The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutR-80-0105RESOLUTION NO. 80-105 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO SUBMIT A GRANT APPLICATION TO THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT (HUD) FOR THE PROPOSED COM- MUNITY DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM DURING 1980-81, IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CHANGES THAT HAVE BEEN MADE TO THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT THREE YEAR PLAN AND APPROVED AT DULY HELD PUBLIC HEARINGS; AND FURTHER AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER, UPON APPROVAL OF SAID GRANT BY HUD, TO ACCEPT THE ,SAME AND NEGOTIATE THE NECESSARY IMPLEMENTING CONTRACTS AND AGREEMENTS, SUBJECT TO THE APPROVAL OF �j�,,,; ;��/ THE CITY COMMISSION PRIOR TO EXECUTION THEREOF. FOLLOW" RESOLVED BY THE COMMISSION Section 1. The City Manager is BE IT OF' CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA: hereby authorized to submit a grant application to the' U.S. Department of Housing Urban Development'(HUD)' for, the proposed Community Development Program during 1980-81, in accordance with the changes that have -been made to the- Community Development three year plan and approved at duly held -public ' hearings.` Section 2. The City Manager, as Chief Administrative Officer' for the City of Miami, upon ";approval of the said grant by HUD is hereby authorized to accept the grant and upon receipt of same negotiate the necessary implement- ing contracts and agreements to implement the'1979-82 Community Development;' Program; subject 'to the approval of the City Commission prior to execution thereof. PASSED AND ADOPTED this TEST: 12th day 'of " . " February RALG. ONGIE, CITY CLERK PREPARED AND APPROVED B J.`MICHAEL HAYGOOD J ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY GEORGE CITY 1980. "DOCU.MENT ITEM NO. Maurice A.Ferre MAYOR AS TO FORM KNOX, JR. RNEY !1 ND EX RECTNESS: CITY COMMISSION MEETING OF FEB1 2 1980 oumoNN NO. 0-1 � ................ TJ Joseph Grassie City Manager FROM: Dena "; Spillman Director Community Development CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA INTER -OFFICE MEMORANDUM February 8, 1980 FIDE; Cornmunity Development Public>'"Hearing • QEFER Nc:s: City Commission "Meeting Agenda_- 2/12/80 ENCLOSUR S Attached are the staff recommendations in response to the issues raised at the first Community Development, hearing on January 24. The second hearing on this matter is scheduled for 400p.m. on Tuesday, February 12, 1980. Area Issue Advisory Board feels the funds allocated are not sufficient for area needs. A need for additional"stree-t improvements has-been indicated. Allapattah Coconut Grove Edison Little River The Advisory Board _ recommends that $100,000 be added to, the. current recommendation, to be used, for se- veral activities. Also, the reduction of the land, acquisition program was questioned. Finally, the:Board would ':like ,:the opportu- nity to further" consider the economic development strategy option. Residents, did not agree with the City's strategy for economic development and the reallocatlOfl of $50,000 from rehabilitation" to this activity. - Recommendation The per capita funding level for Allapattah is low. Staff propcses to make up the dif- ference needed for sixth year when seventh year funding is considered. At that time, all target areasfunding will;be:reviewed. This year $50,000 will be allocated to begin street improvement design. Comparison of target area funding levels has shown the Coconut Grove target area as.consis- tently [receiving a high proportion of; CD, funds. The existing -recommendation maintains that high level of per capita funding commintment. Ad- ding an additional $100,000 would widen the gap even_ further between Coconut Grove and the other areas. All areas have unmet needs, staff'recom- mends meeting the, needs of areas such as Allapattah, where funding has been lower in the past. In land acquisition, the emphasis has been on the acquisition'of vacant property and abandoned, dilapidated buildings. Since the most recent appraisals have been received, it is pro- jected that sufficient funds are currently avail- able ,to acquire the properties: thecommunity has identified; therefore, no additional land acqui- sition `funds :are needed at. this time. =`Staff will work with the Board to determine the effectiveness of an: economic ,development office in the area and arrange,`a later shift of area funds. In, order for the city economic development strategy to work, a comprehensive approach which includes cooperating neighborhood offices is essential. The opportunity for areas to participate can only be feasible when funds are reallocated from other target area projects. The Board would recommend the non-profit agency to receive the $50,000 for economic development.' 41. r -1- IIuIIIII!!1111... Area Little Havana Model =:City Issue The following requests were received from agencies in the neighborhood:. Little Havana Activities and: Nutrition Center of Dade County, Inc. - $30,000 Action Community. center additional staff. Little Havana Development Authority - $75,000 over two years. The -Board is not in accord withthe city-wide economic development strategy and wants to fundthe.Model City Develop- ment Agency proposal -for' $350, 000. The. Board was not prepared to make recommendations at the first hearing. The neighborhood would like to participate in the economic development strategy. - 2 - Recommendation It is recommended that the request Activities and Nutrition Center of which would constitute the funding service, be denied. The request by Action Community Center is from an agency primarily supported with city: funding sources. The addition to their budget would be $5,000 and is recommended. The funds would be taken from Latin River - front Park, reducing it to $320,000. The request from Little Havana Development Authority can be met from an existing Fifth Year,studyproject for of the Little Havana Dade County, Inc., of a new social Little Havana in the amount of'$25,000'and `:by committing the Sixth Year economic development. funds in the amour of $50,000 to the agency.' It is notrecommended that the Model City Development Agency be funded at the level requested. It is essen- tial that all development agencies funded by the city cooperate in the city-wide strategy to minimize dupli- cation and make maximum .effective 'use of the funds. The Board .will :meet the evening of February 7th. A follow-up memorandum will be sent to the City Corgnis- sion on Nonday, February 11,..1980,-regarding the Board's actions and staff responses. In order to fund the economic development office it is recommended. that $50,000 be reallocated from the Housing Rehabilitation program in ;the area. IIIIII II Area Multi -Area Issue Many social service projects currently funded by the county will lose 50% of their funding requested that the city when the county. qet. M.any,agenclee n this . situatsituationhaveayment - - of:thesefunds '.- . assume-te p cuts- their bud -- Recommendation This major policy issue was to be discussed at a meeting between both City and County Commission members. A meet- ing could not be scheduledwhich met everyone's individual schedules. The county, on February 5, went ahead and approved their community development application without changing the recommendation on social service funding. The county has taken unilateral action in this matter and has cut the budgets of county projects. Staff recom- mends not funding the 50% needed this year which, accord- ing to county information, would go to 75% next year and 100% the year after. This would leave the city with new social service programs which we cannot afford to operate - 3 - HEMMINNERWiiimmPrm