City of Lawrence, KS

Neighborhood Resources Advisory Committee

January 13, 2005 minutes

 

MEMBERS PRESENT:

 

Jeanette Collier, Donna Duncan, marci francisco, Janet Gerstner, Paula Gilchrist, Carrie Moore, Greg Moore, Vern Norwood, Mike Randolph, Kirsten Roussel, and Patti Welty

 

 

 

MEMBERS ABSENT:

 

None

 

 

 

STAFF PRESENT:

 

Monica Cardin, Melissa Mitchell, and Margene Swarts

 

 

 

PUBLIC PRESENT:

 

None

 

G. Moore called the meeting to order at 5:30 p.m.

 

Introductions

Staff and members introduced themselves. 

 

Approval of the December 9, 2004, minutes

G. Moore moved to approve the December 9, 2004 minutes.  Roussel seconded the motion, which passed unanimously.

 

Discuss Deliberation Process

Staff distributed an updated member list and deliberation summary.  Swarts stated that funding for the CDBG/HOME programs will be less this year than last year.  She reviewed the summary memo.

 

G. Moore inquired about the federal formula used for CDBG funding.

 

There followed a brief discussion regarding the formula.

 

C. Moore questioned if 12C, Hearthstone, Furnish and install 30 wood blinds on 1st and 2nd floor - $4,000, should be in Capital Improvements.   Swarts replied it is not Capital Improvements, but Public Service because wood blinds would be considered “furnishings”. 

 

C. Moore questioned if 13A, HCCI, Tenant/Landlord Counseling and Education - $27,793, is a Capital Improvement.  Swarts acknowledged it was incorrectly assigned and should be moved. 

 

C. Moore questioned if 15A, LDCHA, Tenant Based Rental Assistance – Home, should be $180,000 or $200,000.   Swarts stated that $20,000 is Administration so the $180,000 is correct.

Roussel inquired if 17A, TTHI, CHDO Operating funds – 5% of HOME Funds and 17B, CHDO Project Funds – 15% of HOME funds are limited to $34,242 and $102,726.  Swarts stated the operating is at a maximum, but the set-aside is a 15% minimum, so more funds could be allocated.  

 

Roussel questioned if it is the same with HOME Administration, or if funding could go higher.  Swarts stated that the due to the 10% cap, total Administration cannot exceed $68,484.

 

Collier questioned Swarts about estimates regarding the Achievement Place for Boys application.  Swarts stated it was information that was included with the application.

 

Collier referred to Health Care Access and questioned if it is eligible.    Swarts stated it is because Health Care Access gives medication to low to moderate income people. 

 

Norwood commented that she would like to see future applications in a standard format.

 

Swarts acknowledged that would be a good idea and noted the City Commission has moved to a paperless agenda and packets.  It would probably be a good idea for the Committee to discuss moving toward electronic applications. 

 

Gerstner stated she applauds the train of thought, but is concerned that the target neighborhoods might have limited access.

 

Norwood noted she has concerns for people who are computer illiterate. 

 

Begin Deliberations – Neighborhood Associations

Norwood stated that on some proposals one can see what the coordinator salary is and on some one cannot.  She would like to see it standardized, per hour what they are making and what it is based on. 

 

Gilchrist agreed.

 

francisco stated she wants to look at all salaries and those that are being requested from agencies as well.

 

Swarts stated that salaries fall under operating expenses, which also pay for rent and utilities.

 

Norwood stated that with the limited funds available, the Committee needs to cut some expenditures.  It would be helpful to start planning and thinking ahead about operating expenses and coordinator salaries.

 

G. Moore noted that last year the committee was under fire regarding the funding for coordinator salaries.

 

francisco stated that $10 dollars per hour is reasonable for the coordinator salaries.

 

G. Moore noted that the neighborhood associations needed to be more specific on the hours the coordinators spent working.

 

Welty questioned if the Committee could request more information.

 

Swarts stated yes and advised that staff will get any information the Committee needed. 

 

Collier asked how the coordinator position was selected.  Swarts stated that neighborhoods advertise in the community-at-large.  There is not a requirement for the coordinator to live in a particular neighborhood.

 

Collierr questioned the reasoning behind advertising in the community-at-large.  Swarts stated that the neighborhoods association has to abide by the Equal Opportunity Employment regulations.

 

C. Moore moved to keep Operating Expenses the same as last year; 1A, BCNA - $2,370; 2A, ELNA - $3,152; 3A NLIA - $1,900; 4A, ONA - $3,985; and 5A, PNA - $3,684.  Norwood seconded the motion.

 

francisco questioned if the proposed operating costs increased because expenses increased.

 

C. Moore noted that funds are continually decreasing.

 

francisco asked how the neighborhoods get notices for meetings.

 

Roussel discussed that Brook Creek hand delivers their newsletters.  They also began announcing two meetings in each newsletter.  The lack of advertising caused meeting turnouts to decrease because there was not a constant reminder of what was going on in their neighborhood.

 

Norwood noted that with money shrinking there are going to have to be drastic cuts in places which may alter some activities.

There followed a brief discussion regarding possible solutions for the neighborhoods association meeting announcements.

 

Norwood suggested moving ahead with the motion on the floor.  If a neighborhood association has a problem, it can bring their concerns to the Committee.  

 

The motion passed.

 

francisco moved to fund Coordinator Salary at $10 an hour, with the understanding of what the hours cover; 1C, BCNA - $3,540; 2C, ELNA - $5,200; 3C, NLIA -  $1,500; 4B, ONA - $7,800; and 5C, PNA - $4,200. Gerstner seconded the motion.

 

Gilchrist questioned the rationale of the specific hourly rate. 

 

francisco stated that they will not be paying even dollars across the board.  Each neighborhood is different and funding amounts are different than last year.  There is a discrepancy in salaries from last year.  Each neighborhood is unique. 

 

Gerstner noted that it made sense to her. 

 

C. Moore stated that at the end of the allocation process last year, the Committee agreed to discuss the details on coordinator salaries. (She noted that this has not yet happened)

 

The motion passed.

 

Gerstner moved to fund Neighborhood Clean Ups 1D, BCNA - $150; 3B, NLIA - $1,800; 4C, ONA - $75; and 5C, PNA - $830. C. Moore seconded the motion.

 

francisco stated that a wide variety in the brush collection is something to look over and asked if PNA used City staff. 

 

C. Moore noted that the application breaks down into the hours what the City would charge and then PNA gets outside bids. 

 

Swarts stated that North Lawrence uses a different tree service, not the City’s.  They receive two brush clean ups, one in the fall and one in the spring.  They do it for a flat rate. 

 

The motion passed unanimously.

 

With regard to 2D – ELNA Work Day, Swarts noted that due to lead-based paint issues, they would not want to fund paint related items.

 

Gerstner moved to fund 2D, ELNA Work Day- $1,133, with no funds towards paint. Duncan seconded the motion, which passed unanimously.

 

Gerstner moved to fund 3E, NLIA, Sidewalk, North 7th Street - $750 and 4E, ONA, 1033 Kentucky brick walkway - $1,350.  Norwood seconded the motion.

 

C. Moore noted they need to be certain this project meets low to moderate income qualifications.  She asked if it can be determined that it is not a direct benefit to a homeowner, but is for the neighborhood. 

 

Norwood stated that she thought the City was funding those types of projects.  Swarts replied that at one time the City did, but not in the last couple of years. 

 

Roussel stated that the proposal was unclear on the locations of the sidewalk repairs.

 

C. Moore stated she has a philosophical issue with brick sidewalks and would vote against the motion.

 

Norwood amended her motion to exclude 4E, ONA - $1,350 and Gerstner amended the second.

 

Duncan asked who is responsible for the sidewalks on empty lots and also questioned what happens when someone purchases the property. Swarts replied that even if it is vacant, someone owns the property and the property owner is responsible.

 

Norwood and Gerstner agreed to retract the motion and second and suggested further investigation regarding the proposed location.

 

Norwood inquired about drainage tubes in North Lawrence.  Swarts stated that there is an on going drainage study in North Lawrence.   Different areas may need different corrections.  She commented that Chuck Soules, Public Works Director, noted that if the proposed project does not conflict with the results of the drainage study, drainage tubes may be used to correct some problems.

 

Gilchrist questioned when the study would be completed.  Swarts replied that it would be completed in the spring and before CDBG funds become available in August. 

There followed a brief discussion regarding the North Lawrence drainage tubes project.

 

Welty wondered if the property owners had to pay to replace concrete driveway approaches and if so, would they be compensated.

 

Collier left the meeting.

 

C. Moore moved to zero fund 3D, NLIA, 700 Block Lake-Drainage Tubes and Ditches - $7,500, because of the drainage study and no answer to question no. 15 regarding public support of the project.  Gilchrist seconded the motion, which passed unanimously.

 

francisco noted there are two different addresses for the sidewalk improvements.

 

Ted Bolye, NLIA President, will be contacted to clarify the location.  Staff will then notify the Committee regarding the location.

 

Roussel moved to zero-fund 1B, BCNA- Reconstruction of Old Shelter House ($40,000); 2C- ELNA, Van Go Mobil Arts Building Acquisition ($25,000); 3D, NLIA - 700 Block of Lake - Drainage Tubes and Ditches ($7,500); 4D, ONA - Tennessee Street Curb Repairs ($85,000); 4E, ONA - 1033 Kentucky Street Brick Walkway ($1,350); and 5D, PNA - Clinton Park Restoration Project/Restroom ($82,000), because of limited funds.  Gilchrist seconded the motion.

 

Gilchrist stated that is it a hard decision.  We are $400,000 over with requests and it needs to come from somewhere. 

 

Gerstner suggested stopping the discussion and starting the next meeting at this point.

 

francisco stated that she would like to consider the neighborhood Capital Improvements with all Capital Improvement project applications and prioritize the projects. 

 

There followed a brief discussion regarding zero-funding of the neighborhood Capital Improvements.

 

The motion passed.

 

Gerstner left the meeting.

Miscellaneous Items

Swarts stated the reception with the City Commission is in two weeks and everyone should have received their invitations.  The Committee’s next meeting is February 10, 2005 at 5:30 p.m. in the City Commission room.  She noted that Spring break is the fourth Thursday in March.  The Committee can discuss moving the March 24th meeting.

 

Adjourn

There being no further business and no public present, Gilchrist moved to adjourn the meeting.  C. Moore seconded the motion, which passed unanimously.  The meeting concluded at 7:00 p.m.