3.01.2013
Regarding the potential loss of significant grant funding due to consolidation
Jason West -----Original Message-----
From: Mark Blauer [mailto:mblauer@evenlink.com]
Sent: Tuesday, January 15, 2013 1:21 PM
To: Mayor Village
Subject: Consolidation
Mayor West
Last Thursday we met with George Popp from the USDA Office in Middletown regarding the Village's pending application for water system assistance.
I used the opportunity to ask George if New Paltz Village would be
eligible to apply to USDA for Water & Waste assistance if the Village
boundary was expanded to encompass the Town of New Paltz. The resulting population would exceed the USDA cutoff population of 10,000.
Mr. Popp's said unambiguously that New Paltz will not be eligible if its
new consolidated population exceeds 10,000. This is precisely what I have been saying when first asked about this subject. I was dismayed that some people (folks who don't write grants for a living) doubted my assessment of future eligibility. They are free doubt my judgement but they should not dismiss the firm answer given by George Popp at USDA on the subject.
FWIW, I am 4 for 4 on grant applications submitted for the Village. This
is something people should consider when thinking about my opinions on the subject of grant eligibility.
If I thought that consolidation would improve and not diminish your
prospects for receiving grants I would say so. I am after all in the
business of winning.
Even if USDA changes its 10,000 cutoff in the future the newly constituted Village would not qualify for the favorable "poverty rate"
loan and grant terms it now enjoys. The Village qualifies for the low
rate of 1.875% (38 years) and grants up to $750,000. The Intermediate rate interest is higher and the grant ceiling is only $500,000.
On several occasions I have noted that our CDBG Small Cities success was directly attributable to the 58% low and moderate income percentage of the current Village. We must prove that any project have at least 51% low and moderate income benefit. Presently the Village's configuration makes Village wide benefit projects eligible. As they say on TV, this is black letter law. The expanded Village would have a new low and moderate income percentage well under 51%.
Consolidation may have arguments in its favor but future grant eligibility is not one of them.
I suggest that the Village carefully consider my input based on 35 years
of grantwriting before sacrificing the grant programs we have relied on to bring $1.7 million to the Village in the short time I have served you.
Choose wisely.
Mark Blauer
Blauer Associates
January 22 at 11:54am
Jason West Mayor West
Fairweather is misrepresenting if he says that a new municipal entity with a population of over 10,000 is still eligible for Water & Waste funding. The Town population is in excess of 14,000 according to the 2010 Census. Perhaps Fairweather would like to ask George Popp if the Town of New Paltz can presently apply to USDA for Water & Waste funding.
George Popp said point blank on January 11th that USDA eligibility for Water & Waste will be lost if the Village boundary is expanded to encompass the Town. We all heard what George said and he represents the Funding Agency. Fairweather apparently dismisses what I and Mr. Popp have to say about Water & Waste eligibility. Nothing short of Congressional action will restore eligibility for municipalities with populations over 10,000. Presently the Town of Ulster cannot apply for Water & Waste. Supervisor Quigley can confirm that.
The Town Supervisor is mistaken if she thinks I am being defensive. I don't suffer disinformation gladly and make no effort to mask my opinions about disinformation.
As per the fundng agency, New Paltz will lose its eligibility for USDA through the expansion according to USDA, OCR funding will be at least more difficult and possibly impossible to obtain. I will finish my current projects and move on to work for other clients.
I won't waste time drawing pictures for the willfully blind. Either they get it or they don't.
Mark Blauer
January 22 at 11:49am
Jason West On 1/16/2013 1:41 AM, Jason West wrote:
> Mark -
>
> Most of Fairweather's comments focused on Small Cities. There was some cross-talk regarding USDA and I will confirm what was said verbatim once the video becomes available. It was clear by both thecomments made by a few and the silence of the rest that in the he-said-she-said Fairweather was seen as a more trustworthy source than I.
>
> I will do whatever I can to stop wasting your time with this nonsense so that we may retain your services.
>
> I am copying this to the entire Village Board so that they understand the consequences of their failure to adequately check their facts.
>
> Jason
January 22 at 11:50am
Jason West Jason
I am not surprised that Mr. Fairweather focused on Small Cities and downplayed USDA. The facts about USDA don't support his argument that consolidation does not lessen grant eligibility. USDA's George Popp was unambiguous on January 11th about New Paltz losing USDA eligibility for the Water and Waste Program once its population exceeds 10,000. My understanding is that the new Village boundary would coincide with the current Town boundary. That puts the new entity over 10,000 population. Like I noted the Town of Ulster is already over 10,000 population and is not eligible for USDA Water & Waste. They are presently hoping that Congress changes the law. Even if Congress changes the law, after consolidation New Paltz lose "poverty" status. That translates into a higher interest rate and a lower grant ceiling from USDA.
If consolidation was already accomplished the $4.1 million water request USDA is currently reviewing would have been denied as the municipal population would already be over 10,000.
Regarding Small Cities, we don't entirely lose eligibility. Some types of projects will be instantly ineligible while other submissions will be vastly complicated after 2020.
The Village is 58% low/moderate while the Town is 42%. All Small Cities applications must demonstrate 51% or better low/moderate benefit. The Village's 58% is why we won the last three Small Cities grants. In contrast, the Town of New Paltz has not won a Small Cities grant in at least the last 10 years. Town-wide projects are presently ineligible and will continue to be so because of the 42%. Consider for example a youth center project. A youth center serving the Village is eligible while one serving the whole Town is not.
When the 2020 Census is conducted the demographics of the old Village will be absorbed within the larger Town boundary. The 58% low/moderate figure will disappear to be replaced by a blended low/moderate figure. That figure will be less than 51%. Small Cities has been operating for 35 years and is likely to continue for many more years. The Village's special competitive advantage will disappear with the 2020 Census. At that point income surveys would be required to justify water and sewer projects. Towns like Ulster and Wawarsing conduct such surveys now. Surveys are difficult, expensive and time consuming. Surveying hundreds of households including off campus students in order to qualify a water or sewer project would be a logistical nightmare for New Paltz. Without the 58% percentage the Village now enjoys our last three Small Cities projects would have required door to door income surveys to determine the income characteristics of approximately 3,800 residents.
Qualifying a Small Cities project that requires surveying 1000+ households is possible in theory but often impossible in practice. Anyone who writes Small Cities applications would understand why I am loathe to discard the Village's separate identity and advantageous 58% low/moderate income demographics.
I can assure the Village Board that I don't wish to stop working on future projects for the Village. I am just being realistic. Casting away eligibility through consolidation may leave me little to do for New Paltz. Without workable opportunities I would have no choice but to move on.
Mark Blauer
January 22 at 11:50am
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.