMPLEX FACTORS OF POPULATION, EXTENT OF POVERTY, AND DEGREE OF OVERCROWDING OF HOUSING A�. 11ELL A� ON A HOLD HARMLESS CLAUSE FOR UNITS OF GOVERNMENT WHICH FORMERLY RECEIVED IIUD CATEGORICAL GRANTS . THIS HOLD HARMLESS CLAUSE, WHICH APPLIES TO SAINT PAUL, CALLS FOR ANNUAL FUNDING FOR THREE YEARS AT A LEVEL GENERALLY DEFINED AS THE ANNUAL AVERAGE OF HUD CATEGORICAL FUNDING FROM 1968 TO 1972� • ������ REMARKS TO �ITY �OUNCIL - HOUSING AND AUGUST 21, 1974 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ACT OF 1974 PAGE 3 UNDER THIS FORMULA, SAINT PAUL WILL RECEIVE �IH� H MILLION EACH YEAR FOR THREE YEARS, AND WILL THEN DROP IN STAGES TO ONLY $4�Z MILLION DURING THE SIXTH AND LAST YEAR OF THE PR06RAM� HOWEVER, IT IS NOTEWORTHY THAT THE BILL HAS ONLY BEEN FUNDED FOR THREE YEARS, AND THAT CONGRESS IS TO RECONSIDER THE ALLOCATION AT THE END OF THIS TIME� I CANNOT OVEREMPHASIZE THE FACT THAT THIS IS OLD MONEY, FUNDS WHICH CAN DO LITTLE MORE THAN SUSTAIN EXISTING PROGRAM LEVELS � IN FACT, IT IS ACTUALLY IFSS THAN PREVIOUS FUNDING, SINCE THE LEGISLATION MAKES NO PROVISION FOR INFLATION SINCE 1��Z-- AND NO PROVISION FOR FURTHER INFLATION DURING THE NEXT THREE YEARS� THIS IS LEGISLATION WHICH CALLS FOR CONSIDERABLE BELT-TIGHTENING AND EXCEEDINGLY TOUGH PRIORITY SETTING , THIS IS NOT THE TIME TO MAKE IMPOSSIBLE POLITICAL PROMISES TO ONE GROUP OR ONE PROGRAM AT THE EXPENSE OF ANOTHER GROUP OR PROGRAM; AD HOC PROMISES BASED ON THE FIRST-COME FIRST-SERVED PRINCIPLE WHICH COULD LEAD TO THE UNWISE AND UNPLANNED EXPENDITURE OF THESE LIMITED FUNDS� WHAT WE MUST HAVE IS AN ORDERLY AND COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING PROCESS WHICH DETERMINES, FROM A CITY-WIDE POINT OF VIEW, HOW THESE FUNDS SHOULD BEST BE ALLOCATED, P1lR.�Q�E USE OF THESE FUNDS IS DEFINED IN DETAIL BY A LENGTHY LIST OF ELIGIBLE PROGRAM ACTIVITIES, WHICH ARE OUTLINED IN OUR REMARKS TO �ITY �OUNCIL - HOUSING AND AUGUST 21, 1974 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ACT OF 1974 PAGE 4 INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDUM� ALL OF THESE ACTIVITIES MUST BE UNDERSTOOD AND VIEWED IN LIGHT OF THE GENERAL STATEMENT OF PURPOSE IN THE TITLE : THE PRIMARY OBJECTIVE OF THIS TITLE IS THE DEVELOPMENT OF VIABLE URBAN COMMUNITIES, BY PROVIDING DECENT HOUSING AND A SUITABLE LIVING ENVIRONMENT AND EXPANDING ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITIES, RRINCIPALLY FOR PERSONS OF LOW AND MODERATE INCOME � � � �SECTION IOIC) � RESP�11lS I�ILLIY RESPOtJSIBILITY FOR THE PROGRAM IN ALL OF ITS ASPECTS IS UNEQUIVOCALLY VESTED WITH THE CITY AND ITS ELECTED OFFICIALS� INDEED, THE ONLY SIGNIFICANT MENTION OF OTHER AGENCIES NOTES THAT ��ONE OR MORE PUBLIC AGENCIES, INCLUDING CXISTING LOCAL PUBLIC AGENCIES, [�1A�C BE DESIGNATED BY THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER OF , , , A UNIT OF GENERAL LOCAL GOVERNMENT TO UNDERTAKE A COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM IN WHOLE OR IN PART�� �SECTION IOZC) � THIS IS THE CITY�S PROGRAM, � ` � _ ��� REMARKS TO CITY COUNCIL HOUSING AND AUGUST 21, I9/4 �� COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ACT OF 1974 PAGE 5 �.I T IZEN PART I C I PAT I QN I'�ITN REGARD TO CITIZEN PARTICIPATION, THE LEGISLATION ITSELF IS SOMEWHAT VAGUE, AND WE EXPECT HUD TO ISSUE ADMINISTRATIVE REGULATIONS ON THIS QUESTION IN THE NEAR FUTURE. THE KEY DISCUSSION OF CITIZEN PARTICIPATION IS AS FOLLOWS: L THE APPLICANT MUST PROVIDE 7 , � � SATISFACTORY ASSURANCES THAT, PRIOR TO SUBMISSION OF ITS APPLICATION� IT HAS �A) PROVIDED CITIZENS WITH ADEQUATE INFORMATION CONCERNING THE AMOUNT OF FUNDS AVAILABLE FOR PROPOSED COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND HOUSING ACTIVITIES, THE RANGE OF ACTIVITIES THAT MAY BE UNDERTAKEN, AND OTHER IMPORTANT PROGRAM REQUIREMENTS, �B) HELD PUBLIC HEARINGS TO OBTAIN THE VIEWS OF CITIZENS ON COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND HOUSING NEEDS, AND �C) PROVIDED CITIZENS AN ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY TO PARTICIPATE IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE APPLICATION; BUT NO PART OF THIS PARAGRAPH SHALL BE CONSTRUED TO RESTRICT THE RESPONSIBILITY AND AUTHORITY OF THE APPLICANT FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE APPLICATION AND THE EXECUTION OF ITS COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM. �SECTION 104a �6) ) � � � �����Q V REMARKS TO �ITY �OUNCIL - HOUSING AND AUGUST 21, 1974 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ACT OF 1974 PAGE 6 WHERE DO WE GO FROM HERE? OUR FIRST PRIORITY, REASONABLY ENOUGH, SHOULD BE TO TAKE THE NECESSARY STEPS TO OBTAIN THE MONEY WHICH THIS LEGISLATION MAKES AVAILABLE TO US � AS I INDICATED BEFORE, THIS INVOLVES THE FULFILLMENT OF VERY DETAILED APPLICATION REQUIREMENTS, ESSENTIALLY DEMANDING THE SUBMISSION OF A THREE-YEAR, COMPREHENSIVE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM WHICH IDENTIFIES COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT NEEDS AND DETAILS A COMPREHENSIVE AND DETAILED PROGRAM OF ACTIVITIES TO ADDRESS THOSE NEEDS , THE PLANNING STAFF IN GENERAL� AND THE �RANT-IN-AID OFFICE IN PARTICULAR, HAS ALREADY BEGUN PRELIMINARY WORK AIMED AT THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE CITY� S COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION� HOWEVER, NOW THAT WE KNOW EXACTLY WHAT IS CALLED FOR BY THE LEGISLATION, IT IS IMPERATIVE THAT WE MOVE FORWARD SWIFTLY TO PLAN AND PROGRAM OUR COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT FUNDS� KEEPING IN MIND THESE FACTS, -- THAT THIS IS A CITY PROGRAM, -- THAT OUR FUNDS ARE IN FACT HIGHLY LIMITED, SUBSTANTIALLY LESS THAN FUNDS RECEIVED UNDER FORMER HUD CATEGORICAL PROGRAMS, -- THAT THIS PROGRAM WILL BECOME EFFECTIVE LESS THAN S MONTHS FROM NOW, REMARKS TO �ITY �OUNCIL - HOUSING AND AUGUST 21, 1974 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ACT OF 1974 PAGE � -- THAT APPLICATION REQUIREMENTS ARE BOTH COMPLICATED AND COMPREHENSIVE, AND -- THAT ALL PROGRAMS CONSOLIDATED IN THIS LEGISLATION WERE ADMINISTERED IN THE PAST EITHER BY THE CITY OR THE HRA, I PROPOSE THAT WE PROCEED NOW IN THE FOLLOWING MANNER : '�c PLANNIN� PBQCESS 1� DESIGNATE THE CITY PLANNING STAFF TO P�AY THE LEAD ROLE IN THE PREPARATION OF OUR COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND FUNDING APPLICATION� Z� HAVE CITY PLANNING ESTABLISH A SPECIAL STAfF TASK FORCE TO WORK FULL TIME ON THIS, DRAWING ON PERSONNEL FROM LINE DEPARTMENTS AND FROM THE HRA AS NECESSARY� BECAUSE OF THE SPECIAL NATURE OF THIS TASK, IT MAY BE ADVISABLE TO HAVE CERTAIN COUNCIL LEGISLATIVE AIDES ON THIS TASK FORCE� 3, CHARGE THE TASK FORCE TO DEVELOP BASIC GOALS AND OBJECTIVES OF OUR COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM, WHICH I WOULD TRANSMIT TO YOU WITH MY COMMENTS AFTER REVIEW AND COMMENT BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION � - ,. . ��s��� REMARKS TO �ITY �OUNCIL - HOUSING AND AUGUST 21, 1974 � COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ACT OF 1974 PAGE H 4� WIDELY DISSEMINATE THIS DRAFT STATEMENT OF GOALS AND OBJECTIVES IN THE COMMUNITY FOR COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARINGS, WHICH COULD PROBABLY NOT BE HELD UNTIL AFTER ADOPTION OF THE 1975 BuDCEr� 5� REFER WHATEVER GOALS AND OBJECTIVES ARE ADOPTED BACK TO THE SPECIAL TASK FORCE FOR USE IN DEVELOPING A DETAILED PROGRAM APPLICATION. I WOULD, AGAIN, TRANSIMIT THIS APPLICATION TO YOU WITH MY COMMENTS AFTER REVIEW AND COMMENT BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION � 6� ��IDELY DISSEMINATE THE DRAFT PROGRAM APPLICATION IN THE COMMUNITY FOR COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARINGS, WHICH HOPEFULLY COULD BE HELD BY LATE DECEMBER , THE COUNCIL WOULD THEN FORMALLY APPROVE THE CITY� S COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT REVENUE SHARING APPLICATION FOR SUBMISSION TO HUD , THIS PROCESS SEEMS TO SATISFY A NUMBER OF IMPORTANT REQUIREMENTS� FIRST, IT IS AN ORDERLY AND COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING PROCESS BASED ON THE WORK OF CITY PLANNING � SECOND, IT CLEARLY RECOGNIZES THE LEAD ROLE OF THE CITY IN FORMULATING THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM, THIRD, IT INSURES EXTENSIVE COUNCIL INVOLVEMENT AT THE POLICY LEVEL OF BASIC GOALS AND OBJECTIVES� REMARKS TO �ITY �OUNCIL - HOUSING AND AUGUST 21, 1974 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ACT OF 1974 PAGE 9 FOURTH, IT ALLOWS CITIZEN REVIEW BEFORE THE APPLICATION IS "CAST IN CONCRETE�� � FIFTH� IT ALLOWS FOR THE EXPEDITIOUS PREPARATION OF THIS APPLICATION AND, I TRUST, OUR RECEPTION AND WISE EXPENDITURE OF THESE FUNDS� IF THIS WAY OF PROCEEDING MEETS WITH YOUR APPROVAL, THE ADMINISTRATION IS READY TO BEGIN THIS PLANNING PROCESS IMMEDIATELY� # # # MAYOR'S OFFICE �C���� FROM Mayo V Lee _Fischer 0 her T0: Pre . � Council Public Works Ci Administrator Traffic Engi.neer Bu get Director Community Pl'annin Coor . Library ��y er ��,� J� Park & Rec. l3ons Health City Attorney Pollution Control Consumer Affairs Housing � 31dg. Civil Service Police Manpower Administration Model Cities Fire � Safety Hwaan Rights HRA Ernergency Prepared. Port Authority Printing � Dupl. School District Finance � Mgmt. Civic Center Purchasing Ramsey County Licenses Other ACTION: •� � �, . 0`� � ' '-.r�a�� .�• �j '•� o, - 5F. .;I'� f "Y � Y', f l h +i�,� 'k� T �194s�q �„� . k � '� -9 a x��,; �� �'�,.,��*°�r : r k ;I ( � , � �' �;� F Y' .. , t 4 3_ 4^ , V �,�. f�f�. jS i , � � � ��f f y�. ! � �-.� �F' i ls r{k f*v}t�''� r .. i J� � �1 �N,. ,�' � x ml f �� 7t���i� � � ���� �� �� � �.t � ��� r `�(� 7 � ��� i � ��� r r `i-*�, 'w irw.` .i.. � � � * '�v rGe!�� � -_�� � �� ^ t �� ;i � .- � . � �"�X � �s � �_ . �� a ° ,� � .; � 5 � € 'H � i e �? 7 # • . . �r1 rt �n . 't�,t�.'� � � `� � •, � �`s �x �� �� i p ' f � 1'��. ♦ x"�'ts i i�- �� y A* .a` " � x �E ; .�b ����5�,� , � • * a �- � } �f� Kf','� � �� � �� � � �� ���a� � � � �� d � ��d�rr °g k' i � � i. i � � \ � ���,y. � � �'.� ��+; ' ��., � �. } � i } � �� � � �� A � �k 1 •t� v� y�+� ;�"�fi Ld�a -� adl��� r�".� - y ') � � 1 ��� .� �� t" ' � �� � � �� � r.�3��. '� �:� ±x;,� t-, i .� � . �`s �.�c�r;�� r:� �\ X �,� . �"'�ii �' EFx� `uy-�',i'. ns t� 1��'` ^;.� �• �- k� `� �S ' I � , � . ��.:. .>�. ,: � � )` �R,� .� . r : ; , e� t a i.; � '��� �� � �G7 � `� ' � � � �:: ,. � � a'. - +,,� ��� P'"� ���Ea�"y,�,��:� "t, � \ ": - 4�f' ��'t -����C#'� ;�.. � �:z ;� � 3 � � �.� N �x` f � y� ., .�"M" y � ��� �t - � . .�f ��li�� aa �'� a � r x ' ..- �} '' '� ""�'�r°4��`,� ' - . � � �: ' '^ �.:.�' � #�t�°*xr'�3 x. v 'r � ' � �` � � � �y ea�; � ' ! r �' � ��:� �x �'� ' 1�.k.� ��. .. ' ; .�, - �- �.c ����" �f�'i,��e+^ : 4 .� :� � + � �{Yfi�� �� ��� y � � x�'�` R"y' _ 1 ti y f� R�.^' . ry� - ��Y ��S "'� �� ��r_.Z � ��� � �y \ . � f �°k r� � ,b�� `��, ;,' l, � � � ,;x r` � �� � �� � ��� ��� - V � , � Y�a� �j �;����� 5 ��f! �����'���� t ( Yr � �F 'eX� � {y�.i' � g �1�'� r r} �}��, i�l��A{ .,� � . .'�y71���"� y��- ���' 1 . . � r � `< ti, ��::t �{�' ; � ,:���ce�.�t. a -: �� .�.F�� i�� . .. � �. '`� F r� � n, 3 x d. ,fi� � �`�; � ,cl 'r - f � � �� � � �y� �'� � � �����v -�'. ��. v'1 ,,.>- � '� � �,�'�+�+ �c'� ^�a�%5�.,+afi . a �� ��'3� -� �` ' � � � j f q t,�� � s r����; � �C .�'' t kr�� . ' 3 �,_ � ,'�1 x�r '�. . � ..i ��� � '��' '�+Q'�flE�� �+1"�'�t��i� �t• `���i�•O�A ���� ` � �, �°' r O A �,., ` � �` k � � �s�►'�.'M+�#;� +�S�.ts ,r.��i�� i�v�lv�i��':.#��'�` �i�� � �� ; ,.�. '�, R ��� }� �. , ,, as,� � _. I '���,. � �`� ����.'�.+�4� '�� 1�� i���������' ;r�� �t � � ��' �� �� ��� +� lM���`E` ��.El� � �s.�� $x ° �� " ? , `�^, r�° "�"; �; ����i�����L��' ���� .��'�� ��4� � , �� �i S � �� � ����,` s���i 4 � Y� - ���1'� #�`�4' �� !�d +� � � �. '� � !�d �� � ` � �� ��� ����;��}� � � ^��s `„� , '' � � , �,'`` ,ts��± �s �� ��y r � s �. � ��� �? �� �� � � � - '^�, '/` �� a J' y� r 4 _ r �` j p�' ,t��l Yi�� ���� `� r� ; ���:�� �y � f � 'r. �.:;�"j �'` ��,"'�� ,:(` J 4S S f 3� �t �� ` t��+���;�f � �` t , '� � , ��� � � F'. 1 � �#t ��'F J I_ � � f r yt , , z , • � . .�.";h�♦ 't,�,.i � ;'�a�'��4px�i� . i .. r � x..��.�.� �:5 Y � ^ x{ �' xzl Sy' t ., \ ` . I� :� . �„+:. ...44 R �$t , � � ,�1'^ ��j. f S� -:� jrlr� i i7 ! �I �� � - 1 p � �� � ,�'s �. � T. l� `( � S� y M � $�} K J i 1' 1 t, � f � }J�� � J+ � ��.4 � { � �.�1 i1 �F,.������ �. . 1 `�� t �I. �! �{ �,� Y �s� "� + �� ��±� i � y� F I q � � x r t . �^"Lr`',`� �♦ �����i� ' � � i .��.� i�{ �'tk '�' _.ra �'`- '( �, y r�• ��,�y' ' ! a�..,r Y.* ?r,y � . , 1�� �.. `: �' ,t�e t•(7 �Y y ,y� 2r�t � . �,��.�� �ac\. , .� � A '� � �� 'K}����y ��� t� � � - A� ��.; � Q 5���/�h f ' p � � h P�r44 . . �0.� h � ' � � ��� s.' r \ w� ` � a . . ` � ,� �� ��+z � � . Y �p � �F��lY��N+ ���� � {� t �. , `"'� {a y� �•� �',�" � t ' 3' �. P p � � 1 I' . / •�- t � ��; i �, 4 +� '�}��� �. � a e C �N ��x . . ' • �� " � . � � _ ,-�� . r^ ,• E , . . i`-- �, � r� ,= T� � .��. �` . �, ` � �: ���' . �y ��. ,� . : . , . . . . -�..': ` f-�� �+,7 � �' .. ' . t � �. � "4d }c?� .. � r -� t p'. q�� 7 � ' � - . ..i' � �k.4 � b "e"^°'��^-, }.. . . � � S ��j:� k�t��v�y��. � r ' � � .. �' . . . �. � ,: '�r > i.� � � . . - } „ �.x y � � [ y� � s�=s Z �.�'��,` . . . _ . . . ' . . '�+� YiQ:: . sf 3� , . . �, ' ��? ��S $ 'i { Y� � 1 �a xr;t<'. d ;� i � . . :x... _.. . , , . _. � . ... . ._ . Y , � .. . �,. F. . ,. r, r,. ,.� . ..