September 18, 2006

FULL COMMITTEE MINUTES

Members of the Citizens Committee on Community Development will be holding their monthly meeting at the location and on the date indicated below:

Monday, September 18, 2006

1 So. Van Ness Avenue, 5^th Fl.

Conference Room 5080

5:45 p.m. – 7:45 p.m.

Citizen's Committee Attendees:

Daniel Wong

Jordan Klein

John Lucero

Nancy Mayeda

Ralph Romberg

Rene Cazenave

MOCD Staff Attendees:

Fred Blackwell, Director

Melange Matthew, COO

1. Meeting called to order 5:55 PM.

2. August 21, 2006 and September 18, 2006 minutes will be approved at October's meeting, because there isn't quorum.

1. Director's Report – Fred Blackwell: 1) Fred gave the Committee an update on CDBG

Federal Deliberations and where it stands at the federal level. Last year CDBG was funded at the level of about $3.71Bdollars the spending bill that went through the house ended up with a $3.873Bdollars budget for CDBG, which represent about $163Mdollors increase from the year before. And at the Senate level they were only able to get through deliberations at the Committee level. So the Appropriation Committee recommended to the full Senate, that CDBG be funded at a level above what the House said at about $3.877B dollars, which would be $167Mdollars increase, and attached to that no real changes to the formula which was something we were concerned about. The one thing that was up in the air, some folk feel like there could be small changes to what the Senate Committee or the Senate would have got, based on what would happen in the mid-term election i.e. if the Democrats were to get control of the Senate or the House folks think there maybe new proposed spending bills especially for HUD that could be higher than what is currently being proposed. 2) We're 95% there, in terms of getting everyone into contract and beginning work, all the signatures have been gather. At this point most of the stuff that isn't in contract, isn't in contract for a reason. 3) In October just about every department will be going before the Board of Supervisors to talk about  performance measures . This year kind of a heighten sense of attention at the Board of Supervisor level around performance. The Controllers Office is training all departments, so that there's a common language, and framework that gets used to go before the Board of Supervisors across departments. 4) There are two RPF's on our web-site, one is Women's Micro-Enterprise Program is separated into three categories, loans for folks who are emerging entrepreneurial, grants for folks for capitol things like computers. And training, and then ongoing technical assistants. That one for Women's Micro-Enterprise is $425K total, separated into those three parts. This is one of the add backs that was given back to us at tail end of the process. The second one is also Micro-Enterprise, focused on youth, high school age, through young adults and it's the same type of breakdown in terms loans, grants, training, and technical assistants with emphasis on training, and technical assistants side is on peer technical assistants. So what we're doing is actually minding all the entrepreneurial that have trained by our NEDO's to find folks who are young people themselves who started businesses so they can mentor young people who get inspired to open their on businesses. The RFP is requesting proposals that can facilitate that peer mentoring process, but that can also administer a grant fund as well as a loan fund focused on that particular demographic. This money we also got from general fund in a, add back, but it was back in March as part of the violence prevention add back. So the emphasis on this one will be neighborhood that are highly impacted in violence and do aggressive outreach and recruitment from those neighborhoods and really get those folks into the pipeline, so those are the two out there. There's a  bidders conference on September 27^th, for both of those. Proposals are due in this office by October 20^th, by 5:00 with no exceptions. We're putting together a staff review process who will probably bring in for the Women's Micro-Enterprise, readers from the Department on the Status of Women and probably bring in some folk from DCYF for young adults and teenage one. Fred extended an invitation to the Committee to help out in the process.

4. RFP – Melange Matthews: Melange informed the Committee that the RFP would be released near the end of November instead of closer to the holiday, so that folks will have the opportunity to fill it out before the real push for the holidays. And it will give us more time to assess in-house, and have stronger staff recommendations more clear and less rush process. We put together an RFP staff team this year, who have already been meeting for the past month. To try and look at ways to streamline the entry into the RFP, and to also try and find a way to compel applicants to fill out and tell us what they do and what their activities are and we will place that in ESG, Public Service rather than them trying to understand the over arching rubric. This will be the first time we'll have the opportunity for agency to fill out agency information once no matter how many projects their applying for, and sort of have that set aside, and then really synthesize the stuff that's the same across Economic Development, Public Service, and just have one module in the RFP that's really content specific. This will make it easier when we come up on the CAPER, the question Fred has to answer for the Controller's Office and the Board of Supervisors, the question we have for the CAPER are driving through the response to the RFP. It's the first time we're taking the outside information, and making sure it starts at the RFP level. That, that genesis is comprehensive enough to get us the data we need.
5. By-Laws – Melange Matthews: Tabled until October meeting.
6. CAPER– Melange Matthews: The CAPER is what we send to the Federal Government on or before the last day of September by 5:00pm. The most updated version will be published on our web-site tomorrow, it's already published in the library and front office. We're trying to synthesize the information so from a citizens perspective that it's reader and user friendly. We're dropping down all the data off the final contract this week, the guts of it is there, and the narratives are there. The key part of this CAPER is the same thing Fred, Dwayne, and Melange have been drilling into our staff. Unlike many strategic plans this one is really the document that drives the RFP, and what drives our final performance results. We will make sure you have synthesize version over the next ten days as we put it together. The heart and soul of this are the four goals for MOCD and the goals for MOH, and how we go about meeting them. So, what Fred, Dwayne, and Melange have done is take strategic plan and create a five year goal across every single objective that they identified. And what they did was line up the RFP to meet that goal. What they've done is take and put into technical language what our numbers are and what we're trying to achieve that's what we promised HUD and that's what we're driving for. We have four documents that are due to the Federal Government on September 29^th, the first one is the CAPER, the second on is the Citizen's Participation Plan this is also posted in all the same locations that we're legally required to post. What this plan does is encourages citizen engagement in our process throughout the whole year. And the primary change in the Citizen's Participation Plan is what triggers a thirty-day posting review, is called  substance of change . This is really the process of moving funds from one place to another. What we've proposed is that is if we move more than accumulative change in CDBG funds from one activity to another in excess of 10% of the total CDBG grant allocation for the program year. The pots are planning and admin, capital, economic development, and housing. So if we move more than 10% from one to another because a project has failed to get off the ground. Then we need to publish that and let people know that's what we're doing. In addition to the full regulatory legislative process of going before the Board of Supervisors. We have been very clear this year that our primary method of distributing dollars is primarily through an RFP. We also identified a NOAF (Notice Of Availability for Funds) because that's what Housing primarily uses in an RFQ. Committee member Rene Cazenave suggested in the area of the 10%, and the other two or three things that trigger a comment. Maybe put a paragraph in there that says  understand please this is a common kind of thing, actual supplemental allocation does go before the Finance Committee . Rene expressed concern that there could be a  public comment situation as experienced last year. Melange explained that what goes through the Board of Supervisors is the allocation that the Committee make the recommendations for it has been for years that the Action Plan and the allocation are on somewhat overlapping schedules. Melange explained that we will post the Action Plan in a parallel thirty-day period. That would be the solution to the issue. Melange noted for the minutes that there is no public engagement when the Committee ask for comment. Rene ask about the Action Plan and the Con-Plan. Melange responded as she had said that there were four documents due to the Feds at the end of September, the CAPER, Citizen's Participation Plan, Action Plan, and the Con-Plan are due, as Fred and Melange said as of October 1^st, there are new performance measurements that the Fed are requiring all municipality that have CDBG dollars. It's a different way of counting, sometimes it's adding new things, sometimes it's just a new way of counting. It's a new matrix we have to overlay onto our current 7c square system. That does not trigger an substantial update to the Action Plan or the Con-Plan as per Federal guidelines and compliance. But, we do have to update the way that we create that matrix with five-year goals, and we're in the process of doing that. And that's the only difference that we're adding to the Action Plan and Con-Plan. It's just the Federal guidelines, it does not trigger an additional public comment, it just means we have to give them what they ask for. That includes all Capital projects and HPG and everything we do.
7. Sunshine Ordinance – Melange Matthews: The issues that are of concerns to us continues to be the inside recommended changes. Those changes go before the voters not exclusively the Board of Supervisors because the Sunshine Ordinance came up the voters and can only be changed by the voters. There were a series of recommendation made two years ago by the Sunshine Ordinance Taskforce and it's By-Law Amendment Sub-Committee. Those changes reflected a lot of the same issues we currently face in these 66 pages in by-law changes. The Rules Committee was not enamored of the changes, am essentially gutted it. They gutted it to the extent of not putting it back for the public vote. Two years have pass, and they're back at work with their changes again. The good news for this body is that nothing will be before the voters for this RFP round. Part b to that is we're going to be organizing several departments that have issues with Taskforce it is not to our best interest to go out to the Sunshine Ordinance Taskforce ourselves. There will be an unified letter on nobodies letter head, but will have multiple signatures, from multiple departments. That will go forward expressing the concerns of this Committee and this department and as many other departments we can chain letter on. And under Fred's signature that will be cc'd to the Chair of the Rules Committee and all members of the Board of Supervisors. We don't want to go before the Board of Supervisors and have the Sunshine Committee say we didn't weigh in. And we don't weigh in and have us become a target. The likelihood that this will go before the voters is 2007.
8. Miscellaneous – Fred had one more update DCYF is on a three-year funding cycle. And they have developed their framework for the next three years. Fred has invited Margaret Brodkin and her Deputy Director to come to the next CCCD meeting to give you a briefing on what their doing with the Children Funding Plan, so that you guys can get a snap shot of what the next three years are going to look like in term of priorities for Youth Funding in the City. Committee member Ralph Romberg expressed his concerns that this meeting didn't matter because there was not a lot on the agenda to vote on, but if this kind of membership or lack of membership continues we're going to be hamstrung. Ralph suggested that at the very least a letter should be sent out everybody, not to single out anybody. But to let them know we had a meeting and we couldn't do anything this cannot continue. This is a business body and there's business that we have to take care of. If people can't make or don't want to be here that's ok, but he doesn't think this should be tolerated. Fred assured the Committee a letter will be sent out, it will be a cover letter to another letter that the Mayor will be sending to all Boards and Commissions addressing this very issue. Rene suggested that Vincent reconfirms the Committees at the next meetings that would bring up who is or who isn't interested.
9. New Business – None
10. Public Comments – None
11. Meeting Adjourned 6:45