Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAGENDA REPORT 1985 0401 CC REG ITEM 07C MOORPARbv ALBERT PRIETO �TEVEN KUENY Mayor �Pw °•c,_ City Manager JAMES D.WEAK oPO �° CHERYL J. KANE Mayor Pro Tem f City Attorney THOMAS C. FERGUSON NIALL FRITZ Councilmember O Director of DANNY A. WOOLARD Community Councilmember �° Development LETA YANCY-SUTTON *moo ' R. DENNIS DELZEIT Councilmember City Engineer DORIS D. BANKUS JOHN V. GILLESPIE City Clerk Chief of Police JOHN C. GEDNEY City Treasurer TO: The Honorable City Council FROM: Niall Fritz, Director of Community Development DATE: April 1, 1985 SUBJECT: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT (CDBG) PROPOSED ACTION Receive public comments upon activities or programs to be included in a CDBG application. BACKGROUND INFORMATION The City has been requested by the Cabrillo Economic Development Corporation, on behalf of Villa Campasina, to submit an application for a Community Development Block Grant. Grant funds would be used by Villa Campasina to purchase the 10. 7 acre site upon which their proposing to develop low-income housing (Exhibit 1) . For reference, a General Plan Amendment for the project has been submitted and the applicant is preparing development applicantions (zone change, tract map and planned development permit) to be processed concurrently with the GPA. In general, any incorporated city under 50, 000 people or any County with an unincorporated area of under 200 , 000 people is eligible to participate in the State CDBG Program. This is a very competitive program and for the 1985 funding cycle approximately $28, 000, 000 will be available. In preparing an application for this program, it is required that during the process a public meeting be held to gather public input regarding those programs or activities for which an application should be submitted. Specific approval of the proposed grant application program is required prior to its submission to the State. Such a meeting would be scheduled before your Council on April 15, 1985 . Further background information regarding the program is provided (Exhibit 2) . 799 Moorpark Avenue Moorpark, California 93021 (805)529-6864 The Honorable City Council page 2 - April 1, 1985 SUBJECT: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT (CDBG) The maximum amount of money for which a grant request can be submitted is $600, 000 . For general administrative purposes the City may request up to 180 of the grant, or a maximum of $108, 000. The general administrative portion of a grant may be used by the City for the administration of the grant, for the preparation of a proposal for the next year (including the study of new housing programs) , or to study downtown improvements. Staff is investigating the feasibility of included a "downtown improvement plan" with a grant application for this year. RECOMMENDED ACTION Receive public comments on activities or programs to be included in CDBG application. 0 CEDCCabrillo Economic Development Corporation P Po 11011 Azahar Street, Saticoy, California 93004 (805) 659-3791 March 29 , 1985 Niall Fritz Director of Community Development City of Moorpark 799 Moorpark Avenue Moorpark, CA 93021 Dear Mr. Fritz : The Cabrillo Economic Development Corporation (CEDC) requests that the City of Moorpark work with us to apply for CDBG funds for the Villa Campesina project, the mutual self help homeownership project proposed for a 10 . 7 acre site on Liberty Bell Road. Because of high land and site development costs in Moorpark and Farmers Home Administration policy on maximum mortgage amounts, additional funds are necessary in order to make the project possible and CDBG is the best source for these funds. The CEDC proposes to use CDBG funds of $540, 000 for land and site development costs to allow the cost of up to 75 lots to be reduced from a projected cost of $29 ,200 each to $22, 000 . This would allow for total mortgages, including house construction, as follows : 2 bedroom home - $49, 000 3 bedroom home - $52,800 4 bedroom home - $56, 000 The $22, 000 lot cost would be within the range of the lot cost typically approved by Farmers Home Administration in this three county area of $22 ,000 to $23,000 . Total mortgages would be within the $55,000 to $60 , 000 maximum currently allowed by Farmers Home. This writedown of $7 ,200 per lot could be structured as a no interest loan due in five years. At that point, if the family could not afford to pay the loan back, it would be refinanced under the same terms . When the loan is paid back, it would go to the CEDC to do further low income housing activities in Moorpark; such activities would be subject to City Council approval. BOARD OF DIRECTORS TERESA CORTES CARMEN RAMIREZ VICTOR FONTAINE DELFINO LOPEZ-ROJAS President Vice President Secretary Treasurer Villa Campesina Channel Counties Legal Small Business Proctor&Gamble EXECUTIVE Corporation Services Association Consultant DIRECTOR RODNEV FERNANDEZ MARIA LUISA LOPEZ CRISTOBAL O. RAMOS ALICIA SANCHEZ JAIME ZEPEDA Sergeant at Arms Cabrillo Cooperative Buenaventura Rancho Sespe Administrative Aide to Housing Corporation Legal Clinic Workers Association Assemblyman Jack O'Connell A community economic development corporation serving Ventura County Niall Fritz March 29 , 1985 Page 2 Based on our discussions with staff of the California Department of Housing and Community Development, which administers the CDBG program, we believe that an application for this activity would be very competitive. Sincerely, J/ Rodney Fernandez Karen Flock Executive Director t° Project Manager kf Cali�ornia 1985 Community Deve_ pment Block Grant Program Introduction Moorpark is eligible to obtain funding under the 1985 State Community Development Block Grant Program administered by the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) . The final date for submitting applications for the General Allocation is May 6 , 1985 . Applications for the Economic Develop- ment Allocation will be accepted until August 15 , 1985 . Eligible Activities Basic eligible activities fall into the three major categories of housing, public facilities , and economic development. These activities include, but are not limited to: (1 ) acquisition and disposition of real property, ( 2 ) construction of public facilities and improvements, ( 3 ) property rehabilitation, ( 4 ) provision of public services, ( 5 ) payment of the non-federal share of a grant- in-aid program, ( 6 ) improvement of sites for assisted housing, (7 ) relocation assistance, (8 ) expansion of industrial and commercial property, ( 9 ) historic preservation, and ( 10 ) comprehen- sive community planning. Applicants may apply for funds to under- take any one or any combination of eligible activites . There are three allocations of funding: General, Economic Develop- ment, and Native American. An application must be filed under a specific allocation. Amount of Funding Applicants for General Allocation funds may apply each funding cycle for up to $600, 000 for any one or a combination of the eligible activities or, as an alternative, may apply for more than $600 , 000 with a maximum of $1, 200 , 000 for a single activity which cannot be completed in segments . The total amount of funding awarded from the General and Economic Development Allocations may not exceed $600 , 000 . Up to 180 of the grant may be used for the city' s administration of the grant; however, normally 5-100 of the grant amount is used for administration and HCD rates applications lower that fall outside this range unless there is a very good justification. Basis of Award of Funds Consistent with the nature of a competitive application process, there is no assurance that each applicant will be funded. In fact, less than one half of the applicants typically receive awards. Those that are funded best meet the state' s program objectives . The priorities of the state are to emphasize benefit to the targeted income group, and to use these funds to address serious local needs. The primary national objectives of the program are the development of viable urban communities by providing decent housing and suitable living environment, and the expansion of economic opportunities , principally for persons of low and moderate income. This is to be achieved through the undertaking of eligible activities, each of which must carry out at least one of three additional broad national objectives : A. Benefiting low and moderate income families ; B. Aiding in the prevention or elimination of slums and blight; or C. Meeting other community development needs having a particular urgency. At least fifty-one percent ( 51% ) of the funds applied for shall benefit the targeted income group. For Ventura County, including Moorpark, these are families whose incomes are below 80% of the area median income. The amounts are as follows, depending on the number of persons in the family: 1 - $17 , 900 2 - $20 , 500 3 - $23 , 050 4 - $25 ,600 5 - $27 , 200 6 - $28 ,800 7 - $30, 400 8 - $32, 000 HCD will evaluate and fund applications based on all the activities in the application in most cases . In other words, HCD will not be negotiating with applicants and funding only the activities that rate highest. It is HCD ' s policy to encourage applicants to submit proposals that rate well as a whole rather than submit proposals with a combination of strong and weak scoring activities. The most competitive applicants will be those that meet a clear need with a well designed program. Attached is a sheet showing the factors used to rate applications. C0 i iUNIT" DEVELOP;TENT BLOCK GRANT RATING FACTORS 1935 Funding Cycle 1 . Poverty index ( 100 Points) Ratio of applicant's poverty index to highest poverty percentage. Data from U.S . Census . For Moorpark, the percent of persons in Poverty Index Score poverty is 12.0. 2. Benefit to Target Income Group. (300 Points) 6. 12 points for each percentage point above 51 that program funds benefit the targeted income group. Targeted Income Group Benefit Score 3. Program Impact. (450 Points) Applications are reviewed and assigned points as_ follows : Insignificant Impact - 0 Points Minimal Impact - 1-110 Points Moderate Impact - 111-225 Points Substantial Impact - 226-450 Points The factors reviewed are: A. Significance and documentation of the needs addressed; B. Degree to which the funds address basic and serious community development needs; C. The effectiveness of the program in addressing basic and serious community development needs (program design) ; D. Strength of commitments from other sources necessary for the program; E. Potential environmental problems and proposed mitigation measures; F. Extent that the program furthers one or more of the following objectives: 1. Complementing other local actions increasing housing opportunities for targeted income group households. 2. Promotion of deconcentration of housing for the targeted income group or promotion of housing opportunity for special needs households. 3. Promotes land utilization consistent with comprehensive local or areawide development planning. 4. Provides increased economic opportunities for the targeted income group. 5. Provides housing or economic development infrastructure or corrects health and safety deficiencies for persons/households in the targeted income groups. 6. Promotes energy conservation. 7. Promotes reuse of historic and older buildings. �* G. Degree to which the applicant has achieved its program performance objectives under any prior grant from the State CDBG Program. Program Impact Score 4. Cost Effectiveness. ( 150 Points) Factors used to evaluate cost effectiveness are: A. Leveraging of private sector funds. B. Cost per household benefitted or job retained or created. C. Cost of general administration of program. D. The extent the program prevents recurring community development problems. E. Other local actions that increase the benefit of the program. Cost Effectiveness Score TOTAL POINT SCORE Required Hearings The State CDBG regulations require a public meeting to be held "during program design and preparation of the application. " This meeting should be held as soon as possible. The purpose is to explain the State CDBG Program and give attendees an opportunity to ask questions and suggest possible uses for the funds . Written comments on any aspect of the program must be invited, with instruc- tions on where to submit such comments. The public meeting should be noticed as widely as possible, but at least in the same way a formal public hearing is noticed. The State CDBG regulations also require a public hearing to be held "prior to submitting the application to the Department. " This hearing is more formal than the meeting described above, and is to be held before the governing body of the applicant. At the hearing the proposed program should be fully described, including the amount of funds to be requested, each proposed activity, the location of each activity, and the estimated schedule for accomplishment of the activity. Attendees should be provided full opportunity to comment on the program, sub- ject to the applicant' s normal rules governing public hearings. Housing Element Submittal As a condition of receiving funds, a city or county shall have sub- mitted a draft housing element to the HCD. Upon submittal of a draft housing element, the Grantee may draw down a portion of the administrative funds for the purpose of completing the adoption of a revised housing element in compliance with State law. It should also be noted that any costs incurred prior to the effective date of the grant agreement are ineligible for reimbursement from the State CDBG Program. This restriction is applicable to the use of consultants as well as to the applicant' s own personnel.