VIPpeople
MEMBERS OF Poor People's Economic Human Rights Campaign DeKalb
Alliance
LINC (Low Income Networking and Communications) Project Email
us!
VIP
People
|
![]() |
BLOCK GRANT CONSOLIDATED PLAN PROGRAM YEARS 2000-2004 Presented by members of the
PART I COMMENTS ON A GENERAL
OVERVIEW OF THE PLAN
Thank you for taking time to consider these comments. We appreciate the time and energy required to develop this draft Plan, especially with the varied and complex HUD regulations. Each of us has come away from our review of the Plan with a greater appreciation of how much work it takes to be on the City Council and how much work staff does. My remarks focus on the lack of urgency in the Consolidated Plan. This lack of urgency in the plan gives the appearance of a government that is not interested in, and/or insensitive to the needs of some of our most vulnerable citizens. Here is what I mean. The plan indicates that there are 297 families on waiting lists for public housing or section 8 subsidies. On page 46 of the Plan it states that there are "3,900 persons who are on the brink of homelessness." The Plan indicates that 200 housing units will be built to address the needs of low-income citizens. We understand that CDBG funds cannot be used to build housing, but there is no specific action or intention with a corresponding budget line for any CDBG approved activity that indicates how the city will work to achieve this goal. We encourage the city to adjust the Plan and be specific about how the building of 200 housing units will be carried out over the course of this Plan. In another section of the plan there is $50,000 targeted for Private Property Rehabilitation. In year 7, five homes will receive $10,000. We understand that local landlords and owners of property rented by low-income citizens are not interested to participate in rehab programs sponsored by the City because they want assurances that their investments will be protected. We encourage the City to develop with landlords, low-income citizens and interested citizens creative incentives to encourage landlords to participate in a rehabilitation program. At the same time, we suggest that the City provide oversight to insure that properties receiving these funds remain earmarked for low-income families. And finally, we encourage the City to increase funding for Property Rehabilitation and do what is necessary to enforce codes as a preventative strategy. In another section of the Plan where citizens were asked to prioritize needs, food is at the top of their list. We are concerned with the overall citizen input to the Plan. The fact that families identified food as their first need and that this item is tabled for further discussion leaves the impression that to be hungry in DeKalb or to live in substandard housing as indicated in other parts of the plan is not an urgent priority. We hope that this is not true, but it is difficult to engage citizens in government when they feel ignored or alienated when most in need. Finally, we note that in June 1999, in the CDBG Annual Review more than one half of the funds for program year five were not spent. We assume they were carried over to the next year, since most of those moneys were for the Short Street Redevelopment Project. Yet, approximately only one third of the Private Property Rehabilitation funds were spent in that time. It is our concern that both the planning for the use of and the administration of these funds lacks attention and the will to meet the needs of the citizens they are intended to support. Return to
Table of Contents
|
Recent
Action:
March 16, 2000:
February 14 2000:
February 2-8 2000:
November 12-14 1999:
October 1999:
October 28, 1999:
|