Laserfiche WebLink
Mr. Floyd wanted to know if the County could apply for a grant in the future <br />for Gifford, if the Committee selects the West Wabasso Phase 11 Project. Mr. <br />Rohani remarked that the County can apply for future grants, as long as the <br />current project application is closed. The County can only have one project open <br />at a time with regular category block grants. <br />Chairman Smith turned the Committee's attention to the financial impact <br />this would have on the residents of the West Wabasso community. Mr. Alday <br />confirmed that there will be fees associated with the new sewer system for the <br />community but the County will alert the residents of the fixed costs associated by <br />certified letter. Mr. Rohani also interjected that in some cases, residents may <br />apply for SHIP grants to assist with these fees. Mr. Burke also commented that <br />with a LMI status, HUD has requirements in place that prohibit the County from <br />charging impact fees associated with projects such as the West Wabasso sewer <br />project. <br />Mr. Rigby inquired if this new application 'grant will have the assessment <br />stated on the actual grant as was on previous West Wabasso Phase I project. <br />Mr. Rohani replied in the affirmative. <br />Chairman Smith asked why, out of 52 residential homes, so many were <br />opposed to this project. Mr. Rigby suggested that those residents were <br />misinformed. Ms. Price also :commented that during Phase I, the residents that <br />were surveyed were in some cases renters, and not the actual homeowners. <br />Only the actual homeowners vyiii be surveyed in this project. Mr. Alday noted that <br />the County does need to contact all owners about connection fees, but that all <br />residents Including ;renters get an income survey and notice about monthly fees. <br />Mr. Burke further explained that a base fee plus and estimated cost based on <br />water usage is used in `the notice so everyone will have a fair idea of monthly <br />costs. <br />Ms. Price suggested that because the lack of positive conveyance within <br />the community, a drainage project within East Gifford will be a help. <br />Mr. Burke interjected that the Committee needs to manage expectations <br />with this project. The East Gifford drainage project may not fix all the drainage <br />problems the community has currently. Mr. Alday commented that a Gifford <br />drainage project to address more needs could be a future application after this <br />project closes. <br />ON MOTION by Mr. Floyd, SECONDED by Mr. Idelette, the members <br />voted unanimously (3-0) to recommend to the BCC to choose West <br />CDBG / Un -Approved December 19, 2013 <br />C:\Users\aweragoda\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\Temporary Internet <br />Files\Content.Outlook\UDJ6DNQW\CDBG CATF 11 06 14 Meeting Minutes.doc <br />95 <br />