HomeMy WebLinkAboutAGENDA REPORT 1990 0321 CC REG ITEM 09DMOORPARK
IT I /Aa,. GI . 0.
PAUL W. LAWRASON, Jr.
Mayor
SCOTT MONTGOMERY
Mayor Pro Tern
ELOISE BROWN
Councilmember
CLINT HARPER, Ph.D.
Councilmember
BERNARDO M.PEREZ
Councilmember
LILLIAN KELLERMAN
City Clerk
M E M O R A N D U M
TO: The Honorable City Council _1 —)
FROM: Donald P. Reynolds, Jr. Management Analyst
DATE: March 14, 1990
STEVEN KUENY
City Manager
CHERYLJ.KANE
City Attorney
PATRICK RICHARDS, A.I.C.P.
Director of
Community Development
R. DENNIS DELZEIT
City Engineer
JOHN V. GILLESPIE
Chief of Police
RICHARD T. HARE
City Treasurer
SUBJECT: 1990/91 Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Public
Hearing for the Appropriation of Funds (Estimated to be
$171,090)
The following report will briefly retrace previous CDBG projects and
summarize the status of recent HUD findings as they relate the City's
past appropriations. The report also summarizes the twelve proposals
requesting grant funds this year, and has attached a summary of these
materials for City Council consideration, (Please refer to Attachment
"C"). Staff is proposing that the City Council receive public testimony
and then close the March 21, 1990 public hearing and defer final
appropriations until the April 4, 1990 Council meeting. During the
period between March 21 and April 4, 1990, staff is recommending that
the Budget and Finance Committee review the proposals and recommend
final appropriations for the 1990/91 CDBG program at the April 4, 1990,
Council meeting.
Background
On January 3, 1990, staff reported to the Council the status of past
appropriations since 1986. Of the three HUD criteria for eligibility,
(low and moderate income benefit, elimination of slum and blighted
conditions, or relief for urgent health and safety needs), the Council
has focussed on the low and moderate benefit criteria. Specifically,
the City Council's past priorities for the program focussed mostly on
affordable housing, 48%, and street improvements in a low and moderate
income neighborhood, 42%. Three percent of the Council's appropriations
are public services for low and moderate income persons, and 1989/90 was
the first year the City awarded grants to this type of project. Public
services were reviewed in the January 3, 1990 staff report and will be
discussed in this report only when deemed relevant to future
appropriations.
799 Moorpark Avenue Moorpark, California 93021 (805) 529-6864
1990/91 CDBG Appropriations
March 14, 1990
appropriations.
Staff's proposed appropriations for this year were also part of the
January 3, 1990 report. Staff estimated receiving approximately $178,
290, to be disbursed as follows; $18,290 for administration, $12,000 for
Senior Nutrition, $74,000 for public improvements and, $74,000 for
affordable housing. The Ventura County Public Social Services Agency
has only requested $10,000 for their coordinator position, freeing
$2,000 for other uses, (Please refer to Attachment "C"). Staff has also
received some input on uses for the affordable housing appropriation
from interested parties.
On February 6, 1990, staff reported to the City Council that the City
has not received final notice from the County of Ventura, (which had not
received final notice from HUD), pertaining to the exact amount of funds
to be appropriated to Moorpark. It was reported to the City that the
Entitlement CDBG program would receive a cut in funding ranging from 4%
to 12%. Staff was recently informed that the final appropriations have
been received, and Moorpark will receive $171,090 which is a 4% cut in
funding. This is $19,010 for administration, and $152,081 for project
appropriations. The cap for public services of 15% equals $25,664.
On February 28, 1990, staff informed the City Council that the
advertisement for the March 7, 1990 CDBG public hearing was
inadvertently not published. With this exception, staff has been
following the schedule as adopted by the City Council at the April 26,
1989 City Council meeting.
Discussion
The following discussion will up -date some of the City's current
projects, and summarize recent events pertaining to HUD regulations.
This information is necessary for the evaluation of staff's proposals
for City projects and other proposals for grant funds which are
highlighted under separate headings.
Staff has not had sufficient time to focus on implementation of the
affordable housing projects. These appropriations resulted from the
reorganization of the Senior Center funding source and the additional
scope of work to be completed in the Virginia Colony street improvement
project. As a result of these modifications, the County Board of
Supervisors did not accept the revisions to the City's final statement
until October 1989, and did not execute the operational agreements for
1988/89 and 1989/90 until December 7, 1989. As stated in the January
3, 1990 report to Council, $272,000 has been appropriated for affordable
housing, to be used in variety of ways as follows: $75,000 for CEDC site
acquisition and pre -development costs; $5,000 for Networking for Housing
in Ventura County revolving loan fund; $100,000 for housing
rehabilitation; $29,250 for site acquisition; and $62,750 for an equity
2
1990/91 CDBG Public Hearing
March 14, 1990
share program.
Staff has learned that the equity share program, attempted under CDBG
in other jurisdictions, was deemed ineligible by HUD. The low and
moderate income criteria did not fully satisfy HUD requirements, so
other jurisdictions attempted to use the elimination of slum and
blighted conditions criteria. It is possible, if the subject properties
are within a "revitalization" area, to meet this criteria, but in
addition to the equity share investment, HUD expects the structures to
be rehabilitated in order to contribute towards the elimination of the
previous conditions in the project area. In this way, the project could
qualify under slum and blighted conditions, rather than low and moderate
income benefit. This approach could involve the City in major
rehabilitation efforts, absorbing the funds available to other
recipients. The equity share program is feasible, however it seems
risky, time consuming relative to the benefits and could potentially
limit the number of beneficiaries of the program.
Staff has also learned that HUD no longer permits "lump sum draw downs"
or CDBG fund advances. Typically, a housing rehabilitation project
requires that HUD provide a lump sum of money from which the loan fund
is created. Other CDBG projects function strictly on a reimbursement
basis and by removing the ability to make lump sum draw downs, HUD has
unified its application of this standard, but makes the rehabilitation
efforts more tedious for local jurisdictions to implement. The program
is highly feasible in Moorpark, if the City Council is willing to loan
the CDBG program funds in order to create the loan pool. Under this
scenario, the City would be reimbursed by HUD as each project is
completed. Attachment "A" is a letter from the County dated December 1,
1989, provided for reference.
Staff has researched the implementation procedures for initiating the
housing rehabilitation program and has been able to identify positive
steps for starting this project. Like the cities of Camarillo, Fillmore
and Ojai, the City could contract with the Area Housing Authority for
the start up of this project, but this could cost the City up to 30% of
the initial loan amount. Staff would return to Council with a specific
proposal outlining other approaches for the program at the May 2, 1990
City Council meeting, should the Council choose to proceed with this
project.
The status of the 1987/88 appropriation to Cabrillo Economic Development
Corporation, (CEDC), has not changed since last reported to Council in
the January 3, 1990 staff report, but CEDC does hope to bid on a site
in the near future. The 1987/88 $75,000 appropriation to CEDC is to be
used for locating a potential site for acquisition, $50,000, and for
pre -development costs, $25,000. As reported to the City in the
Attachment "B", CEDC is currently negotiating for a site next to the
existing Villa Campesina project. If successful, they hope to use City
3
1990/91 CDBG Public Hearing
March 14, 1990
CDBG funds for site acquisition. The County has not resolved the
technical complications regarding their contract with CEDC, and staff
is still on hold as far as moving forward with the contract for
services. In estimating what the value of the new site may be, staff
reminds the Council that the original Villa Campesina site cost
approximately $500,000 in 1986.
City Proposals
As mentioned in the background section of the report, staff recommended
appropriation of funds for 1990/91 for public services, (specifically
the Senior Nutrition Coordinator), affordable housing, public
improvements and administration. The following will provide more detail
for the City Council to consider when appropriating the 1990/91 CDBG
funds.
Administrative funds have become a significant part of the City's CDBG
program, now entering its fourth year. As the City appropriates funds,
the program becomes more complex to administer. Staff is currently
developing five contracts for service, as well as coordinating street
improvements and affordable housing program development. In addition
to local administrative requirements, the City is obligated to
assertively promote fair housing standards, assist the County in
developing a Housing Assistance Plan, assure that the City is in
compliance with equal opportunity regulations, fair labor standards, and
procurement policies, (to name a few). These administrative obligations
are in addition to the various reports, meetings and training required
to maintain the program. Approximately 50% of the cost of the current
staff position responsible for the program is sponsored by CDBG
administrative funds.
The Senior Nutrition program has been running successfully in the new
facility. The County is still unable to fund the staff that coordinates
the food service for Moorpark, therefore, in order to assure that the
program continues, staff is endorsing this proposal for grant funds.
The only concern is that as an existing service, we must be able to show
an increase of service to the community. Special activities and
additional public outreach can enhance the volume of service and assist
the City in meeting this criteria. During the last quarter of fiscal
year 1988/89, the monthly average of meals served is 408. The first two
quarters of fiscal year 1989/90 averaged 427 meals per month. Service
has jumped over 427 meals per month on three occasions; 481 meals in
June 1989, 495 meals in September 1989 and, 463 meals in December 1989.
The unusual distribution of high frequencies can be interpreted to mean
that there is no real way of assuring that the program will increase its
service and that many variables can influence the level of service
provided by the program at any given time. Staff feels that the City
is at risk of not being reimbursed for funding this program for more
4
1990/91 CDBG Public Hearing
March 14, 1990
than two years, because eventually the service level will remain stable.
Street improvements are a popular program for CDBG projects, in Moorpark
and in other cities. The current project in Virginia Colony may not
utilize the entire grant appropriation and therefore, in completing the
proposal to the County, the City stated that the work may include parts
of Charles Street. This decision was made by the Council after a
special review of the two neighborhoods by the Public Works Committee.
The current CDBG portion of work for Charles Street is limited to the
higher elevations of the street between Spring Road and Magnolia because
of limited CDBG resources and plans to develop storm drains on the lower
portions of the street. If the Council chooses, grant funds could be
used towards an enlarged scope of CDBG work for this neighborhood. The
amount of funds appropriated would determine the amount of work which
could be completed because the scope of work on Charles Street is far
greater than the availability of CDBG funds at this time.
Staff is recommending that the equity share program be initiated within
the Redevelopment Project Area using redevelopment funds, and that the
City avoid using CDBG funding for type of project. The City of Simi
Valley administers equity share successfully with Redevelopment funds,
not CDBG. By relying on Redevelopment funds, the equity share concept
could help more people, while following local requirements rather than
federal regulations. This would free $62,750 for other affordable
housing projects.
The rehabilitation program is feasible, and can be implemented quickly.
In other communities, such as Fillmore, a housing conservation plan was
developed by use of Census data that qualifies neighborhoods as low and
moderate income residents. Currently, the 1980 Census data provides
adequate eligibility data for parts of the downtown neighborhood.
Combining this data with the data collected while preparing the
Redevelopment Plan, the City can easily prepare a program for specific
rehabilitation uses. If staff can continue to make progress, the City
could have a program in about six months.
Acquisition of land for affordable housing will require a more
significant investment from the City if we hope to realize this
objective in the near future. The City Council may consider
appropriating all the affordable housing appropriations from 1987/88,
1989/90 and 1990/91 funds towards this objective. It is possible to
adjust the last years appropriation without a second public hearing
because staff did not specifically detail the three programs addressed
at the last hearing, and submitted a proposal titled "affordable
housing" to give the City this type of flexibility. Therefore, if the
City Council wanted to wait for Redevelopment to fund both the equity
share and rehabilitation programs, shifting all funds to acquisition,
can be easily arranged.
5
1990/91 CDBG Public Hearing
March 14, 1990
If the Council chooses to focus on acquisition for affordable housing,
by eliminating the proposed equity share and rehabilitation concepts,
then this would free $192,000 from past years which could be added to
this year's funds (subtracting administration, $17,289, and Senior
Nutrition, $10,000) totalling approximately $325,172. This amount of
money reflects a serious commitment to assist low income people, and
greatly increases the feasibility of a new affordable housing project
in the City.
Staff s recommendation for the appropriation of the $171,090 CDBG funds
for 1990/91 proposals are as follows:
1) Administration $19,010
2) Public Services $25,000
3) Affordable Housing $63,540
4) Public Improvements $63,540
Proposals Received from Other Agencies
Staff has attached an outline of the twelve proposals requesting grant
funds for this year's program. Of the $104,200 requested, $54,200 is
for public services, and $50,000 is for site improvements or site
acquisition. In general terms, there seems to be an increasing burden
on the various agencies to meet the growing case loads. All of these
programs are unique in the service they offer to Moorpark residents, but
require Moorpark residents to leave the City in order to receive these
services. The Proposal Package, Attachment "C", has been organized to
distinguish local programs from those programs located elsewhere in
Ventura County.
The important distinction emphasized by the separation of proposals is
based on the likelihood of working with the County in a joint powers
arrangement for the centrally located services. In the event that the
City and the County fund the same central service proposal, the County
will administer and manage the service contract. This is a relatively
new concept, and has been welcomed by all entitlement cities because
it lessons the burden of administration placed upon the smaller
organizations by the requirements of managing this program.
Three programs are designed specifically for Moorpark: Senior Nutrition,
(previously discussed); Senior Nutrition Equipment Purchase; and the
development of a Moorpark Literacy Program. These three services
combined equal $19,200 in requests which is $6,466 below the estimated
15% cap for these services.
Other programs have provided statistical justifications for their
N.
1990/91 CDBG Public Hearing
March 14, 1990
request for funds from Moorpark by attempting to measure what percentage
of the service is for Moorpark residents. Most of these applicants are
applying to each Entitlement Grant city and the County, and have used
the percentage criteria for calculating the funds requested.
This year staff requested the agencies' current operating budget, and
most recent audited financial statement. Most applicants cooperated
with this request. Exceptions include the following: Networking for
Housing provided neither document after two attempts by staff to include
them in the proposal; the Area Housing Authority and Youth Connection
only provided a financial statements after two requests, one is
incomplete; the Reading Program for Adults claims to have never been
audited, and therefore could only provide a budget; Clinicas del Camino
Real did not include a budget; Community Conscience did not include the
budget; Food Share did not include a complete budget. When possible
staff did make attempts to contact these agencies in following up on the
City's criteria. For most agencies, a letter was sent in January along
with the application, and again in February when the original
application was deemed incomplete.
The Proposal Packet includes a spread sheet of applications, a summary
of each application, and some key questions to ask the agencies in the
event that they appear at the public hearing. Each agency was
personally contacted and invited to attend the public hearing with one
exception. Networking for Housing in Ventura County has not returned
staff's phone call.
Summary
The City is in a flexible position to make adjustments to the affordable
housing program, possibly shifting all funds to property acquisition,
or splitting the funds between acquisition and rehabilitation. Many
good proposals were received by the City this year, 50% for public
service, and 50% for site improvements/acquisition. Shifting federal
regulations require the City to look closely at past appropriations, and
consider new appropriations for 1990/91. CDBG appropriations are never
a simple choice, and the volume of selections justifies that the City
take their time and review each proposal carefully.
7
1990/91 CDBG Public Hearing
March 14, 1990
Recommendation:
That the City Council:
1) Receive public testimony for consideration in appropriating the
1990/91 Community Development Block Grant funds estimated to be
$171,090 and close the public hearing;
2) Defer the final appropriations to the April 4, 1990 City council
meeting;
3) Direct the Budget and Finance Committee to review proposals prior
to the April 4, 1990 meeting and make a recommendation to the
Council for final appropriations.
Attachments: A) Lump Sum Draw Down Change in Regulations
B) Letter from CEDC
v:ORPARK, CALIFORN{A
City Councr Meeting
of _ 199�
Y sZf
8
ATTACHMENT A
CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE
Ventura Richard Wittenberg
of Chief Administrative Officer
unty
Robert C. Hirtensteiner
Assistant Chief Administrative Officer
December 1, 1989
Don Reynolds,
Management Analyst
City of Moorpark
799 Moorpark Avenue
Moorpark, CA 93021
Dear Don:
Re: Lump Sum Drawdowns
As you are aware, there have been some questions about the ban
on lump sum drawdowns for housing rehabilitation. To date, we
have not received any written direction from HUD on the
procedures we are to follow concerning such arrangements.
However, we recently received a Community Development Digest
issue with information on the topic. Below is the text from
their article:
Community development block grant recipients [and
subrecipients] will not face HUD sanctions if they
unknowingly made lump sum deposits of CDBG funds into
revolving loan accounts after Sept. 30, sources assure CD
Digest. HUD will insist, however, that grantees terminate
any agreements for lump sum deposits entered into since Oct.
1 to avoid being found in noncompliance with CDBG
requirements at some future time. A one-year ban on lump
sum deposits became effective retroactively with the
President's signing of fiscal 1990 HUD funding legislation
on Nov. 9. Appropriations Committees put the prohibition
into the annual HUD money bill to help keep the measure from
exceeding actual spending targets in the 1990 budget
resolution. Grantees can continue revolving loan programs
established with lump sum payments made before Oct. 1, we're
told. Any agreements with banks or other financial
institutions that expire during fiscal 1990 (October 1, 1989
- September 30, 1990) however, may not be extended or
renewed, grantees are reminded. Current CDBG entitlement
program regulations issued last fall limit such agreements
to 2 years. Grantees wanting to continue arrangements for
800 South Victoria Avenue, Ventura, CA 93009 (805) 654-2680 ATSS 723-2680
Don Reynolds
December 1, 1989
Page 2
lump sum payments must execute new agreements under the 1988
rules. The 1990 legislation, however, prohibits new
agreements, leaving grantees to figure out a more direct way
to finance property rehabilitation, the only activity for
which lump sum deposits are permitted. The ban will expire
after 9/30/90 unless reenacted in next year's HUD funding
bill or other legislation.
Although we have not received "official" notification of this
restriction from HUD, it is in our best interest to comply with
the information provided by the CDD. The County is considering
some lobbying measures to ensure that the restriction is not
included in the 1991 funding legislation. We would appreciate
any comments you may have on how this restriction will affect
your CDBG program. If you have any questions, or if you would
like to discuss this matter, please contact your assigned
analyst, either Lynne Kada (654-2690) or Ann Hewitt (654-2692).
Sincerely,
MARTY SHAW-HALLOWAY
Manager, Community Development Block Grant/
Special Projects
lumpll28/msh/ah
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
BERNARDO M.PEREZ
President
Moorpark City
Councilmember
TERESA CORTES
Vice President
Villa Campesma
Corporation
ERNIE MORALES
Second Vice President
Former Mayor of the
City of Fillmore
VICTOR FONTAINE
Treasurer
Fontaine. Quintanilla
and Associates
JAMES P DRISKELL
Secretary
Project Understanding
ED AGUILAR
Community Representative
Member at Large
CAROLYN BRIGGS
Area Housing Authority
NANCY GRASMEHR
Cohen, Alexander
8 Clayton
RAULLOZA
Rancho Sespe Workers
Improvement Association
ANGEL MONTELONGO
Community Representative
Member at Large
CARMEN RAMIREZ
Channel Counties
Legal Services
Association
DAVID J. SABEDRA
Ventrua County
National Bank
ADVISORY BOARD
RON L. HERTEL
Hertel Constructors
AL ZAPANTA
Atlantic Richfield
Company
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
RODNEY E. FERNANDEZ
ATTACHMENT B
Cabrillo Economic Development Corporation
11011 Azahar Street, Saticoy, California 93004 (805) 659-3791
February 15, 1990
Don Reynolds
Management Analyst.
City of Moorpark.
799 Moorpark Avenue
Moorpark, CA 93021
Re: CDBG
Dear Dori:
As we discussed, the CEDC is not applying for a CDBG grant at this time. We do support
the allocation of as much of your CDBG grant as possible for affordable housing
programs. As you know, the CEDC is actively searching for a site to develop a second
affordable housing project in Moorpark. We are currently in negotiations with the
owner of the site to the east of the self help project; we are proposing to develop the
southern part of that site as affordable housing. If we are successful in reaching
agreement, we would be counting on CDBG funds allocated for affordable housing to be
used for a project on, that site.
We'lI keep you informed as to our progress.
Sincere?
Cz
Karen Flock
Project Manager
kf
RECEIVED
F E B 16 1990
City of MoorpaO
A United Way Agency
A community economic development corporation serving Ventura County
ATTACHMENT C
CDBG PROPOSAL PACKAGE FOR THE 1990/91 PROGRAM
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Spread Sheet of Proposals .................................. 1
Keyquestions for Applicants ............................... 2
Summaryof Proposals ....................................... 3
SPREAD SHEET FOR 190/91 CDBG PROPOSALS
ORGANIZATION
PUB.SOC-SRV.AGENCY
FOOD SHARE INC.
CH.ISL.LEGAL SRVCS.
L.TERM CARE SERVGS, OF V.C.
NETWORKING FOR HOUSING
C.V.LIBRARY SRGS.
PUB.SOC.SRVGS.AGENCY
PUB.SOC.SRVCS.AGENCY
YOUTH CONNECTION
COMMUNITY CONCSIENCE
CLINICAS DEL CAMINO REAL
SUB -ORGANIZATION
SUBM.
CONTACT
PH #
PURPOSE
ELIG961LTY CAT.
$ REQUESTED
HOMELESS OMBUDSMAN
FOOD BANK/FOOD PANTRY
EAST COUNTY PROGRAM
LONG TERM OMBUDSMAN
REVOLVING LOAN FUND
READING PROGRM. FOR ADULTS
SENIOR NUTRITION
SENIOR NUTRITION
CASH PACIFCA
HUMAN SERVICES CENTER
NEW DENTAL LAB
2/23
2/5
2/5
2/2
2 1
/
2/3
2/2
2/2
3/5
3/5
2/27
SHIRLEY BUSH
JEWEL PEDI
CARMEN RAMIREZ
BEE ELLISMAN
LYNN JACOBS
PATRICIA FLANIGAN
VIOLET HENRY
VIOLET HENRY
PAMELA BURKE
FRED P. WILSON
JACK HINOJOFA
652-7636
647-3944
487-6531
656-1986
644-4453
652-6294
388-4316
388-4316
983-8887
05_
4, 7458
524-4926
OBUDS14AN SALARY
WHAR EHOUSE PORCH.
ATTORNEY SRVCS./TEN.LANDLORD
ASSIST SENIORS IN LONG TERM CARE FACIL.
PREDEVLOPMEN7 COSTS FOR AFF.HSG.
ESTABLISH A LITERACY PRGM. IN MOORPARK
PURCHASE OF EQUIP. FOR MEAL SERVICES
NUTIRION COORDINATOR SALARY
PREDEVELOPMENT COSTS FOR FACILTY
CAPITAL LOAN INTEREST PAYMENT FOR FACILITY
ACQUISITION OF EQUIP. FOR NEW FAC.
PUBLIC SERVICE $500.00
ACQUISITION $10,000.00
PUBLIC SERVICE $10,000.00
PUBLIC SERVICE $3,600.00
PUBLICG. S10,000.00
PUBLIC SERVICE $8,000.00
PUBLIC SERVICE $2, 100.00
PUBLIC SERVICE 510,000.00
CONSTRUCTION COSTS $25,000.00
'IT55,000.00
PUBLIC SERVICE $20,000.00
$104,200.00
BENEFICIARY
HOMELESS/Low /Yl
LowlAod
LOW INCOME PERSONS
LOW INCOME/SENIORS
LOW INCOME
LOW INCOME
LOW INCOME/SENIORS
LOW INCOME/SENIORS
LOW INCOME/YOUTH
LOW INCOME
LOW INCOME/MEDICAL
Key Questions for Grant Applicants
New Public Service
How will they document that recipients are Low/Moderate income
persons
Will the recipient documentation detail head of household,
handicapped individuals, age, and ethnicity
Explain agency's familiarity with Federal grant requirements such
as reporting requirements, accounting procedures, and employment
standards
How was the need for this service in Moorpark justified?
Existing Public Services
How will grant funds increase service, can the increase be
documented in quantifiable terms?
Explain agency's familiarity with Federal grant requirements such
as reporting requirements, accounting procedures, and employment
standards
Describe methodology for arriving at percentage of needs, and the
amount requested from Moorpark
Will the recipient documentation detail head of household,
handicapped individuals, age, and ethnicity
Site Improvements
Describe experience using federal funds for construction relative
to the Fair Labor laws, and Davis Bacon requirements
Are other federal funds being used for construction of facility, if
so, do these requirements equal CDBG reporting requirements,
accounting, and construction regulations?
Would the facility always service low and moderate income persons
(as stipulated in the deed to the property), and document that the
recipients are low and moderate income?
Site Acquisition
Has the preliminary Environmental reviews matched those required by
CDBG regulations by addressing historic places, flood plain
regulations, displacement and relocation requirements?
Has the additional funding been secured for acquisition, if not,
what other resources may be available?
And all questions included under site improvements.
PROPOSAL SUMMARY FOR THE 1990/91 CDBG PROGRAM
Staff is in receipt of more applications this year than in the past.
The following is intended to provide an objective summary of the eleven
proposals requesting funds from the City. As mentioned in the staff
report, any County -wide agency which receives funds from the County CDBG
program and Moorpark, can be more simply administered through a joint
powers (JP) agreement between the City and the County. Three proposals
which provide direct benefits to the City, The Moorpark Literacy
proposal, the Senior Nutrition meal coordinator proposal and the Senior
Center equipment proposal are not eligible for the JP arrangement.
Each of the agencies requesting funds this year provides a service which
is unique to the area. No agency provides the exact same services for
Moorpark or the County of Ventura, and this is the justification used
for applying for grant funds Moorpark. Because Moorpark does not
provide these services, our citizens rely on the are -wide agencies, and
many have proportionately divided their requests based on the percentage
of the service that Moorpark residents receive. This data is difficult
to accumulate for some agencies so estimates were used. Each agency has
applied to other CDBG cities with the same proposal, hoping for are -
wide support for their projects, (excluding the three local proposals
mentioned above).
Some proposals qualify for funds as public services, and others qualify
as site improvements or acquisition. Some proposals are for new
programs, others hope to expand their services or sustain current levels
of service under recent budget restraints. The existing services MUST
SHOW AND INCREASE OF SERVICE AFTER RECEIVING CDBG FUNDS in order to be
eligible for reimbursement from HUD. All proposals are intended to
benefit low and moderate, (L/M) income persons.
Local Proposals
These proposals are from County -wide agencies seeking assistance for
programs located in Moorpark.
1). Senior Nutrition coordinator
Agency: V.C. Public Social Services Agency, (PSSA)
Funds: $10,000
Eligibility: Existing L/M Public Service
Summary: This proposal is identical to the proposal funded last
year, except staff has requested PSSA to identify a means to
increase the Senior meal service to the community. The program has
been stable in its service volume to the seniors since moving to the
new location, but staff is concerned that the program will not show
an increase in service during it's second year. Eventually, the
service level will peak, and the City or County will have find a
new means for funding this program.
2). Moorpark Literacy Program
Agency: V.C. Library Services Agency- Reading Program for Adults
Funds: $8,000
Eligibility: New L/M Public Service
Summary: This proposal is for the establishment of a Moorpark
Literacy program providing one-on-one tutoring to those who do not
read or write english. The funds would provide a the salary for a
coordinator, reading materials and public outreach. The applicant
has researched the feasibility of the program, and has confirmed a
possibility of two locations for the training, free advertising from
the local paper, and possible referral of volunteer tutors and
service recipients from Moorpark Community College. Currently,
there is no local program which offers this service for our
community.
3). Storage Shelves for the Moorpark Senior Center
Agency: V.C. PSSA
Funds: $1,200
Eligibility: Existing L/M Public Service
Summary: The improvements to the new Senior Center have provided
space for food storage, but did not fund adequate shelving for food.
This request is for equipment which meets health and safety
standards and provides for efficient use of the new storage area.
It may be difficult to show how storage shelves actually increase
the service to the seniors when all food for the Senior Nutrition
program will be prepared in Camarillo and then transported to
Moorpark.
Centrally Located Proposals (J.P. is Possible)
4). East Ventura County Legal Services for Low Income Persons
Agency: Law Offices of Channel Counties Legal Services Association
Funds: $10,000
Eligibility: Existing L/M Public Service
Summary: This proposal is for salaries to expand the existing
service within closer proximity to East Ventura County residents.
The service provides legal support for all low income persons in
Ventura and Santa Barbara County. The legal support usually assists
those who need help with tenant landlord problems, providing defense
for recipients all the way to court if necessary. Staff considers
this an existing service because Moorpark residents currently
receive Agency support from the Oxnard location, but feels that
comfortable with the agencies growth in service as it proposes to
use funds to provide additional staff exclusively for East Ventura
County.
5). Equipment Acquisition for Senior Nutrition Camarillo Facility
Agency: V.C. PSSA
Funds: $900
Eligibility: Existing L/M/ Public Service
Summary: The central facility for all Senior Nutrition food
preparation in Camarillo is in need of a new dish washing machine.
The funds requested are proportionately related to percentage of
service provided to Moorpark from this facility. Staff's concern
is documenting an increase in service as a result of acquiring this
piece of equipment. Currently, when the machine breaks, it can take
as long as a week to repair it. It will soon will be beyond repair.
6). Acquisition Assistance for the Human Services Center in Thousand
Oaks
Agency: Community Conscience
Funds: $5,000
Eligibility: Site Acquisition for L/M Benefit
Summary: The Community Conscience organization has recently
constructed a central facility for 26 public service agencies in
Thousand Oaks. The project was funded in part by other city CDBG
funds and creative funding efforts. The agency requests assistance
in paying the interest on the construction loan, based on the
estimated percentage of service received by Moorpark residents.
Assistance of this nature by-passes the public service requirements
and essentially helps these agencies to dedicate more funds to their
services, rather than rent. This facility is unique in its ability
to efficiently provide many services under one roof for East Ventura
County. As stated in the application, this proposal will be
requested for three consecutive years from each City which receives
benefits from the facility.
7). Assistance Funding the Pre -Admissions Counselor for the Long Term
Care Ombudsman Program of Ventura County
Agency: Long Term Care Services of Ventura County
Funds: $3,600
Eligibility: Existing L/M Public Service
Summary: This request for funds is to assist this service for Senior
citizens in continuing to provide long term care assistance to
persons despite the rising costs of these services. This is the
only program which assists people who are about to enter a long term
facility, and are unaware of their rights and legal standing. The
program is under duress to meet the rising costs of their insurance
and overhead expenses (as indicated in their budget), and is in need
of support in order to sustain the current level of service it
provides free to seniors. The funds requested is a careful
calculation of the percent of Moorpark residents who receive
assistance from this agency at their East Valley location in
Thousand Oaks. These funds will help to support the most important
part of their service which provides referrals (staff position of
referral coordinator) to seniors on a wide variety of concerns which
are common to this need. The funds would have to increase the
current level of service.
8). Food Bank Warehouse Acquisition
Agency: Food Share, Inc.
Funds: $10,000
Eligibility: Site Acquisition for L/M Benefit
Summary: The Food Share program plans to purchase the warehouse in
Oxnard, which will store food disbursed to all recipients in the
County. The current rent of this facility can be applied to the
equity of the site during the interim period as they attempt to
collect $300,000 for the down payment, and $740,000 for the total
cost of the facility. This program is the source of food for the
Moorpark Food Pantry, the only assistance available to Moorpark
residents in need of food. Grant funds could help the agency to
provide more services with the existing revenues, rather than using
these source for site acquisition.
9). Advocacy and Case Management Services for the Homeless
Agency: V.C. PSSA- Adult Services
Funds: $500
Eligibility: Existing L/M Public Service
Summary: Due to an increased demand for services, the Agency is
requesting funds to help pay for additional staff to meet these
needs. The position to be funded is Case Manager which provides
direct assistance to homeless persons County -wide. Services include
referrals to housing facilities, food, and health needs. The
request for funds seems relatively small, but this is because the
agency based the request to Moorpark on the number of persons
assisted last year which was 12, or 1.5% of total services.
10). Low Income Dental Assistance Program- Oxnard Facility
Agency: Clinicas Del Camino Real
Funds: $20,000
Eligibility: Existing L/M Public Service
Summary: The Agency provides services primarily for farm workers in
Ventura County, and other persons in need of medical care but are
uninsured or receiving benefits which do not pay for all of the
costs. The demand for these services is increasing rapidly, and the
Agency is working towards a new larger facility to meet these needs.
The Agency hopes to acquire land for the facility from the Oxnard
Redevelopment Agency, and upon completion of construction,
(estimated in September 1991), will need equipment and supplies in
order to operate. The request for funds is based on the data
provided in the application representing Moorpark as receiving 5%
of their services.
11). Site Improvements for Youth Authority Facility, Casa Pacifica, and
the Are Housing Authority Mentally Handicapped Facility
Agency: Ventura County Youth Connection and the Area Housing
Authority of Ventura County
Funds: $25,000
Eligibility: Site Improvements for L/M Benefit
Summary: The two agencies applying for funds are working together
to develop land to be used for two purposes; 1) Children's Crisis
Center and 2), a facility to house mentally ill adults able to live
independently in a shared housing arrangement. The facility is
located near the Camarillo State Hospital and Developmental Center,
and will be the first of its kind in the County. The request is to
help pay for off -site water and sewer improvements. The Agencies
estimate construction completion in January 1992. The request
represents about 6% of the total request for CDBG funds area -wide.
12). Networking for Housing in Ventura County- Revolving Loan Fund
Agency: Networking for Housing in Ventura County
Funds: $10,000
Eligibility: Site Improvements L/M Benefit
Summary: This application is familiar to the City, having funded the
revolving loan program in 1987. The intent is to provide a pool of
funds to be used a loans to developers in the construction/pre-
development costs for affordable housing. The program assists any
developers within Ventura County thereby assisting all low income
people in the area.