The most notable issue during the meeting was the proposal to reallocate $33,000 from an unexpended sidewalk replacement budget to the Center for Self-Reliance Food Pantry, a project of Community Action Pioneer Valley. The funds were initially part of a larger $1.65 million grant for the fiscal year 2022-2023, with the extension granted due to pandemic circumstances. The urgency to reallocate these funds was emphasized, as the food pantry faced potential staffing reductions before the next grant cycle begins on January 1, 2026. This decision was intended to help the city reach the maximum allowed for public social services grants, aligning with public feedback urging the city to enhance support for local social services.

Public concerns were raised by a resident, Stephanie Duclo, who questioned the decision to divert funds from sidewalk repairs to the food pantry’s operational costs. Duclo expressed her frustration over the deteriorating condition of sidewalks in her neighborhood, particularly highlighting a sinkhole on Chapman Street. She remarked, “I have a problem when we try to allocate the money to something that is, I guess, a value choice rather than… a hole in my street is still not fixed,” arguing that the funds should be utilized for infrastructure needs rather than what she perceived as non-essential expenditures.

In response to these concerns, it was clarified that the $33,000 originated from a sidewalk replacement budget where bids had come in lower than expected. The representative explained, “We have to use up by the end of this calendar year,” underscoring the urgency of reallocating the funds. The discussion evolved to address the ongoing sidewalk conditions, with Duclo pressing for explanations on why immediate repairs could not be made, given the existing sinkhole issue.

Further complicating the debate was the requirement to prove that neighborhoods are predominantly low or moderate income to qualify for infrastructure projects using CDBG funds. Duclo questioned the process of obtaining this data and the challenges of surveying low-income residents, particularly when absentee landlords might hinder survey distribution. Another resident, Jimmy, questioned the necessity of surveys for justifying funds for food pantry operations. The representative mentioned that infrastructure projects face more standards, complicating the allocation of funds for tangible repairs. Jimmy expressed concern over the disparity in fund allocation, questioning why the food pantry could receive funds without a similar requirement for infrastructure projects.

The meeting also addressed the allocation of CDBG funds for a proposed locker project intended to aid the unhoused community. This project aimed to provide storage for belongings of unhoused individuals, with funding potentially sourced from the CDBG. A counselor from the city’s ad hoc committee on the unhoused community acknowledged the project’s necessity, expressing gratitude for the council’s focus on community needs. However, concerns were raised about the funding allocation, particularly regarding financial support to agencies that do not contribute to local taxes, potentially affecting public safety services. A council member questioned the rationale behind replicating a model from Northampton, Massachusetts, expressing skepticism about its effectiveness in Greenfield, stating, “I do not actually like supporting giving agencies money that doesn’t come back to us.”

The placement of the lockers also raised concerns, but it was clarified that the funds were intended solely for the locker hardware. The city would be responsible for determining their placement, involving discussions with the mayor’s office and the ad hoc committee. A council member reiterated the need for transparency, emphasizing the importance of knowing the exact locker locations.

The broader context of CDBG projects was also discussed, with updates on existing initiatives, including the closure of social service projects and ongoing sidewalk and water main replacement projects. The fiscal year 2024 program was reported to be in its early stages, involving various social services and a housing rehabilitation program for low and moderate-income homeowners. The fiscal year 2025 proposal outlined five social services programs and sidewalk improvements, including a replacement project on Elm Street. The council anticipated receiving the grant award in the fall, with projects expected to commence in January 2026 and conclude by March 31, 2027. The meeting concluded with an invitation for public comments, encouraging individuals to submit input via email by a specified deadline.