Human Affairs Committee

HUMAN AFFAIRS COMMITTEE January 25, 2010 A meeting of the Human Affairs Committee was held Monday, January 25, 2010 at 8:48 p.m. in the Aldermanic Chamber. Chairman Lori Wilshire presided. Members of the Committee present: Alderman Richard LaRose, Vice Chair Alderman-at-Large Ben Clemons Alderman Diane Sheehan Alderman Mary Ann Melizzi-Golja Members not in Attendance: Also in Attendance: Alderman-at-Large Barbara Pressly Alderman Kathy Vitale COMMUNICATIONS MOTION BY ALDERMAN LAROSE THAT THE RULES BE SO FAR SUSPENDED AS TO ALLOW FOR THE INTRODUCTION OF COMMUNICATIONS RECEIVED AFTER THE AGENDA WAS PREPARED MOTION CARRIED From: Carrie Johnson Schena, Urban Programs Manager Re: FY2010 CDBG Update MOTION BY ALDERMAN LAROSE TO ACCEPT AND PLACE ON FILE MOTION CARRIED From: Carrie Johnson Schena, Urban Programs Manager Re: Spreadsheet - Five Year CDBG Activity MOTION BY ALDERMAN LAROSE TO ACCEPT AND PLACE ON FILE MOTION CARRIED UNFINISHED BUSINESS - None NEW BUSINESS - RESOLUTIONS R-10-01 Endorser: Mayor Donnalee Lozeau Alderman Michael J. Tabacsko Alderman-at-Large Ben Clemons Alderman Arthur T. Craffey, Jr. RELATIVE TO THE ACCEPTANCE AND APPROPRIATION OF $75,000 FROM THE STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE, DEPARTMENT OF SAFETY INTO SPECIAL REVENUE ACCOUNT #336-6274 "PUBLIC SAFETY INTEROPERABILITY COMMUNICATIONS GRANT" AND TO AUTHORIZE THE TRANSFER OF MATCHING FUNDS IN THE AMOUNT OF $15,000 FROM ACCOUNT #590-23536 "PRIOR YEAR ESCROW, COMMUNICATIONS" Human Affairs - 01/25/10 Page 2 Chairman Wilshire I will say, for the record, this has also been through the Budget Committee, and they recommended final passage on 1-21-10. MOTION BY ALDERMAN CLEMONS TO RECOMMEND FINAL PASSAGE ON THE QUESTION Alderman LaRose We happened to all be present at the Budget Review Committee meeting so we are aware of what this is all about, but for the general public who are probably wondering, this happens to be a communication grant that will allow the police and fire departments to be able to talk with other police and fire department entities who have a different radio frequency than we have, and also people on line at disaster sites. It is a communication thing where everybody will be able to talk to one another even though they have different types of equipment. Chairman Wilshire It is VHF/UHF gateways. Thank you for the explanation Alderman LaRose. The motion before us is to recommend final passage of R-1 0-01. Is there further discussion? MOTION CARRIED NEW BUSINESS - ORDINANCES - None PUBLIC COMMENT - None GENERAL DISCUSSION Alderman LaRose stated he favored the Mayor's proposal with regard to CDBG funding. He believed it should be given a chance, and done now rather than waiting until next year. Alderman Clemons stated he believed the idea had merit, but was uncomfortable moving forward at this point as he felt there were too many unanswered questions particularly in relation to the city's budget, the possibility some of the allocation could be cut, how the process would be moved forward in future years, and what sort of restrictions would be placed on eligible non-profits. The idea of allowing applications for funding general operating expenses requires assurance the non-profit applying is a legitimate source, the purpose funding is being used for has been identified by several different sources as is the case currently, etc. He stated he would like to see more written detail and more proposals as to what would be done if the proposal were to be adopted next year. He felt the idea may be a good one, but he required additional information before recommending moving forward. Chairman Wilshire remarked the Review & Comment process would remain the same. They would not change the rules based on whether the committee allocated the 15% or not. Her caution was in the fact the Review & Comment application has been changing over the past few years. She felt more committee input into that process would be in order if the proposed change were to be made. Human Affairs - 01/25/10 Page 3 Alderman Clemons responded his agreement with the notion, but the purpose he took out of the discussion was to enable more non-profits to apply for funding as restrictions for use would be changed. Chairman Wilshire responded she did not believe that to be the case. She felt what the Mayor was attempting to do was eliminate the strings attached to CDBG funding. Applications would follow the Review & Comment process, which has changed over the last few years. The proposed change would not open the process up to additional non-profits. Alderman Clemons stated that is not what he took from the discussion. He believed it would open the door for more non-profits or for non-profits to apply for funding that may not necessarily have been able to due to the fact that they were not either expanding services or initiating new programs. Chairman Wilshire stated it was pretty clear to her the only objective was to ease the process for the non-profits so they did not the strings attached to CDBG funds. She did not take from the conversation that the application process would be open to additional non-profits as they are all eligible to apply now for the 505 account money (general operating). She reiterated her concern was that the process that has been changed over the past few years has not come before the committee. Alderman Melizzi-Golja stated her understanding more non-profits would be able to access the funding if the CDBG allocation were swapped out with general funds dollars put into the Review & Comment process. Alderman Clemons agreed, and stated that was where his concern was as he believed that would lead to a lot of grey areas that are not yet ironed out. Alderman LaRose remarked HUD does not require the city to utilize any of the funds for non-profits. He believed what the Mayor was proposing was for all HUD money to be used for community block grant eligible projects, and that she would put additional funding into the Review & Comment process. It is believed that will provide flexibility to the Review & Comment Committee and provide the city with more opportunity for completing city projects. Alderman Sheehan remarked she felt the proposal was being brought in the 11 th hour, and there have been a lot of unanswered questions. She stated she would feel more comfortable with additional information. She is unsure how the city would save more money. She questioned if there would be a reduction in FTEs because oversight would no longer be needed. She asked where the savings would be and how much was anticipated to be saved. She questioned if there had been funds left over in the account in the past. Chairman Wilshire stated what sometimes happens is projects funded have come in under budget. When the resolution is put together those unused funds are typically re-programmed and put back into the pot for reallocation. Alderman Sheehan stated she would like to have a great level of detail explaining what strings would be eliminated. Alderman LaRose provided an explanation of how funds are re-allocated. He stated the money allocated is being spent wisely, which is why he did not have reservations on the proposal brought forth. As far as the application process to Review & Comment, he felt, if the applications require changing, that can be done during the year for next year's process. Human Affairs - 01/25/10 Page 4 Chairman Wilshire stated the applications have been changed the last two years with no oversight from the committee. Alderman LaRose felt if it was the belief the committee should develop the criteria he was acceptable to that. Alderman Clemons questioned if the requirement exists that excess funds be returned to the city, and was told that it does. Any request for additional funding or re-allocation of dollars has to go through the committee process. Alderman Clemons questioned if city general fund dollars were being utilized for projects that came in under budget, would there be a restriction that would disallow the use of the excess funding towards other operating expenses (he used the example of using excess funding towards the school deficit). Chairman Wilshire explained such re-allocation of funds could not take place with CDBG funds, but could with general operating funds. Alderman Clemons expressed a concern with project oversight, Le., would there be less stringent guidelines with the use of general operating funds. He questioned if the guidelines would be the same what would be the point in changing the process, and if not, what would be less stringent about the process. Chairman Wilshire explained her understanding the HUD guidelines would not be used. That is what the Mayor is proposing we try to get away from. She believed the Mayor to be attempting to simplify the process by just utilizing the Review & Comment process. She explained when funding goes through the Review & Comment process and the funds are allocated for a specific purpose, it is trusted the entity will utilize the funding for the purpose for which they were granted funding. The next year when they re-apply, their financials are reviewed, etc. She stated she believed it to be a good process. Alderman Clemons questioned whether the accountability of funds would change if the funding were coming from city dollars as opposed to HUD dollars, and how that would be changed. Alderman Vitale stated, with the amount of outstanding questions within the committee, she would recommend no change in this year's process. She felt it would be helpful for the members of the committee to see the applications that have been before Review & Comment (perhaps the last three years). She stated there has been a substantial change in the application process. She stated she was not aware those changes had not come back to the Board of Aldermen. She felt it wise to let the process go through its current change before another one takes place. Chairman Wilshire remarked the Mayor was correct in her statement that the recommendations from the Review & Comment Commission have historically been unchanged by the committee or the Board of Aldermen. A lot of faith has been placed in them, and they have done the work. Alderman Melizzi-Golja stated she shared the concern with the application process being changed without input from the Human Affairs Committee. She remarked a comment made during the public hearing that having the ability to say they has received funding from CDBG has helped them to leverage other funding, left her wondering about changing the process. The information the Mayor provided indicated HUD has changed the coding for Neighborhood Housing and they now would have to go through Review & Comment and apply for that CDBG funding. She questioned if there was another benefit to entities being able to say they have received Human Affairs - 01/25/10 Page 5 CDBG dollars as well as general fund dollars. She shared the concern expressed by Alderman Clemons regarding excess dollars being put back into the general fund. Chairman Wilshire provided the clarification of when funds are given to the Review & Comment Commission to allocate to non-profit agencies, there are no funds being return in that process. The discussion regarding excess funds relates to the bricks and mortar piece where they might go out and fix a roof and the project comes in under budget. In that case the entity would only receive the amount of funds necessary to complete the project. Alderman Vitale remarked, with regard to Review & Comment, it is a very rare instance where an entity receives a funding amount equal to their request. She reiterated the benefits of the committee reviewing the application, how it has changed over the years, why the changes were made, and how the follow up with the agencies has been done. Chairman Wilshire remarked when a meeting was conducted with the non-profit organizations, the Mayor explained how she was looking to swap the money out. There was not a lot of concern expressed. One of the questions that was brought up was did they appreciate the feedback about why they received the funding amount they received. She felt that important information to be provided. Alderman Vitale remarked one thing taken out of the new application was some of that feedback. Alderman Clemons stated he had some of his own misconceptions of some of the process, but believed changing it at the 11 th hour was not the right thing to do. He believed the committee should work with the Mayor over the course of the year and develop a process everyone understands and believes will work well. MOTION BY ALDERMAN WILSHIRE TO ALLOW THE MAYOR TO MAKE THE CHANGE OF USING GENERAL OPERATING DOLLARS IN LIEU OF THE CDBG ALLOCATION MOTION FAILED Chairman Wilshire remarked the next item to be determined was the recommendation of the percentage of CDBG funding to be allocated to the Review & Comment process. She stated the amount of the grant was unknown, and, therefore, the exact amount of a particular percentage was unknown. Alderman LaRose remarked the amount may be similar to what was provided last year, inclusive of a stimulus package. Alderman Clemons stated he would not want to provide a concrete number without knowing what the allocation would be. Chairman Wilshire stated it would be difficult to not provide a percentage as the work of the Review & Comment Commission would likely be completed prior to the next meeting of the Human Affairs Committee. Alderman Clemons questioned last year's allocation. Chairman Wilshire stated the human service program support was $117,750, which she believed to be 15%. Alderman Clemons questioned whether it would be safe to assume the city would receive the same amount of funding this year. Alderman LaRose stated he felt providing for 15% would allow the Human Affairs - 01/25/10 Page 6 commission to do their work understanding changes make have to be made depending upon the actual grant amount. Alderman Sheehan remarked, given the current state of the economy, the increase in patronage, and decrease in donations, the amount of CDBG funding allocated to non-profits through the Review & Comment process should be fully funded. MOTION BY ALDERMAN SHEEHAN TO RECOMMEND THE ALLOCATION OF FIFTEEN PERCENT (15°1<» OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT FUNDING TO NONM PROFIT OPERATIONS MOTION CARRIED ADJOURNMENT MOTION BY ALDERMAN LAROSE TO ADJOURN MOTION CARRIED The meeting was declared adjourned at 9:30 p.m. Alderman Mary Ann Melizzi-Golja Committee Clerk  Community Development 589-3095 City of Nashua Planning and Zoning BUilding Safety 589-3090 589-3080 Code Enforcement 589-3100 Community Development Division Urban Programs 589-3085 Economic Development 589-3070 City Hall, 229 Main Street, PO Box 2019 Conservation Commission 589-3105 Nashua, New Hampshire 03061-2019 FAX 589-3398 www.gonashua.com January 22, 2010 To: Alderman Wilshire From: Carrie Johnson Schena, Urban Programs Manager Cc: Human Affairs Committee Re: FY2010 COSG update Per your request, please find attached a summary of the FY2010 COBG funded projects. This summary was drafted to provide the Human Affairs Committee with current information to be used in evaluating past performance of COSG applicants. These projects relate to Resolution R-09-158, passed by the Board of Alderman on May 14, 2009.  FY2010 CDBG FUNDED PROJECTS DATE AWARD AWARD ENCUMB NAME RECV'D REQUESTED CDBG CDBG-R YTD SPENTYTD NH Legal Assistance 1/7/2009 $ 3,000 $ 3,000 $ 2,445.47 $ 544.53 Micro Credit - NH 1/9/2009 $ 12,000 $ 12,000 $ 12,000.00 $ - Police Athletic League 1/16/2009 $ 40,000 $ 15,000 $ 15,000.00 Ctr Multiply Handicapped 2/6/2009 $ 20,000 NHSGN-PUB SVC 2/11/2009 $ 50,000 $ 45,000 $ 24,545.45 $ 20,454.55 NHSGN 2/11/2009 $ 35,000 City ofNashua - Brownfields 2/11/2009 $ 80,000 $ 80,000 $ - $ - NH Small Business Devel. Ctr. 2/11/2009 $ 20,000 Community Council-PUB SVC 2/12/2009 $ 75,000 $ 15,000 $ 15,000.00 VFW 2/13/2009 $ 100,000 $ 40,000 $ 40,000.00 Youth Council 2/13/2009 $ 162,000 Nashua Area Health Center 2/13/2009 $ 45,000 Girl's Inc. 2/13/2009 $ 55,000 $ 30,000 $ 30,000.00 Boys & Girls Club 2/13/2009 $ 125,000 $ 20,000 $ 20,000.00 Great American Downtown 2/13/2009 $ 50,000 Program Administration 2/13/2009 $ 153,000 $ 143,000 $ 10,000 $ 8,809.00 $ 72,567.52 Home Improvement Program 2/13/2009 $ 150,000 $ 150,000 $ 16,060.00 $ 80,381.00 IllP Program Operations 2/13/2009 $ 113,000 $ 113,000 $ 24,474.00 Best Retail Practices 2/13/2009 $ 15,000 $ 15,000 $ - Pre-Foreclosure Assistance 2/13/2009 $ 75,000 Innovative Business Program 2/13/2009 $ 10,000 $ 10,000 $ - Community Gardens 2/13/2009 $ 25,000 $ 4,000 $ - Security Monitoring System 2/13/2009 $ 30,000 Ash street Skateboard Park 2113/2009 $ 3,000 PAL basketball courts 2/13/2009 $ 15,000 $ 11,000 $ - City Parks 2/13/2009 $ 50,000 $ 24,000 Lighting on Heritage Rail Trail 2/13/2009 $ 10,000 Sidewalk Snowplow match 2/13/2009 $ 24,000 $ 24,000 $ 24,000.00 Net at Murray Field 2/13/2009 $ 8,000 $ 8,000 $ 6,443.00 Business Revolving Fund 2/13/2009 $ 250,000 I $ 71,273 $ - $ - Southeast Quadrant Skate Park 2/13/2009 $ 250,000 Hunt Building 2/13/2009 $ 45,000 $ 45,000 $ - $ - Soup Kitchen and Shelter-PUB SVC R&C $ 75,000 $ 57,750 $ 31,500.00 $ 26,250.00 Contingency $ 41,438 TOTAL $ 2,173,000 $ 789,188 $ 198,273 $ 195,359.92 $ 275,114.60  Rtf ,--' Unexpended Organization FY06 FY07 FY08 FY09 FY10 5-Yr Totals Balance* City of Nashua DPW $9,230 $24,000 $58,230 City of Nashua· Parks/Rec $32,000 $13,685 $50,000 $25,000 $184,685 Community Gardens $4,000 $4,000 PAL Basketball Courts $11,000 $11,000 City Parks $24,000 $24,000 Murray Field Nets $8,000 $1,557 UPD • Capital $0 Marguerites Place $25,000 $12,185 $37,185 HIP Program $150,000 $150,000 $150,000 $130,000 $150,000 $730,000 $69,619 NHSGN·HomeOwne~hip $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 $40,000 $45,000 $235,000 NHSGN • Capital $25,500 $35,000 $60,500 $24,545 Harbor Homes Inc. $30,000 $35,000 $30,000 $35,000 $130,000 Habitat For Humanity $7,000 $7,000 Nashua PAL $14,400 $600 $2,053 $31,500 $15,000 $63,553 $15,000 Nashua Childrens Home $0 VFW • Capital $40,000 $40,000 $40,000 Tolles Street Mission· Capital $15,400 $15,400 UPD Consolidated Plan $0 Nashua Pastoral Care Center $0 Friendship Club - Capital $17,000 $15,000 $32,000 Adult Learning Center - $45,000 $45,000 $45,000 $135,000 Community Council of Nashua $20,000 $50,000 $70,000 Community Council - Human Sv~. $15,000 $15,000 $15,000 Nashua Center for Mult. Handicapped $0 Area Agency $5,800 $5,800 $11,600 Plus Company $28,000 $6,000 $10,000 $44,000 Great America Downtown $50,000 $50,000 NH Legal Assistance $1,500 $3,000 $3,000 $3,000 $10,500 $2,456 Community Development City Bell $0 NH Community Loan Program $12,500 $12,500 $25,000 Nashua Youth Council - Capital $45,000 $45,000 $45,000 $135,000 $41,200 Dental Connection - Capital $9,293 $9,293 Neighborhood Crime Watch $7,000 $14,000 $15,000 $36,000 French Hill Crime Watch $3,500 $3,500  'C:'~-=- Unexpended Organization FY06 FY07 FY08 FY09 FY10 5-Yr Totals Balance* SNHS - Capital $35,000 $20,000 $20,000 $75,000 $40,000 Community Development Grant Writer $21,220 $21,220 Community Development - Court St. $5,000 $5,000 Community Development - Best Retail $12,000 $15,000 $27,000 Economic Dev. Dept - Rev. Loan Fund $71,273 $71,273 $71,273 Community Dev. MicroEnterprise $10,000 $10,000 NH Small Business Dev. Center $0 Senior Center $52,939 $52,939 UPD -VISTA $20,000 $10,000 $30,000 Boys Club -Human Services Support $14,800 $14,800 Boys Club - Capital $35,000 $26,500 $20,000 $81,500 Girls Inc. Capital $30,000 $30,000 $60,000 $30,000 Keystone Hall - Human Svrs. Support $25,000 $17,440 $25,000 $20,000 $87,440 NSKS Capital $25,000 $20,000 $5,500 $14,005 $64,505 NSKS • Human Services Support $63,462 $52,000 $50,500 $66,158 $232,120 $31,500 Nashua Area Health Human Srvs Sup. $38,000 $29,500 $38,000 $13,400 $118,900 HIP Operations $99,650 $103,689 $104,000 $113,000 $113,000 $533,339 $88,526 UPD Adminsitration $142,000 $139,702 $135,200 $153,077 $153,000 $722,979 $70,432 City of Nashua-Hunt Building $22,000 $50,000 $58,879 $45,000 $175,879 $45,000 City of Nashua· Brownfields Boiler House $80,000 $80,000 Microcredit $12,000 $12,000 Contingency - $25,854 $82,600 $18,907 $41,483 $168,844 $893,086 $1,071,524 $955,399 $891,479 $929,756 *Unexpended amounts are from FY2010; except for Nashua Youth Council (FY09) ; SNHS FY08 & 09); and NSKS (FY08)