HomeMy WebLinkAboutAGENDA REPORT 1992 0603 CC REG ITEM 08OTO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
Summary
MOORPARK STEM E?'o 0'0
799 Moorpark Avenue Moorpark, California 93021
The Honorable City Council
(805) 529 -6864
DORPAW, CALIFORNA
C;ty Council Meeting
of 199
ACTION:
Donald P. Reynolds Jr., Management Analyst r y
May 27, 1992
Consider a Contribution to the County's CDBG Fair Housing
Program
The following report will outlin
Ventura which requires the Ci
administrative funds to a I
"affirmatively further fair hot
negotiate this contribution
stipulations upon the City's use
the County expressed that these
response and would impeded their
the Entitlement jurisdiction i
further fair housing.
Staff's recommendation
information and direct
for 1992/93 to include
used by the Area Housi
fair housing.
Background
e the proposal from the County of
ty of Moorpark to donate CDBG
)rogram which is proposed to
ising." Staff has attempted to
and avoid imposing additional
of administrative funds, however,
options were not an appropriate
ability to demonstrate to HUD that
s taking affirmative action to
is that the Council
staff to amend the
a contribution to the
ng Authority /County
consider the following
administration proposal
County of $1,890 to be
of Ventura to promote
In 1990/91, the City participated in an analysis of the fair
housing practices in the Entitlement jurisdiction, which resulted
in a report for the file to demonstrate to HUD that the CDBG unit
was complying with the requirement to "affirmatively further fair
housing." As a follow -up to this report, the Entitlement
jurisdiction met to discuss how the findings would be implemented
in an "affirmative" fashion.
The findings of the report demons t
complaints have been filed, and t
whole. Despite this finding, HU
taken to "affirmatively" further
County contracted with the Area
referral service for fair housing
housing steering committee to
participation in the program. O
Steering Committee met to discus
s
rated that in Moorpark, very
few
his was true for the County as a
D still requires that action be
the fair housing program. The
Housing Authority to provide a
complaints, and developed a fair
address each jurisdiction's
n February 5, the "Fair Housing
what actions were available to
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
make an affirmative for fair housing.
During the February 5 meeting, the Fair Housing Steering Committee
represented by Camarillo, Santa Paula and the County, designed a
plan for all cities to follow. An excerpt from this letter (the
entire letter is presented as Attachment "All), was presented to the
Council in the proposal package for the 1992/93 program
appropriations, because it recommended that the City of Moorpark
contribute a percentage of the cost for the budget developed by
those in attendance at the meeting of $21,000, to come from
administrative dollars so that the Area Housing Authority could
develop outreach materials to affirmatively further fair housing.
The Council did not appropriate any of the administrative funds
agencies other then for City staff time.
Upon review of the City's final appropriations, the County stated
that "HUD recommends, as a rule of thumb, that 1% of the CDBG
funding amount be allocated toward fair housing" expressing concern
that Moorpark did not contribute. Three to four meetings of the
Fair Housing Steering Committee are anticipated during fiscal year
1992/93. Using this information, staff analyzed options for the
City that would allow the City to maintain its funding for
administration of the grant.
Staff analyzed the cost of attending meetings, and presented it the
County of Ventura explaining that more than 1% of the $21,000
recommendation would be used to be part of these meetings, and that
the recommendation of the Fair Housing Steering Committee is
essentially a 2% contribution from Moorpark for the purpose of
affirmatively furthering fair housing, (Attachment "B").
The County responded to this proposed plan as unacceptable, and in
its letter of May 20, 1992, implied that the City would be impeding
the County's ability to affirmatively further fair housing by not
contributing time and administrative funds to the program, and
therefore be in violation to the cooperative agreement, (Attachment
"C")
Discussion
The budget developed by the Committee did not take into
consideration each agency's ability to pay for this contribution,
but the results are essentially a mandate to participate.
Attending the Fair Housing Steering Committee meetings does not
satisfy the County's intent to further fair housing.
The City manager has the authority to amend the administration
proposal, and no public hearing is required. The net result is
that rather than $22,590 for administration, the City will be able
use $20,700 which is $920 less than last year.
Summary
Staff does not agree with the County on this issue, but not
participating could result in a loss of all CDBG funding.
Recommendation
That the City Council authorize staff to amend the 1992/93
administration grant proposal by including $1,890 for use in
"affirmatively furthering fair housing."
Attachments: A) February 5 letter from the County
B) May 14, 1992 letter from staff
C) May 20 letter from the County
- rrwourity of venture
February 19, 1992
RECEIVED�{1
FEB 2 0 12
Ity of Mm,4 v" CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE
Richard Wittenberg
Chief Administrative Officer
h2tolvmt R obert C_Hirtensteiner
nt Chief Admen strative Officer
FEB 2 0 1992
CITY OF MOORPARK
Steve Rueny OFFICE OF CITY MANAGER
City of Moorpark, L 16050
799 Moorpark Avenue
Moorpark, CA 93021
Re: Fair Housing Steering Committee Meeting and Follow -UP
The purpose of this letter is to provide you with (a) the results
of the f irst Ventura County Entitlement Area Fair Housing Steering
Committee meeting, and (b) results of County staff follow -up to the
discussion. At our August 5, 1991 meeting, when we discussed the
recommendations in the Fair Housing Impediments study, the
following cities had volunteered to sit on this committee:
Camarillo, Moorpark, Ojai, Port Hueneme, Santa Paula and the
unincorporated area.
FAIR HOUSING STEERING COMMITTEE MEETING RESULTS
Attending the February 5, 1992 meeting were Carolyn Briggs and
Shelley Stephens from the Area Housing Authority (at our invita-
tion) , Randy Richardson (Camarillo) , Steve Stuart (Santa Paula),
Ann Hewitt and Susan Van Abel (County of Ventura).
The Committee's discussion proceeded as follows:
1. Fair Housincr Steering Committee Composition, Roles and
Responsibilities
Given the low turn -out at the meeting, our first priority
should be to confirm with the remaining cities whether they
wish to be included on this committee. Since we are trying to
make entitlement -wide decisions, it seems important to have as
much representation as possible. The committee's purpose will
be to:
o make decisions about outreach activities, and not
necessarily traditional housing counseling.
o confer on annual fair housing budgets and activities.
o assist in selecting fair housing providers.
.-� o provide direction to fair housing providers, one of which
may be the Area Housing Authority.
Hall o, A;^-iin strc' ',,n L = 1`40
500 .`,r,u;n `J clur a Aw;,,u,., Ventu',,. C:. :'300 ;05i E);:14-2680 FAX (805) 6 5106
Fair Housing Follow -Up
-2- February 19, 1992
once a program is established, meetings can be confined to two
or three a year, or on specific issues as they arise.
2. Recommendations Arising From IM pediments to Fair Housing Stud
specific activities related to the entitlement partners
include the establishment of a steering committee to promote
fair housing. The committee reviewed all recommendations and
noted that some were not applicable to the fair housing
program: the non - applicable recommendations include:
o jurisdictions should review, evaluate and modify zoning
and development standards to reduce if possible the
overall cost of housing production.
o a letter from the "steering committee" could be sent to
motivate lenders to consider FHA /VA loans and /or afford-
able loan programs.
o promote construction of more affordable housing (housing
for all income groups and family size).
In formulating recommendations, the Committee considered the
similarities and differences between Housing Counseling and
Fair Housing. While fair housing issues may arise during
counseling, in general such complaints tend to center around
landlord - tenant disputes and eviction problems. Fair housing
is more broadly directed towards the elimination of discrimi-
nation in the provision of housing. We also discussed the
structuring of fair housing activities to meet the 51% low -
moderate income and record - keeping requirements. If we are
unable to do so, then this activity would have to be funded
out of administration dollars, and all agreed that this was
not desirable.
A number of potential activities were suggested, as follows:
fair housing counseling, posters, brochures, community
meetings, fact sheets, symposia, meetings with property
managers and realtors, newspaper advertisements and contacts
with newspapers to display fair housing logo, information in
phone books to direct potential complainants to the Area
Housing Authority, providing fair housing information to AFDC
recipients when they are working with the Public Social
Services Agency, focusing attention on fair housing for the
physically, mentally and emotionally disabled, the production
of a video to provide information on fair housing, development
of Spanish language information, working with Head Start to
educate people concerning fair housing, the installation of
television monitors in PSSA General Relief waiting rooms, to
play fair housing videos (either ones produced here or library
tapes).
Fair Housing Follow -Up
-3- February 19, 1992
The decisions reached were as follows:
o Cities will continue to operate their housing counseling
contracts, independent of the fair housing mandate.
o Approximately $21,000 would be required to upgrade the current
Fair Housing Program. (Although the Committee arrived at this
by examining the current city allocations to housing counsel-
ing, this $21,000 is in line with HUD's recommendation that 1%
of an entitlement area's budget be devoted to fair housing
activities.)
o Based on a budget of $21,000 we would anticipate that, at a
minimum, the Area Housing Authority and /or other fair housing
provider would update the current brochures, increasing their
eye appeal and perhaps tailoring some brochures to specific
client groups. The AHA would continue to provide general
education and hold meetings and symposia with real estate,
banking and other industry organizations, as well as the
general public. Finally, they would work towards locating
and /or producing a video that could be used in public waiting
rooms, such as General Relief offices and AFDC offices. Once
the videos have been identified, in future years we could look
towards purchasing monitors to display them.
STAFF FOLLOW -UP TO FEBRUARY 5 1992 MEETING
o Although there was some discussion at the meeting about how to
make these fair housing activities eligible as public service,
our subsequent research shows that this is problematic. CDBG
regulations 24 CFR 206(c) state that the provision of fair
housing services are administrative costs. Recent publica-
tions sent to our office have described other jurisdictions'
arguments with HUD over this issue; however, HUD continues to
classify the activity as administrative. Therefore, the
$21,000 budget must betaken from administration dollars. The
breakdown across jurisdictions is as follows:
FORMULA FAIR HOUSING
CITY PRCNT. SET -ASIDE
Camarillo
18%
$3,780
Fillmore
7%
$1,470
Moorpark
9%
$1,890
Ojai
3%
$630
Port Hueneme
10%
$2,100
Santa Paula
14%
$2,940
Unincorporated
39%
$8,190
TOTAL
100%
$21,000
Fair Housing Follow -Up -4- February 19, 1992
As part of the package that our office will take to the Board of
Supervisors on March 17, 1992, we will be recommending that $8,190
of administrative dollars be used for mandated fair housing
activities. The Special Projects /CDBG Unit is recommending that
your city consider similar actions. In addition, unless all cities
participate the quality of the fair housing program would be
depleted and the entitlement area could find itself in a situation
of noncompliance with HUD regulations.
Consistent with County policy, the provision of funds towards fair
housing would be administered under a joint powers agreement.
While the County would handle general administration of the funds,
the Fair Housing Steering Committee would be responsible for
providing direction to the fair housing providers concerning types
of activities, etc.
Since the 1992 funding cycle is already
appreciate it if you could get back to Susan
your city staff's intentions with respect t
your City Council.
Sincerely,
Ann Hewitt
Principal Administrative Analyst
AH:lj
cc: Marty Shaw - Halloway
Susan Van Abel
[or"sVvh90219.edb
underway, we would
Van Abel concerning
o recommendations to
May 14, 1992
Susan Van
Principal
CAO /CDBG
County of
800 South
Ventura C,
MOORPARK
799 Moorpark Avenue Moorpark, California 93021 (805) 529 -6864
Abel
Analyst
Ventura
Victoria Ave.
k 93009
Dear Susan:
The following letter is in response to the County of Ventura's
request that the City provide the County with a plan that
demonstrates how Moorpark will use 1% of its administrative
allocation from 1992/93 towards "affirmatively furthering fair
housing."
The City will plan for attendance at future Fair Housing Steering
Committee meetings, estimated by the County to be 3 to 4 meetings
during the upcoming fiscal year. The City would prefer to create
a local outreach program utilizing the services of the
Moorpark /Simi Valley Board of Realtors, and therefore anticipates
that the information from the Steering Committee, will be shared
with local representatives of the Board of Realtors. This will be
accomplished with the help of Ruben Castro and Vicki Perez, the
City's appointed representatives to the Area Housing Authority.
The combined costs of staff attendance at the Steering Committee
meetings, between various staff members, between staff and the City
Council, and between the City and the Board of Realtors is
estimated to be at least $1,863.60. Adding time spent researching
this matter and preparing form meetings, the City will exceed the
1% requirement.
The calculation of costs is attached. The per hour figure is the
rate adopted by the City Council in resolution, February 5, 1992.
The cost for mileage is part of the City's personnel rules and
procedures. Staff's assumptions in this cost calculation are
conservative. A single report to the Council can require much more
than then the estimated time stated in the attached calculations.
Therefore, if the Steering Committee only meets 3 times, the
reporting to staff and the Council will compensate for this
shortfall. Time spent on the Fair Housing Issue will be clearly
delineated in the daily time sheets, as are all hours of staff
time.
Currently, the City uses much more than the allotted CDBG funds for
the administration of the program. There are no "surplus" dollars
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 PaDe
available for other uses. Because staff would be able to
communicate the efforts of the Steering Committee to the local
representatives, we feel that it will serve as a benefit to the
community to participate in the Committee meetings, but to add 1%
in addition to this is essentially a 2% contribution, which is more
than the HUD "Recommendation."
The City intends to proceed as originally approved by the Council
April 8, 1992.
Thank you for your efforts in assuring that the City contributes
its 1% to affirmatively further fair housing.
Sincerely,
;bnald P. �Rey2old`sJr.
Management Analyst
Attachment
CC: Steven Kueny, City Manager
Richard Hare, Deputy City Manager
Attachment
Fiscal Analysis of the City's Proposed CDBG Fair Housing
Contribution for Fiscal Year 1992/93
The following analysis will identify the City's staff time and
associated costs related to performing the duties related to
meeting the CDBG recommendation of contributing 1% of the City's
administrative allocation to "affirmatively further fair housing."
Based on an estimate attendance at four Fair Housing Steering
Committee meetings, staff costs are calculated as follows:
Assumptions-
2 meetings prior to January 1, 1993, and 2 meetings after
January 1, 1993- the 1992 cost per hour equals $73.00 /hr, with
an anticipated increase of 4% effective January 1, 1993,
equalling $2.92, for a 1993 cost per hour of $75.92, or
$76 /hour.
Staff will report the status of the Committee to supervisory
personnel at the City, and consequently keep the City Council
and public updated on the progress. Staff will be able to
convert the efforts into a local program by sharing materials
and information with the local Board of Realtors.
1992
Travel .75 hours one way X 4 = 3 hours X $73.00 /hr = $ 219.00
Travel Reimbursement @ $.27 per mile, 35 miles one way
(35 miles X 2 per round trip, 2 round trips) = $ 37.80
Meeting Time 2 hours each X 2 meetings
Follow -up staff time providing information to
supervisory staff= 1 hour per meeting X 2
Follow up staff time meeting with
supervisory staff and reporting to Council
1/2 hour for two meetings = 1 hour total
Follow up time with the Moorpark /Simi Valley
Board of Realtors 1 meeting 2 hours
1992 Sub total
= $ 292.00
= $ 146.00
= $ 73.00
= $ 146.00
$ 913.80
1993
Travel .75 hours one way X 4 = 3 hours X $76.00 /hr = $ 228.00
Travel Reimbursement @ $.27 per mile, 35 miles one way
(35 miles X 2 per round trip, 2 round trips) _ $ 37.80
Meeting Time 2 hours each X 2 meetings = $ 304.00
Follow -up staff time providing information to
supervisory staff= 1 hour per meeting X 2 = $ 152.00
Follow up staff time meeting with
supervisory staff and reporting to Council
1/2 hour for two meetings = 1 hour total = $ 76.00
Follow up time with the Moorpark /Simi Valley
Board of Realtors 1 meeting 2 hours = $ 152.00
1992 Sub total $ 949.80
Total City Contribution for Fair Housing $1,863.60
Less 1% of City Administrative allocation ($1,890.00)
Total estimated cash contribution $ 26.40
RECEIVED �---
MAY t X92
City CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE
City of Moorpark Richard Wittenberg
coun y f vEntura Officer
?obert C..H:`:enstei er
Offi cer
May 20, 1992
' �
city Manager
21 1992
Steve Kueny, Y g
city of Moorpark, L #6050 CITY OF MOORPARK
799 Moorpark Avenue
Moorpark, CA 93021 OFFICE OF CITY MANAGER
SUBJECT: FAIR HOUSING PROGRAM
We received your letter of May 14, 1992, outlining the City's
proposal to affirmatively further fair housing; the City's proposal
is unacceptable. HUD does not acknowledge staff time in preparing
for, traveling to and attending meetings as affirmatively
furthering fair housing.
As was mentioned in our letter of April 30, 1992,
the CDBG
Entitlement Area Fair Housing Steering Committee is made up of
representatives of the Area Housing Authority, six cities in the
entitlement area and the County representing the unincorporated
area. All of these participants, except Moorpark, have agreed to
support tangible efforts for fair housing which will require staff
time. In addition, each entity is contributing its "fair share"
from administrative Funds to help finance whatever fair housing
product is agreed upon by the Committee. This product could
include such items as updated brochures, a fair- housing video, etc.
The City's minimum contribution to this effort should be $1,890
from administrative funds.
Interestingly, the City stated in its May 14 letter, "the City uses
much more than the allotted CDBG funds for the administration of
the program. There are no "surplus" dollars available for other
uses." Since the inception of the CDBG Entitlement Program, the
City has received $79,510 in administrative funds; to date, $0 has
been drawn down. It is somewhat difficult to believe that $1,890
is unavailable from this allocation.
More importantly, the City entered into a Cooperating Agreement
with the County on July 19, 1991, which states:
6. CDBG funds shall not be used for activities in or in
support of any City that does not affirmatively further
fair housing within its own jurisdiction or that impedes
the County's actions to comply with its fair housing
certification.
As we stated in our letter of April 21, 1991, the City is not
required to utilize CDBG funds to affirmatively further fair
Hall of Administration L = 1940
:,l'J Srnitth Victoria Ventura, CA 93009 (80--,' 654 -2600 '30�
Moorpark
May 20, 1992
Page Two
housing; other City funds can be used. We do need to know,
however, the details of the alternative approach both in terms of
funding and the program.
If the City continues with non - compliance of this requirement, we
will have no choice but to review the City's eligibility for CDBG
funds.
SUSAN VAN ABEL
Principal Administrative Analyst
c: Marty Shaw - Halloway
mp4 /sva /7