Bill Overview
Title: To amend the Public Works and Economic Development Act of 1965 to authorize the Secretary of Commerce to make predevelopment grants, and for other purposes.
Description: This bill authorizes the Economic Development Administration to make predevelopment grants to specified entities for activities such as community asset mapping, technical assistance, and feasibility and environmental studies.
Sponsors: Rep. Carter, Troy [D-LA-2]
Target Audience
Population: People in communities benefiting from U.S. economic development activities
Estimated Size: 50000000
- The bill is a piece of U.S. legislation thus primarily impacts entities and individuals in the United States.
- The bill involves predevelopment grants which are aimed at helping specified entities such as local governments, non-profits, and other development organizations.
- Community asset mapping, technical assistance, and feasibility and environmental studies are typically activities that precede large development projects which aim to benefit local populations.
- These grants often support areas with economic challenges to help them prepare for larger development projects, thus potentially impacting economically disadvantaged communities.
Reasoning
- The policy targets U.S. communities with economic challenges, so I included diverse individuals from urban, rural, and tribal areas, as well as varying socio-economic backgrounds.
- Estimated interviewees are part of populations that would directly or indirectly benefit from predevelopment work funded by the grants, such as improved local infrastructure or job opportunities due to enhanced economic activities.
- The population impacted includes individuals and communities heavily involved in or adjacent to development projects incentivized through these grants.
- Budget constraints mean not everyone may be directly affected, and the intensity of impact is varied depending on proximity to development activities and type of grant focus in their area.
Simulated Interviews
Community Development Officer (Detroit, MI)
Age: 45 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I think this grant will help us kickstart several projects we've been planning but couldn't fund.
- It's always a struggle to gather resources for initial studies and mapping, so this policy feels like a significant boost.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 5 |
Environmental Consultant (San Antonio, TX)
Age: 32 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy could lead to more contracts for my consulting work, allowing communities to engage in environmentally sound development.
- Grants for technical assistance are crucial for integrating green practices in development.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Freelance Urban Planner (Brooklyn, NY)
Age: 29 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 4.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Access to resources for detailed mapping will enhance our community outreach and engagement strategies.
- It could significantly accelerate area redevelopment plans and improve local amenities.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
Local Government Official (Rural Alabama)
Age: 52 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 7.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- These predevelopment funds could finally support the groundwork needed for new road and internet infrastructure.
- Our community could see substantial changes if we receive some of these grants.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 4 |
Community Organizer (Navajo Nation)
Age: 41 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy can fund necessary studies for sustainable development respecting cultural grounds.
- Improved engagement through these grants could yield long-lasting benefits for our community.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Graduate Student in Urban Studies (Los Angeles, CA)
Age: 24 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Such grants will provide real-world job opportunities and internships in urban development for students like me.
- Policymaking that's support-focused enables our generation to innovate.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 7 |
Construction Contractor (Buffalo, NY)
Age: 38 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 4.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Increased predevelopment activity would assure more contracts and steady income for me and my employees.
- Our industry heavily depends on continual development initiatives.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
Retired School Teacher (Fargo, ND)
Age: 58 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Although I am not directly involved, I'm hopeful that improved planning can lead to better public amenities and community spaces for others.
- Change is often driven by new development opportunities.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Social Worker (Richmond, VA)
Age: 33 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Predevelopment grants could lead to new job training and placement projects, benefiting those I assist greatly.
- I see potential reductions in local unemployment due to enhanced project feasibility.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
Real Estate Developer (Salt Lake City, UT)
Age: 47 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 7.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- These grants can enhance feasibility studies necessary for building sustainable and affordable housing with community integration.
- I expect significant opportunities to implement new projects aligning with both my business goals and community needs.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $10000000 (Low: $8000000, High: $12000000)
Year 2: $10000000 (Low: $8000000, High: $12000000)
Year 3: $10000000 (Low: $8000000, High: $12000000)
Year 5: $10000000 (Low: $8000000, High: $12000000)
Year 10: $10000000 (Low: $8000000, High: $12000000)
Year 100: $10000000 (Low: $8000000, High: $12000000)
Key Considerations
- The effectiveness of the grants in leading to successful development projects.
- Administrative costs related to managing and evaluating grant applications.
- Potential for economic revitalization in targeted communities leading to broader economic benefits.