My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
12/7/1977
CBCC
>
Meetings
>
1970's
>
1977
>
12/7/1977
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/23/2015 11:28:42 AM
Creation date
6/11/2015 10:05:59 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
12/07/1977
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
100
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
K <br />m <br />MONTH TO START SPENDING THE $203,000 RECEIVED.FROM THE LAST APPLICATION. <br />HE CONTINUED THAT HE ATTENDED A MEETING OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT <br />ASSOCIATION AND THERE ARE NEW REGULATIONS. WE HAVE THE CHANCE TO GO <br />FOR MULTIPLE PURPOSE'FUNDING FOR MULTIPLE YEARS {A 3 -YEAR PERIOD) OR <br />MULTIPLE PURPOSE FOR A• SINGLE YEAR PERIOD. ISR. BRENNAN STATED THAT <br />HE PERSONALLY WOULD PREFER THE 3 -YEAR PERIOD BUT DOES NOT REALLY KNOW <br />WHICH IS THE BETTER WAY TO GO. HE NOTED THAT'HE ALREADY HAS RECEIVED <br />RESUMES FROM PEOPLE INTERESTED IN BECOMING THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT <br />COORDINATOR FOR THE COUNTY AND FELT IT WOULD BE ADVANTAGEOUS IN HIRING <br />SOMEONE IF WE HAD THE MULTIPLE YEAR PROGRAM.` <br />THE PLANNER CONTINUED THAT WE HAVE TO HAVE A PRE -APPLICATION <br />IN BY THE END OF .JANUARY, AND AT THE TIME THIS PRE -APPLICATION IS RE- <br />VIEWED HUD WANTS TO SEE 75% OF THE $203,000 JUST RECENTLY RECEIVED SPENT OR <br />COMMITTED, BUT MAINLY SPENT, SO THAT THEY KNOW THAT WE ARE DOING THE <br />JOB. HE FELT THIS IS A VERY DIFFICULT SITUATION, BUT NOTED THAT THIS <br />IS A GOOD PROGRAM AND WE WOULDN'T HAVE BEEN ABLE TO MAKE THE IMPROVE- <br />MENTS WE HAVE IN THE DESIGNATED AREAS WITHOUT THIS PROGRAM. <br />THE BOARD AGREED THAT WE DO NOT WANT TO GIVE UP ON THIS PRO- <br />GRAM. <br />COMMISSIONER SCHMUCKER NOTED THAT A LOT OF PROJECTS WERE <br />JUST ASSIGNED PRIORITIES AT THE LAST CITIZEN'S ADVISORY COMMITTEE <br />MEETING, BUT THE POSSIBILITY OF SPENDING 757 OF THE MONEY IN SUCH A <br />SHORT TIME IS PRETTY REMOTE. <br />COMMISSIONER SIEBERT ASKED IF PAST PERFORMANCE DOESN'T COUNT <br />FOR SOMETHING, AND PLANNER BRENNAN AGREED IT DID, BUT POINTED OUT THAT <br />FOR TWO YEARS WE HAVE BEEN PLANNING TO SPEND MONEY FOR REHABILITATION <br />BUT HAVEN'T BEEN ABLE TO DO IT SO FAR. HE NOTED THAT THIS IS THE <br />ONLY AREA WHERE WE HAVEN'T SPENT MONEY. <br />DISCUSSION FOLLOWED IN REGARD TO THE PROBLEMS INVOLVED WITH <br />THE REHABILITATION PROGRAM AS THE PLAN WORKED OUT DOES NOT BRING THE <br />BUILDINGS COMPLETELY UP TO THE BUILDING CODE. <br />COUNTY PLANNER STATED THAT HUD DOES NOT ENCOURAGE VARIANCE <br />FROM THE BUILDING CODE AND THEY ARE NOT GOING TO TAKE ANY EXCUSES FOR <br />NOT DOING REHABILITATION. HE NOTED THAT THEY DON'T CARE IF YOU DO ONLY <br />THREE HOUSES INSTEAD OF TEN AS LONG AS THEY ARE BROUGHT UP TO CODE. <br />87 <br />3 <br />DEC 71977 27 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.