My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
17B
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2013
>
050713
>
17B
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/1/2013 5:17:59 PM
Creation date
5/1/2013 5:17:49 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
AGENDA REPORT
DOCUMENT DATE
5/7/2013
DESTRUCT DATE
15Y
DOCUMENT NO
17B
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
45
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
4. Summary of citizen participation process and consultation process <br /> The City held two joint HHSG grant application workshops in collaboration with the cities of Livermore <br /> and Dublin in early December 2011. Notices regarding the workshops were mailed directly to over <br /> agencies and persons in an "interest list" data base,and notices were also published in the key local <br /> newspapers and on city web sites prior to the workshops. HHSG grant applications were reviewed in <br /> three public meetings held in March and April 2013.All meetings were noticed in a newspaper of <br /> general circulation as well as a local paper that is delivered to all Pleasanton residents.Alameda County <br /> also published notices regarding the overall Action Plan (which includes all entitlement cities and the <br /> urban county) in ANG newspapers throughout the County.Copies of the draft Action Plan were provided <br /> to the main Library and City Hall in Pleasanton for public review. A 30-day public review period, <br /> coordinated by Alameda County HOME Consortium,was held from late March through the end of April <br /> 2013. <br /> S. Summary of public comments <br /> As noted above,the FY 2013 Action Plan was reviewed at three public hearings in March (the City's <br /> Human Services and Housing Commissions)and April 2013 (the City Council).The two Commissions <br /> heard brief presentations from subrecipient agencies and entertained comments from interested <br /> members of the public. In the past, subrecipient agencies have generally commented that the CDBG <br /> funds which they received enabled projects to be implemented and services to be provided which <br /> otherwise could not have been accomplished. In the past, agencies have expressed frustration with the <br /> difficulty in making progress on capital and construction projects due to the current economy and the <br /> impact of the prevailing wage requirement relative to the local construction market(i.e., contractors <br /> often choose not to bid on small jobs that involve the use of federal funds due to increased project costs <br /> and higher administrative burden). However,the recent weak construction economy has reversed this <br /> trend in some cases.The more common concern is the impact of significant rent increases which is <br /> making it difficult for low-income households, particularly those who rely on Section 8 rental assistance. <br /> In general,the lack of affordable housing is perceived as an issue that is intermingled with many other <br /> human service needs. <br /> 6. Summary of comments or views not accepted and the reasons for not accepting them <br /> There were none. <br /> 7. Summary <br /> [None] <br /> Annual Action Plan 4 <br /> 2013 <br /> OMB Control No:2506-0117(exp.07/31/2015) <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.