My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Agenda Packets - 1996/01/08
MoundsView
>
Commissions
>
City Council
>
Agenda Packets
>
1990-1999
>
1996
>
Agenda Packets - 1996/01/08
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/28/2025 4:45:50 PM
Creation date
6/19/2018 8:49:32 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
MV Commission Documents
Commission Name
City Council
Commission Doc Type
Agenda Packets
MEETINGDATE
1/8/1996
Supplemental fields
City Council Document Type
City Council Packets
Date
1/8/1996
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
89
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).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
• Attachment C <br /> 11111 CDBG HOME APPLICATIONS <br /> for Fiscal Year 1995 <br /> The communities of Suburban Ramsey County that make up the Ramsey County <br /> Housing and Redevelopment Authority, in response to HUD requirements for <br /> the Consolidated Plan, identified priorities for housing and community <br /> economic development needs. HUD requires the funding decisions for <br /> Community Development Block Grant and Home Investment Partnership Act <br /> (HOME) funds to be tied to those priorities for FY 1995. The priorities, in this <br /> order, ar-• <br /> 1. Rehab - Owner Occupied <br /> 2. Rehab - Rental Property <br /> 3. Remove Dilapidated Structures <br /> 4. Job Creation <br /> 5. Home Ownership <br /> 6. New Housing Construction <br /> 7. Neighborhood Revitalization <br /> 8. Social Services <br /> Money 4 <br /> or-. .••'- . v targeted to assist very low, low, and moderate <br /> income persons. <br /> A groupof County s to <br /> ff, following the recommendations of the communities, <br /> reviewed the proposals. <br /> Rankings and Point Total <br /> The process: <br /> 1. Ratings group scored proposals based on the rating scale developed from • <br /> both HUD priorities and the priorities developed by the HRA <br /> participating communities. (Copy attached.) <br /> 2. Raters individually ranked proposals from 1-17, based on point totals. (# 1 <br /> received highest number of point totals, #17 the fewest.) <br /> 3. Raters then as a group totaled the numeral rankings, resulting in the totals <br /> listed below. Low score ranks highest. <br /> Review Committee <br /> Denise Beigbeder Community and Economic Development <br /> Mary Lou Egan Community and Economic Development <br /> Mary Karcz Policy and Planning Division 1 <br /> Harry McPeak Ramsey County Attorney-Civil Division <br /> Anne Schwartz Ramsey County Attorney-Civil Division <br /> Pat Yoerger Community and Economic Development <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.