The Urban County is a consortium of Washtenaw County and 18 local municipalities that receive federal funding for low-income neighborhoods. Members include the cities of Ann Arbor, Ypsilanti and Saline, and 15 townships. “Urban County” is a designation of the U.S. Dept. of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), identifying a county with more than 200,000 people. With that designation, individual governments within the Urban County can become members, entitling them to an allotment of funding through a variety of HUD programs. The Urban County is supported by the staff of Washtenaw County’s office of community & economic development (OCED).

Two HUD programs – the Community Development Block Grant and HOME Investment Partnership – are the primary funding sources for Urban County projects.

This brief was filed from the boardroom of the county administration building at 220 N. Main St. in Ann Arbor. A more detailed report will follow: [link]

Mary Jo Callan, director of the Washtenaw County/city of Ann Arbor office of community development, at Tuesday's meeting of the Washtenaw Urban County. (Photo by the writer.)

“I am bringing you some troubling news,” said Mary Jo Callan, director of the Washtenaw County/city of Ann Arbor office of community development. “Do you want to start with the bad news, or the worst news?”

Callan reported that the two major programs that fund projects for low-income neighborhoods – the Community Development Block Grant and HOME Investment Partnership programs, both operated by the U.S. Dept. of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) – have been targeted by Congress and President Obama for significant cuts in both the current fiscal year and in 2012. Washtenaw County communities receive about $2.4 million annually from the CDBG program alone.

Though at this point it’s unclear exactly what the final federal budget will include, Callan said it’s nearly certain that some funding cuts will occur – her staff is planning for a 10% reduction in grants from those two programs for fiscal 2012. “It’s pretty bleak,” she said.

Federal Funding Outlook

The Urban County is a consortium of 11 local municipalities that receive federal funding for low-income neighborhoods. Members include Washtenaw County, the cities of Ann Arbor and Ypsilanti, and the townships of Ann Arbor, Ypsilanti, Pittsfield, Scio, Superior, Northfield, Salem, and Bridgewater. “Urban County” is a designation of the U.S. Dept. of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), identifying a county with more than 200,000 people. With that designation, individual governments within the Urban County can become members, making them entitled to an allotment of funding through a variety of HUD programs.

Two HUD programs – the Community Development Block Grant and HOME Investment Partnership – are the primary funding sources for Urban County projects. Based on a quarterly report presented to Urban County members at their January 2011 meeting, since July 2009 roughly $5.6 million in CDBG and HOME projects have been completed or are underway in Urban County jurisdictions, ranging from housing rehab or acquisition to road improvements and sidewalk repair. [.pdf file of Urban County quarterly project report]

At Tuesday’s monthly meeting of the group’s executive committee, Callan updated members on both the funding status for the current fiscal year 2011, as well as the upcoming 2012 fiscal year.

President Barack Obama recently released his 2012 federal budget, which proposed a 7.5% cut to Community Development Block Grant funds and a 10% cut to HOME funds. The budget provides for increases in some other HUD programs, she said, but the funds coming to the Urban County will almost certainly be decreased.

For the remainder of the current 2011 fiscal year, the U.S. House of Representatives recently passed a continuing resolution – a bill that calls for 65% cuts to the CDBG program, from about $4 billion to $1.5 billion nationwide. A less dramatic decrease is proposed for HOME funds, from $1.85 billion to $1.65 billion. That bill is expected to be modified in the Senate – but the final version will still likely contain cuts, Callan said.

There are a lot of advocates for CDBG and HOME funding, she said, and supporters managed to kill an amendment that would have eliminated the CDBG program entirely. Callan urged Urban County members to contact their federal representatives to let Congress know how important the funding is for the community.

Dramatic decreases have also been proposed for the Community Services Block Grants (CSBG), Callan noted. Obama’s budget calls for a 50% cut to that program, which provides job training and other services for low-income workers. The other 50% will be available only through competitive grants – currently, the funds are allocated through entitlement programs. [Locally, the Washtenaw County Employment Training & Community Services (ETCS) department is designated to receive all CSBG funds for this county. In a follow-up email to The Chronicle, ETCS interim director Patricia Denig said CSBG funds account for about 6% of the department's annual budget, or nearly $600,000.]

At Tuesday’s meeting, several members of the Urban County executive committee had questions about the funding. Bill McFarlane, Superior Township supervisor, observed that it looked like funding for 2011 was uncertain, and wondered what that might mean for projects that had already been approved but that hadn’t yet started. Callan said they should keep moving ahead with their planned projects. Her staff is getting regular updates about the situation, and they’ll reach out to Urban County members to keep them updated as well, as things change.

For the 2011 CDBG and HOME funding, Callan said they hope to know by April what changes will occur. It’s less clear when they’ll learn about cuts for 2012 – Callan said her staff is planning for a 10% drop in funding, though it could be more than that.

She noted that another complicating factor is that they’re dealing with differently defined fiscal years. For example, HUD operates on a fiscal year that begins July 1, as do many local entities like the city of Ann Arbor. The fiscal year for the overall federal government, however, begins Oct. 1 – that’s also the start of the state of Michigan’s fiscal year. Washtenaw County’s fiscal year mirrors the calendar year.

Leah Gunn, a Washtenaw County commissioner who chairs the Urban County executive committee, clarified with Callan that in the event of cuts, all jurisdictions that are members of the Urban County would see funding cut proportionately, based on population size.

After the meeting, Callan told The Chronicle that they’ll need to explore all options in response to the decrease in federal funding, including possible staff cuts to her office, which employs 13 full-time workers. While they’ll try to keep as many of the projects, programs and services as possible, at some point funding cuts will inevitably affect the people who deliver those programs and services, she said.

Public Hearing: 2011 Needs Assessment

The office of community development is putting together an annual plan for the U.S. Dept. of Housing & Urban Development (HUD), which provides funding for low-income housing and neighborhood projects in the county. The plan will include a list of proposed projects located within the Urban County area that would be eligible for HUD funding.

As part of that process, Tuesday’s meeting included a public hearing to gather input from residents about community needs. Lily Au was the only speaker. As she has in the past at meetings for many different public bodies, Au criticized the amount of administrative fees that are used by the office of community development staff to administer their grant-funded programs.

Saying she was worried about those who live in poverty, Au also objected to the demolition of Parkhurst Apartments at 1500 Pauline in Ann Arbor, a low-income housing project spearheaded by the nonprofit Avalon Housing. [The project's site plan was recommended for approval at the Jan. 20, 2011 Ann Arbor planning commission meeting and approved at the Feb. 22, 2011 city council meeting.] Au criticized Avalon’s plan to demolish the existing apartment complex, which is located west of Fritz Park, between Seventh and West Stadium and has 48 apartment units that house federally subsidized low-income residents. The plan calls for constructing a new five-building complex with 32 units, a playground and community center, at an estimated cost of $8 million. Au showed photos of the exterior of the current complex, saying it had been renovated just a few years ago and was in good shape. She also criticized another Avalon housing project – Near North, on North Main Street. She said that developers made Avalon pay too much to acquire the property for its project.

Public Commentary: Staff Response

Later in the meeting, Jennifer L. Hall, housing manager for the office of community development, responded to some of Au’s comments. The exterior of the Parkhurst complex – which Au had shown in photos – tells you nothing about the condition of the buildings, Hall said. The buildings are constructed on land that slopes, she said, and for years water has been infiltrating the structures, causing walls to bow and support beams to rust. Emergency repairs had been undertaken to keep the buildings from being condemned.

Neither Avalon nor the Urban County had sufficient funds alone to embark on a major renovation or reconstruction, Hall said – they needed the resources of the Michigan State Housing Development Authority (MSHDA) for the project. However, after MSHDA engineers inspected the complex, the state agency refused to put more money into the housing unless it were torn down and rebuilt, she said. If MSHDA had walked away from the project, she added, they would have lost that housing completely. The new project has fewer units because that’s the number of units that conform to current zoning, she explained.

As for Near North, Hall said that private developers bought the nine parcels at that site in 2003-04, when the local real estate market was still robust. The developers had planned to build market-rate housing, she said, but when the economy tanked, they couldn’t get financing for their project. Hall said that Avalon’s funders required them to get an appraisal for the property, and she guaranteed that they didn’t pay more than market rate at the time. She also said it was misleading to take the cost of the entire Near North project and divide it by the number of units there, to calculate a cost-per-unit. The project also included retail and office space, as well as a greenway – there are multiple funding sources that involve non-housing portions of the project, she said.

Misc. Updates

Staff of the office of community development gave brief updates on several housing-related projects at Tuesday’s meeting.

Deals have been negotiated on two apartment complexes – Parkside, at 701 Miller in Ann Arbor, and Gateway on West Michigan Avenue in Ypsilanti Township. Both were formerly owned by the Washtenaw Affordable Housing Corp., now an all-but-defunct nonprofit. Gateway in particular has been a problem for well over a year – Jennifer L. Hall, OCD’s housing manager, had briefed the Urban County in detail at its March 2010 meeting:

It was the first and largest rental project undertaken by the Urban County, which allocated $310,000 in 2002-03 to the Washtenaw Affordable Housing Corp. WAHC, which owns Gateway Apartments, had used the Urban County money to rehab the 43-unit property.

WAHC had taken out a $1 million loan to buy the property, but now the nonprofit is “essentially out of business,” Hall told the Urban County executive committee. Avalon Housing, an Ann Arbor nonprofit, has taken over WAHC’s operations, including management of Gateway. WAHC’s board will be deciding how to dispose of its properties, Hall said. And if Avalon isn’t interested in buying Gateway or continuing to manage it, another buyer or property manager will need to be found.

The loan to WAHC is held by three banks: National City, Michigan Commerce Bank and the Bank of Ann Arbor. If a sale is made, the bank loan would be paid first. And if the sale to a party other than Avalon isn’t sufficient to cover the remaining loan balance plus the $310,000 Urban County grant, then the county would be on the hook for repaying that amount to HUD.

Why would HUD need to be repaid? Because the HUD funding stipulates that all of the apartments must be offered at affordable housing rates through December 2012. If not, the Urban County would be considered out of compliance, and would have repay the entire $310,000 to HUD, according to Hall.

On Tuesday, Hall said the three lenders that held liens on both Gateway and Parkside agreed to renegotiate terms. That allowed the nonprofit Avalon Housing to acquire Parkside, she said, and Gateway has been listed for sale. The banks were willing to lower the Gateway mortgage and give them another six months to find a buyer, Hall said – she hopes they’ll be able to sell the property for a price that will cover the debt. Leah Gunn described Gateway as a “big bugaboo,” and hoped they found a buyer quickly.

Hall also reported that the homeownership assistance program managed by the OCD has used up all its Neighborhood Stabilization Program (NSP) funding, which was part of the federal stimulus package. OCD staff is now talking with its partners to see how they can fund future homebuyer education programs. As part of that effort, they’re meeting with local lenders who might be interested in participating in order to receive Community Reinvestment Act credits.

In Ypsilanti Township, OCD is working with township staff and Habitat for Humanity of Huron Valley to deal with the township’s long-term abandoned residential properties. There might be funds available from the Michigan State Housing Development Authority (MSHDA) and Federal Home Loan Bank, Hall said.

Damon Thompson, OCD operations manager, said their office continued to get calls from low-income residents in need of emergency furnace repair or replacement. Last week they’d received a call from a man who was taking care of two small children and was heating their home with his stove, Thompson said. He urged Urban County members to refer residents to the OCD if they need help. In a follow-up phone conversation with The Chronicle, Thompson said that grants are provided – generally in amounts up to $3,000 – through an emergency repair program that’s paid for with CDBG funds. Residents who need this assistance can call 734-622-9025.

Next meeting: Tuesday, March. 22, 2011 at 1 p.m. at the Washtenaw County Learning Resource Center, 4135 Washtenaw Ave. [confirm date]

A van for Avalon Housing, parked at the nonprofit's headquarters in the Northern Brewery building on Jones Drive. Avalon recently received a $250,000 federal "green" grant for its Near North affordable housing development on North Main.

In addition to the grant for Near North – a proposed 39-unit affordable housing development on Main Street just north of downtown – the Urban County also received nearly $180,000 more than anticipated in federal funding through the Community Development Block Grant program for the coming fiscal year.

The board voted to divvy up those additional funds to projects in the Urban County’s three largest jurisdictions – Ann Arbor, Ypsilanti and Ypsilanti Township. They also approved setting aside nearly $27,000 for as-yet-unspecified human services support, in light of possible cuts in city of Ann Arbor funding to local nonprofits.

The focus on allocations at Tuesday’s meeting prompted this comment from Ypsilanti mayor Paul Schreiber: “It’s a pleasure to sit on a board that has money to spend!”

Revising the Urban County Annual Plan

The Urban County is a consortium of Washtenaw County, Ann Arbor, Ypsilanti and 9 townships, responsible for allocating federal funding for low-income housing and other community development projects. The funds are managed by staff of the joint county/city of Ann Arbor office of community development. [For background on the Urban County, see Chronicle coverage: "Urban County Allocates Housing Funds"]

Damon Thompson, OCD’s operations manager, began Tuesday’s meeting by noting that May 3 would be the final public hearing for the Urban County’s annual plan. The hearing will be held during the Ann Arbor city council meeting.

Leah Gunn, a Washtenaw County commissioner who chairs the Urban County board, reported that the county board had held a public hearing on the annual plan at its April 21 meeting. No one spoke at the hearing, she said. When asked by a fellow board member whether that was a surprise, Gunn replied, “No, it’s not.”

Thompson said that the deadline for public comments on the plan is May 10. The plan – for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2010 – must be submitted to the U.S. Dept. of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), in order to secure federal funding. [.pdf of annual plan draft]

At its March 23 meeting, the Urban County board had approved proposed projects included in the plan and funded by the federal HOME Investment Partnerships and the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) programs. At the time, they weren’t yet sure how much CDBG funding they would receive, and based the plan on an anticipated $2.22 million.

On Tuesday, staff informed the board that the actual CDBG funding for fiscal 2010 is $2.4 million. [The HOME funding allocation remained as expected, at $1.665 million.]

Much of the meeting was spent sorting through exactly how the extra CDBG dollars would be allocated. Board members found the staff report confusing, and Leah Gunn asked whether they could table it until next month, when staff would have a chance to clarify the proposed changes. Thompson said that wasn’t possible – he needed to submit the allocations as part of the annual plan for HUD, which was due before the board’s next meeting. So they thrashed through the numbers – and concluded that it was the presentation that was confusing, not a mistake in calculations. Apologizing, OCD director Mary Jo Callan at one point declared, “I’m on the verge of a stroke.”

Ultimately, the allocation changes were approved unanimously, and included:

• $26,978 for human services, with specific projects to be determined. Callan noted that the proposed city of Ann Arbor budget calls for a $260,000 cut to human services funding – it’s up to city council to determine the final amount, she said, but there will almost surely be cuts of some kind. The $26,978 won’t cover the cuts, she added, but it will help.
• An additional $20,000 to Ypsilanti Township for road improvement projects, bringing the total for that line item to $205,000.
• An additional $25,000 to Pittsfield Township for sidewalk repair, for a total of $125,000.
• $20,000 to the city of Ypsilanti, for projects to be determined.
• An additional $51,906 to Ann Arbor for public facilities projects, for a total of $101,905.
• Administrative costs account for 20% of the total amount awarded, or $480,019 – an increase of $35,971.

[.pdf file of final CDBG allocation for FY10]

During the discussion, Paul Schreiber reminded his fellow board members that they are a policy-making body, and that staff are responsible for managing the funds. If staff needs to make changes, he said, the board can vote to amend the plan at a later date.

Other Changes to Funding Allocations: Near North

At their March 23, 2010 meeting, the Urban County board had approved $500,000 in funding for the Near North affordable housing project, to be built on North Main between Kingsley and Summit. The original amount came from three funding sources: $315,536 from the federal HOME program; $154,464 from Ann Arbor’s sewer funds; and $30,000 from Neighborhood Stabilization Program (NSP) awarded to Ann Arbor.

Then earlier this month, the office of community development learned that a grant it had applied for two years ago on behalf of Avalon’s Near North project had been awarded, Callan said. The $250,000 is a HUD community housing development organization (CHDO) grant aimed at increasing the supply of energy efficient and environmentally-friendly housing.

Near North qualifies because it will be built to LEED standards, Callan said.

The original $500,000 funding level for Near North will remain unchanged, but the new grant allowed the board to shift $250,000 previously earmarked for Near North to other projects. A large chunk was allocated for rehab and refinancing of existing properties owned by Avalon, with other funding going to Community Housing Alternatives and Habitat for Humanity Huron Valley.

The funding sources for Near North are now: $250,000 from HUD’s “green” grant; $96,389 from the federal HOME program, and $153,611 from Ann Arbor’s sewer funds.

In addition to the Near North funding, at its March meeting the Urban County board had also granted Avalon a total of $695,467 in funds for the rehabilitation and refinancing of existing properties owned by the nonprofit . Sources for that were $617,404 from the federal HOME program; and $78,063 from the federal Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds.

Avalon had originally requested $814,800 for rehab and refinancing of existing properties. With funds freed up because of the “green” grant, staff of the office of community development recommended that Avalon now be funded to the full amount of its request. At its April 27 meeting, the board agreed – funding from the federal HOME program was raised to $736,737, with the $78,063 from CDBG funds unchanged.

In addition, funding for Community Housing Alternatives was bumped up from $420,000 to $480,000, and Habitat for Humanity Huron Valley’s homebuyer education program, which wasn’t previously funded, is now receiving $22,528.

Board members had few questions regarding the staff recommendations to the funding changes. Mike Moran, supervisor for Ann Arbor Township, asked whether the city of Ann Arbor’s sewer fund contributions were cash or a reduction in connection fees. “Why? Are they increasing yours,” asked Bill McFarlane, Superior Township’s supervisor. Moran laughed: “I don’t know – that’s why I asked.”

After the meeting, Callan clarified for The Chronicle that the sewer funds are specifically from the Walnut Ridge fund, managed by City of Ann Arbor public services unit. In 2000, the city reached an agreement with the developer of the Walnut Ridge residential development in Scio Township – in exchange for hooking up to the city’s sanitary sewer system, the developer agreed to pay $350,000 for use in affordable housing projects. Callan said that Carrot Way – another affordable housing project developed by Avalon Housing – has used some of these funds. When architectural drawings and engineering estimates are completed for Near North, Callan said, the office of community development will send a request to city council to approve the use of the sewer funds for that project.

At Tuesday’s meeting, Moran also asked whether the funded projects required compliance with the Davis Bacon Act, which mandates that public works projects pay prevailing wages. Thompson said that they were compliant. And any projects that received federal stimulus dollars were also required to comply with the “Buy American” clause of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, he said. So materials like drywall and cement would need to be purchased from American firms.

Administrative Costs: An Analysis

At the board’s March meeting, Barb Fuller – deputy supervisor of Pittsfield Township – had asked for more details about costs related to administering federal grants received by the Urban County. On Tuesday, Callan gave board members an analysis for administrative costs in the calendar years 2008 and 2009.

Different federal programs have different caps on the amount that can be used for administration, she said. CDBG allows for 20% of a grant to be used for administration, for example, while the HOME program allows for 10%. In 2008, administrative costs of $784,861 accounted for 12.03% of the total $6.357 million in funding managed by the office of community development. Last year, administrative costs totaled $1.007 million, or 14.82% of the $6.796 million in total project funding.

The increase in administrative costs in 2009 was due to ramping up projects funded by the federal Neighborhood Stabilization Act, Callan said. Other major efforts for the year included bringing the city of Ann Arbor into the Urban County – the city previously managed its own CDGB and HOME funds – and developing the model for integrated human services funding between Washtenaw County and city of Ann Arbor. The office also manages the county’s Barrier Busters program, which helps coordinate efforts of human services agencies.

“We’re working hard to manage these funds,” Callan told the board. “We don’t have a lot of fluff.”

It’s an unlikely resource that might actually be able to help answer those questions: the federal housing programs administered by the Office of Community Development, a joint county/city department.

Jennifer Hall, OCD housing program coordinator, attended the Nov. 4 meeting of the greenbelt group and floated some ideas for how federal funding might provide resources to retain land for the farming community.

The commission also heard from the managing organization of the greenbelt program, The Conservation Fund, about strategies for preserving small farms.

Ensuring a Farming Legacy

Peg Kohring of The Conservation Fund, which is under contract with the city to manage the greenbelt program, gave a presentation to commissioners designed, she said, to give them something to “chew on.” She reported she’d recently attended a conference hosted by the Land Trust Alliance, a national organization, and had come back with some ideas about how to preserve farmland in this area. To see an example of the kind of thing that’s possible, Kohring suggested that commissioners go online to view a clip from a documentary called “The Last Crop,” about an attempt by owners of an organic farm in California to make sure their land remains a farm for future generations.

Kohring outlined several ways that farmland could be secured for farming. One option is an agricultural easement stipulating that at least 50% of the landowners’ gross income, averaged over five years, comes from farming. Another option might be for the city, via the greenbelt program, to own the land, with a farmer signing a long-term lease to use the property.

Commissioner Tom Bloomer, a farmer from Webster Township, wondered why there couldn’t just be a deed restriction on the land, limiting it to agricultural use. Kohring said that one issue was the cost of the land itself. New farmers don’t necessarily have the capital to buy the land, she said. Leasing the land to farmers would make it more affordable for them.

Carsten Hohnke, city council’s representative to the greenbelt commission, asked how these other approaches differed from the purchase of development rights (PDR). He noted that just recently the greenbelt advisory commission had approved a deal that would allow a family to sell their farm at a lower price, because of the greenbelt PDR. [See Chronicle coverage: "Frederick Farm in Line to Join Greenbelt"]

Kohring said that none of the greenbelt’s conservation easements – the agreements which put restrictions on property, such as preventing dense housing developments – have required that the land be farmed. The easements put restrictions on what it can’t be used for, not what it must be used for. It would be possible to buy a farm, for example, and use the land as a large mowed back yard, she said.

Laura Rubin, the commission’s chair, clarified that there were two issues of concern: 1) making farmland affordable for new farmers, and 2) permanently restricting the use of the property to farming.

Commissioner Jennifer Santi Hall brought up the fact that Ann Arbor Township had received a federal grant to explore the development of sustainable agriculture. From the project’s website:

The primary outcome of this project is to establish small farms producing for regional markets using purchase of development rights (PDR) to reduce land costs, improve farm profitability and preserve farmland in a near-urban setting. Ann Arbor Township, with its proximity to the City of Ann Arbor and its ample open space and farmland, is an ideal location for this initiative.

In the short term, the project will identify and introduce interested landowners and potential farmers to learn about opportunities to work together and establish small farming operations. In the intermediate term, those relationships will be established and farmers will be encouraged to seek guidance in formulating sound business plans to meet market demands. The long-term outcomes (third year and beyond) will be to have established several operations and to share the results and lessons of our work with others in the immediate region, before reaching out to southeast Michigan, the entire state and beyond.

This project is being viewed as a demonstration for other communities interested in agricultural profitability, land use at the urban/rural interface and local food production. It is expected that new relationships will be created, small farm operations will be established, more local food and other produce will enter the marketplace and lessons will be learned to provide insight and establish the area as a center for innovative approaches to preserving farmland.

Commissioner Dan Ezekiel said that the greenbelt commission’s committee on small farms had been discussing this issue too, in light of the commission’s efforts to prioritize farmland within the greenbelt program. Unfortunately, he said, the size of properties that would be ideal for small farms would also make it attractive as a large estate with a single house. Even if the greenbelt program buys development rights with the expectation that the land be used for farming, right now there’s nothing to prevent the land from being used merely as a residence.

Kohring encouraged commissioners to consider ways that they might institutionalize the commitment to small farms.

Affordable Housing for Farmers

Jennifer L. Hall, housing program coordinator for the Office of Community Development, talked to greenbelt commissioners about how the Urban County program might be a path for helping to make small farms affordable. The Urban County is a consortium of townships and cities within Washtenaw County that are eligible for the federal Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program, which funds low- and moderate-income housing, infrastructure and other community development projects.

Hall said that for the Urban County’s federally-funded affordable housing projects, restrictions can be placed on the property with regard to the buyer’s income level at the time of purchase. Owners can also be restricted from reselling the dwelling to anyone who doesn’t meet those income requirements. She said that the Urban County hadn’t targeted farms in the past, but there was no reason why they couldn’t use federal dollars and apply the same income restrictions for someone purchasing a small farm through the Urban County’s housing program.

Right now, 11 jurisdictions are part of the Urban County partnership. They include the cities of Ypsilanti and Ann Arbor, and the townships of Ann Arbor, Bridgewater, Northfield, Pittsfield, Salem, Scio, Superior York and Ypsilanti. Nationwide, dollars are awarded to designated urban areas and urban counties based on a calculation that includes factors such as population, poverty rate and infant mortality rate, among others. Locally, an Urban County Executive Committee, chaired by county commissioner Leah Gunn, determines how those funds are used within the participating municipalities, which propose projects for consideration.

Hall said that rural communities who participate in Washtenaw’s Urban County might be excited about a focus on small farms. York Township, for example, is considered a “donor” township because it typically contributes more federal dollars to the Urban County pool than it gets back in projects.

In response to questions from commissioners, Hall said that funds could be available for rehab as well as new construction. The deed restrictions – requiring that the property be sold to people below a certain income level – would apply in perpetuity. The owner’s income level could increase while they owned the property – the only thing that mattered was their income level at the time of purchase.

Commissioner Gil Omenn said that the program seemed to offer more options than they’d previously considered. The harder question, he said, is whether they feel strongly enough to promote this approach. “That’s a whole other level of activity,” he said.