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 II 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,Olace that prohibit Te County from <br />charging impact fees associated with pro1ects such as the West Wabasso sewer <br />project. <br />Mr. Rigby inquired if this new application *ant will have the assessment <br />stated on the actual grant as was,on previous WeeWabasso Phase I project. <br />Mr. Rohani replied in the affirmative. <br />Chairman Smith asked why, ou# of.:5'2"estclential homes, so many were <br />opposed to this projec#4., ,Mr. Rigby.; fs�uggesterthat those residents were <br />misinformed. Ms. .i Price al'sev::commented,that during Phase I, the residents that <br />were surveyed wei^e;,,in sone'_ cases renters, and not the actual homeowners. <br />Only the actual homeowners{,ii.l be surveyed in this project. Mr. Alday noted that <br />the County does neediWgnontatWOI1 F.owners about connection fees, but that all <br />residents_ including ,r;;enters=00 an income survey and notice about monthly fees. <br />Mr. Bu•` a further ekillained`{th5at a base fee plus and estimated cost based on <br />watera,,,ge is used tn she nota a 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\Microsoftniindows\Temporary Internet <br />Files\Content.Outlook\UDJ6DNQW\CDBG CATF 11 06 14 Meeting Minutes.doc <br />95 <br />