Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAGENDA REPORT 1999 0901 CC REG ITEM 10HTO: FROM: DATE: CITY OF MOORPARK AGENDA REPORT Honorable City Council -1 17- , L. - �-+ rrENt /0, R of _dwlember ACT { : Appavm 5tc► jf rec�rrr t«n Wayne Loftus, Acting Director of Community Developmentz Prepared by: John Libiez, Principal Planner /Advanc August 24, 1999 (CC meeting 9/1/99) SUBJECT: Consider Report Concerning the Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) SUMMARY This staff report provides City Council a description and status related to the Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA). Currently the RHNA draft housing Moorpark is: 203 Very Low income; income; 635 Above Moderate income, assigned. Allocations are subject subsequent regional planning agency unit allocation assigned to 142 Low income; 238 Moderate with a total of 1217 units to change as a result of actions. DISCUSSION The RHNA is a numerical projection for housing construction /need prepared by the Southern California Association of Governments (SLAG) which serves as the Regional Planning Agency for Ventura, Los Angeles, Orange, San Bernardino, Riverside, and Imperial Counties. The RHNA figures form the basis for each community's Housing Element `fair share" allocation, which is that portion of the region's housing for various income levels. The allocation figures are the targets every city should attempt to achieve during the five year housing development action plan, a portion of the local housing element. SCAG is required by law to produce the RHNA as a tool to local agencies. SLAG may allow sub - regional councils of government such as Ventura Council of Governments (VCOG) to assist in the drafting of the allocation numbers. Under the current process VCOG has been appointed as the agency to develop the local allocation numbers and submit those numbers to SCAG for incorporation into the regional assessment. VCOG will also act �i•, M: \JLibiez \M \Housing \RHNAstatusCC9199.doc v/L � City Council Agenda Report RHNA Status Report September 1, 1999 Page 2 as the first level of any appeal hearings permitted under the RHNA process. The RHNA process has been underway since April of this year. Draft figures have been prepared by SLAG and VCOG and are under consideration by member agencies within VCOG. The City /County Planning Directors' Association (CCPA) has been appointed as the technical advisory committee to VCOG for the RHNA. CCPA has had several meetings to consider issues related to the draft allocation distribution and formula and to consider adjustments which could result in a more equitable distribution of the "fair share allocation". The local RHNA process has been held back due to objections to the formula and assessments registered by Santa Paula and Port Hueneme. Port Hueneme's objection is based upon the fact that the City has reached the point of build -out and physically cannot accept the prescribed units. CCPA has recommended that consideration be given to the option that the Hueneme allocation be reduced due to SLAG error in drafting base numbers, and that if any unassigned units are required by SCAG to remain in the VCOG share then those units should be allocated among the other agencies on the same basis as the original local share was allocated. Revised draft allocation figures reflecting that compromise have raised the City of Moorpark share from 1213 to 1217 (4 units). There is still a potential that SLAG could direct Hueneme total units to other jurisdictions and that Moorpark's Very Low /Low allocation could increase by as many as an additional 57 units to a total of 402 units from the currently assigned draft number of 345. Depending on VCOG's ability to successfully argue the need to reduce the sub - regional share because of the SLAG error in preparing the draft allocations, the Moorpark share for Very Low /Low income units would be less than 402 but slightly greater than 345. The Santa Paula proposal would require a complete recalculation of allocations within VCOG and increase the burden of allocation to other cities and would significantly increase the Moorpark share. CCPA considered the Santa Paula proposal and did not support it since there is a Dispute Resolution procedure in current law to allow any agency to appeal their assigned allocation. Under the Santa Paula proposal the projected Moorpark share for affordable units would increase by nearly 1100 units. CCPA believed that the Santa Paula proposal was too burdensome and based on flawed logic that those with fewer 0002;7 City Council Agenda Report RHNA Status Report September 1, 1999 Page 3 existing Low and Very low units should accept more such units. It ignores unique characteristics of communities and economics to bring them closer to those that have historically had higher numbers of Low and Very Low units. The Ventura County City Managers' Group also has reviewed and commented on the RHNA process from VCOG. No formal recommendation has been passed by this group for consideration by CCPA or VCOG, although communication between the organization and the VCOG Executive Officer has occurred and suggestions were given. Staff discussed the status of the RHNA process with the County Planning Director, Keith Turner, on August 24, 1999. Mr. Turner indicated that no new developments have transpired that require CCPA action related to the RHNA process since the July 7, 1999, CCPA meeting. Staff discussed the RHNA status with VCOG Executive Officer, Arnold Dowdy, on August 25, 1999. Mr. Dowdy indicated that a compromise proposal will be presented to the VCOG Board at the September 23, 1999 meeting. (VCOG meets on the 4th Thursday of each month) Prior to that date the VCOG Administrative Committee will meet on September 8, 1999 to consider a strategy to establish final recommended allocations for the VCOG member agencies. Mr. Dowdy did not anticipate that CCPA would meet to discuss the proposal prior to the VCOG meeting in September. As noted in the summary paragraph, the current RHNA draft housing unit allocation assigned to Moorpark is: 203 Very Low income; 142 Low income; 238 Moderate income; 635 Above Moderate income, with a total of 1217 units assigned. The first draft numbers prepared by SLAG indicated a total of 1153 units. Subsequently, SCAG region -wide adjustments to the formula increased the City number to 1213. Based upon a compromise on reallocation of Port Hueneme increased allocations, the City total number was increased to 1217 total units by VCOG, with 345 units allocated to the Very Low and Low income groups. This is the status as of this report date. Staff will continue to coordinate with other member jurisdictions in CCPA and the VCOG Executive Officer and will advise Council on options once VCOG has taken action to make the final allocations. 0002�;s City Council Agenda Report RHNA Status Report September 1, 1999 Page 4 STAFF RECOMMENDATION Support existing draft housing allocation numbers or moderate increase. Attachment: Moorpark Draft Regional Fair -share Housing Allocation 000�-1)3 Q 1 L Subregion Name Jurisdiction Name Very Low Income Low Income Moderate Income Above Moderate Total Income Construction Units / Percent Units / Percent Units / Percent Units / Percent Need FILLMORE a Regional Distribudonr Distribution b. Local Distribution a Difference (a -b) d Percent of the Way Adjustment (Policy) e. Adjustment (e times to f. Goal (b +e) MOORPARK a Regional Distribution Distribution b. Local Distribution c. DWerence (a -b) d. Percent of flee Way Adjustment (Policy) e. Adjustment (e times d) f. Goal (b +e) a Regional Distribution Distribution b. Local Distribution a Difference (a -b) d Percent of the Way Adjustment (Policy) e. Adjustment (c times to f. Goal (b +e) OXNARD 183 24% 114 15% 152 20% 312 41% = 761 259 34% 157 21% 178 23% 167 22% = 761 -76 -10% -43 -6% -25 -3% 145 19% e. Adjustment (e times to 75% 75% 75% 75% 884 26"% -57 -8% -32 -4% -19 -3% 108 14% 202 27% 125 16% 159 21% 276 36% ° 761 292 24% 183 15% 243 20% 499 41% a 1,217 113 9% 101 8% 232 19% 772 63% = 1,217 179 15% 82 7% 12 1% -273 -22% 50% 50% 50% 50% 90 7% 41 3% 6 0% -136 -11% 203 17% 142 12% 238 20% 635 52% 1,217 52 24% 32 15% 43 20% 89 41% = 217 57 26% 44 20% 44 20% 72 33% 217 -5 -2% -11 -5% -1 0% 16 8% 25% 25% 25°% 25% -1 -1% -3 -1% 0 0% 4 2% 56 26% 41 19% 44 20% 76 35% = 217 a Regional Distribution Distribution 821 24% 513 15% 684 20% b. Local Distribution 904 26% 576 17% 861 25% a Difference (o -b) -83 -2% -63 -2% -177 -5% d Percent of the Way Adjustment (Policy) 25% 250% 25% e. Adjustment (e times to -21 -1% -16 0% -44 -1% f Goal (b +e) 884 26"% 560 16% 817 24% IVpil..vcitm r""e M ?On0 1,402 41% = 3,421 1,079 32% 3,421 323 9% 25% 81 2% 1,160 34% 3,421 19 August 20, 1999 MOORPARK UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT 30 Flory Avenue, Moorpark, California 93021 CITY OF MOORPAIM CALI City Council Meeting Mr. Steven Kueny, City Manager q City of Moorpark y g ACTION: 799 Moorpark Avenue 'z mad Moorpark, California 93021 Re: Community Policing Program Dear Mr. Kueny, H 1 q! ITEM /D• �- (805) 378 -6300 'J'EIVED AUG 2 C, ow MOORPARK E Crrf MANAM Safety of our students being a major priority, Moorpark Unified School District has been in the planning process with the City of Moorpark since last spring to implement the Community Policing Program. The District has applied and received confirmation of federal grant funding for this program. Moorpark Unified School District would like to take this opportunity to propose to the City of Moorpark the implementation of the Community Policing Program with a full time officer position at Moorpark High School by the beginning of the 1999/00 school year. This objective can be obtain by the following: 1) Tile District will assume the responsibility of paying the first part of the year's costs (or the maximum of $41, 000.00 as originally agreed upon) with the city agreeing to pay the second half of the year's costs. This will extend the timeframe for the City of Moorpark to receive confirmation of receiving the grant from the federal Department of Justice program, "Cops in Schools." 2) This proposal to be brought to the City Councils attention for potential approval which would allow the Sheriff's Department to proceed with the filling of this position currently as opposed to detaining appointing the position until the City receives confirmation of the federal grant. In addition to providing campus security'- expediting the implementation of our Community Policing Program fulfills the importance of first day acceptance and the opportunity for the officer to establish a building rapport with the teaching staff. It is the District's hope that the City of Moorpark will collaborate with us in obtaining this objective. Sincere Iefstrfct Superintend( cc: Councilmembers at'. CIAy &4p.44 BOARD OF EDUCATION: DAVID POLLOCK, President; GARY CABRIALES, Member; GREG BARKER, Vice President, TOM BALDWIN, Clerk; THOMAS G. DUFFY, Ed.D., District Superintendent 000 0 0 2 An Equal Opportunity Employer Moorpark Police Department MEMORANDUM TO: Honorable City Council FROM: Captain Mike Lewi M'c DATE: August 30, 1999 SUBJECT: High School Resource Officer Position In response to the letter from MUSD Superintendent Tom Duffy regarding the new High School Resource Officer, I would like to provide the following information relative to the mechanics of adding a new position, time line for having the officer start work and recap the financing for this position. To add a new position to a city contract the Sheriff's Department needs a resolution from the City Council requesting that the position be added to the contracted level of service. A Board Letter is prepared to accompany the Council Resolution and submitted for review by Sheriff Brooks, County Auditor's Office and CAD's Office. Once approved by the three county entities the document would be placed on the consent calender for Board of Supervisor adoption. Upon adoption, the Sheriff s Department will normally be able to fill the position within 2 to 3 weeks. In short, once the City Council Resolution is received, we should be able to have the officer on campus in 4 to 5 weeks. Using the assumption that the Council approved the addition of the new position at it's September 1, 1999 meeting, the Sheriffs Department should be able to have the officer starting on campus the week of October 11, 1999. Using the projected start date of October 11, 1999, the estimated FY 99/00 costs associated with this position for nine months would be as follows: Direct Costs Police Services (9 months Sr. Deputy) $85,874 Related Costs Misc. $1,450 Total Cost FY 99/00 $ 87,324 High School Resource Officer Position Page 2 of 2 The City has included in it's FY 99/00 budget the following funding sources for this position: COPS Grant $45,800 General Fund $16,900 MUSD Funding $41,300 Total $104,000 In the event the COPS Grant funding was not awarded to the City, and the City chose not to continue the position, the City could notify the Sheriffs Department 30 days prior to the end of the fiscal year it's intent to discontinue the position. In instances of financial hardship, the Sheriff has considered and granted early termination of contract positions if it is in the best interest of the city. I am available to respond to any other questions that the Council may have. cc: Steve Kueny, City Manager John Nowak, Assistant City Manager