Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAGENDA REPORT 1992 0108 CC SPC ITEM 08D r ITEM 8. 9 C4</ MOORPARK \90 00 799 Moorpark Avenue Moorpark, California 93021 Ci�� n0 o Of 199-- SATED- JJy ACTION: M E M O R A N D U M By TO: The Honorable City Council FROM: Donald P. Reynolds Jr. , Management Analyst DATE: December 23, 1991 SUBJECT: City Input to County Regarding the Use of the Cranston- Gonzales 1990 Affordable Housing Act Title II Home Investment in Affordable Housing Program, or "HOME" Funds, within the CDBG Entitlement Jurisdiction Summary On November 22 , 1991, staff transmitted to the Council information regarding the proposed availability of HOME Funds for affordable housing projects. In this transmittal, a summary of the County proposal to use the funds was addressed, and staff reported that it would return to the Council and report its findings for a potential alternative project in Moorpark. Staff proposes to communicate the City's position on the use of HOME funds to the County, at the same time that revisions to the Comprehensive Housing Assistance Strategy ("CHAS") are transmitted. Staff is requesting that the Council support these comments, with any modifications as deemed appropriate. Background HOME funds are a new resource which evolved from the Cranston- Gonzales Affordable Housing Act of 1990. The County, in association with the other CDBG Entitlement cities, (including Moorpark, Camarillo, Santa Paula, Ojai, Fillmore and Port Hueneme) , has been notified by HUD that $1,210, 000 is anticipated to be available during fiscal year 1992/93 from this resource. Of these funds, $992 , 000 can be used for "general" housing assistance and $218, 000 was made available for the development of rental units for low to moderate income families. Of the "general" funds, 15% must be provided to a community based housing organization for development and management of local housing programs. Other details about the HOME funds require fast decisions to be made. A proposal for the use of funds has to be included in the CHAS, (due to HUD the second week of February, 1992) , and no federal funds can be obligated until the CHAS has federal approval. PAUL W.LAWRASON JR. JOHN E.WOZNIAK SCOTT MONTGOMERY BERNARDO M.PEREZ ROY E.TALLEY JR. Mayor Mayor Pro Tem Councilmember Councilmember Councilmember Printed On Recycled Paper City Council Page 2 December 23, 1991 The proposal must specify details about a project that prove to HUD that it can progress rapidly, however, next years's proposal will most likely be different because the matching fund requirement will be in effect. There are no administrative funds identified for this year or subsequent years, and so choosing a project that entails this cost has to evaluated carefully. The County proposed a quick solution to the problem of having a short timeframe to work under without administrative support -- expanding the Section 8 rental assistance program. This proposal would allow several families to be removed from the waiting list at the Area Housing Authority, utilizing the existing administration. A transmittal of the City's concerns regarding HOME funds will accompany the CHAS comments proposed by staff because the County has inserted the HOME rental assistance data into the CHAS. Discussion The Section 8 proposal for the use of HOME funds during 1992/93 does raise some serious concerns. It is staff's understanding that there may be a lag time of two to three months between the transfer of a client from the HOME sponsored program to the regular Section 8 program. This delay could potentially cause hardships for those who must wait for the transfer of funding to be completed. Subsequent years of receiving HOME funds will involve the matching funds requirement which will most likely discourage the entitlement group from considering this type of assistance in the future. Therefore, Section 8 support would only be provided for one year. Negative aspects of the Section 8 proposal have led staff to believe that the best use for the HOME funds is new construction. This is because new construction is more likely to be a long term solution for the need of affordable housing, rather than a temporary solution. Unfortunately, there are many details that have to be addressed in order to move a new construction project along quickly. Local considerations addressed two potential projects which could move quickly enough to be eligible for funding low and moderate income housing opportunities. One consideration was a possible first time home buyer program for the 27 unit condominium project on Charles Street, but this is not an eligible use because the construction began before the federal environmental standards were considered, and the design of the housing units is above the "luxury standards" developed by HUD for the use of federal funds. A second consideration is a housing assistance plan, but the managing agency requires 25% of the grant for administration, and this is not feasible. City Council Page 3 December 23 , 1991 One city has identified a potential immediate need for the HOME funds. New affordable rental units in Camarillo are in a position to be developed now, but this only requires approximately $300, 000. No word has been received from the County as to whether they agree with Camarillo's project as being feasible, and if so, what would become of the balance of funds. Because there are no immediate potential uses identified by staff for the use of funds in Moorpark, staff is prepared to encourage the County to fund projects like Camarillo's before supporting temporary programs like the Section 8 rental assistance. With Council's concurrence, staff will proceed by drafting a letter which expresses this position on the City's behalf. Recommendation That the Council support staff's comments with any modifications regarding the proposed use of HOME funds to the County, and request that an alternative use for the funds be considered before further consideration is given to the original proposed use of funds, (support of the Section 8 rental assistance program) .