The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutAGENDA REPORT 2006 0920 CC REG ITEM 10GT`F I O • G• e r,g „ q .t0 -,Too,& iCT1fN: MOORPARK CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT To: Honorable City Council From: Nancy urns Senior y o Management Analyst Date: September 8, 2006 (CC Mtg. of September 20, 2006) Subject: Consider Response to Grand Jury Report on Affordable Housing in Ventura County BACKGROUND On January 24, 2006, the Grand Jury requested information on the City's affordable housing policies, including qualifications for very low, low and moderate income households, programs and the positive effects for the City, as well as policies and procedures. Materials which responded to this request were submitted to the Grand Jury April 6, 2006. DISCUSSION The Grand Jury's report "Affordable Housing in Ventura County Cities" was delivered to the City June 21, 2006 and subsequently provided to the Council. A response from the City is required within 90 days of receipt of the report. Section 933 of the Penal Code requires governing body comment on the final report. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Approve letter of response to Grand Jury Report on Affordable Housing. Attachments: Letter of response to Grand Jury Letter from Grand Jury and report r kt)O I I MOORPARK 799 Moorpark Avenue Moorpark, California 93021 (805) 517 -6200 September 20, 2006 Honorable John R. Smiley, Presiding Judge Superior Court of California, County of Ventura Hall of Justice, #2120 800 South Victoria Avenue Ventura, California 93009 Dear Honorable Judge Smiley, The City of Moorpark appreciates the opportunity to respond to the Grand Jury Report entitled Affordable Housing in Ventura County Cities. The following represents this response, with regard to the report's applicability to the City of Moorpark. The City concurs with the findings as stated in this report, and recognizes the importance of the availability of decent, safe and sanitary housing for all income levels. The City also acknowledges the challenges inherent in providing such housing at affordable housing cost to low and very low income households. For this reason, the City's efforts have been focused primarily on the low and very low income levels, rather than on moderate income households. The City wishes to clarify that the income limits referenced in Finding F -03 are the maximum income for very low and low income households, rather than an average income. With regard to Recommendation R -01, Moorpark continues to work with developers to provide the highest feasible number of affordable units (both rental and ownership) in market rate projects, through the use of Development Agreements ( "already implemented "). This yields new affordable units with no additional subsidy required. The City has acquired some properties which will be developed for affordable housing, as well ( "will be implemented" by December 2007). The City also is exploring other options such as the use of subsidies for "Down Payment Assistance ", as another component of its First Time Home Buyer Program ( "requires further study "). Another example of a strategy under consideration is the acquisition and rehabilitation of distressed properties, to be resold or rented as affordable units, following rehabilitation ( "requires further study "). iP006 (:Z 0 PATRICK HUNTER ROSEANN MIKOS CLINT D. HARPER KEITH F. MILLHOUSE JANICE S. PARVIN Mayor Mayor Pro Tern Councilmember Councilmember Councilmember With regard to Recommendation R -02, the City has enjoyed a high level of support from residents for its First Time Home Buyer Program, Housing Rehabilitation Program, and the affordable units provided in various rental and ownership projects, and affordable program in the City's single mobilehome park. To foster a continuing spirit of support among Moorpark residents, City staff will collect information regarding the impact of the high cost of market rate housing on key service providers such as educators, police personnel, health care providers, etc. This information can be disseminated to the community as an educational component of the City's overall Affordable Housing Program ( "will be implemented" by July 2007). Attached is a copy of the Annotated Agenda of the September 20, 2006, City Council Meeting, showing City Council approval of this response to the Grand Jury report. The City wishes to express its appreciation to the Grand Jury for addressing the critical issue of affordable housing for the low and very low income residents of the County, and for the opportunity to respond to its report. Sincerely, Steven Kueny City Manager Attachment: Annotated Agenda CC Mtg. 9/20/06 cc: Mayor Patrick Hunter Mayor Pro Tern Roseann Mikos Janice S. Parvin Keith F. Millhouse Clint D. Harper Cper'• f= county of VIEntura June 1u, Zuu6 City of Moorpark 799 Moorpark Avenue Moorpark, CA 93021 Attention: Steven Kueny, City Manager Dear City Council, Grand Jury 800 South Victoria Avenue Ventura, CA 93009 (805) 477 -1600 Fax: (805) 477 -1610 grandjury .countyofventura.org Enclosed is a copy of the Ventura County 2005 -2006 Grand Jury report titled, Affordable Housing in Ventura County Cities This report is being provided to you for the City Council concerned in the above referenced report. It is being provided to you two working days prior to its public release in accordance with the provisions of Penal Code section 933.05 (f). Please note that under the provisions of that code section no officer, agency, department, or governing body of a public agency shall disclose any contents of the report prior to public release of the final report. Penal Code section 933 (c) requires that you comment on the report's findings and recommendations within 90 days of submittal of this report to you. The requirements for required comment are set forth at Penal Code section 933.05 (a) through (c). A summary of these requirements follows: • State whether you concur, concur in part, or disagree with the Grand Jury's findings. • Explain the reasons why you disagree in whole or in part with each applicable finding. • For each applicable recommendation, state if it has already been implemented, will be implemented (with expected date of implementation), will not be implemented (with an explanation of the reason), or requires further study. Please include with your response a copy of the minutes from the meeting when the City Council approved.the response to the Grand Jury report. Please send your response in duplicate to: Honorable John R. Smiley, Presiding Judge Superior Court of California, Ventura County Hall of Justice, #2120 800 S. Victoria Avenue, Ventura, CA 93009 Sincerely, James H. Dekker, Foreperson Ventura County 2005 -2006 Grand Jury i�u,04 C4 Ventura County 2005 — 2006 Grand Jury Final Report Affordable Housing in Ventura County Cities Summary The 2005 -2006 Ventura County Grand Jury (Grand Jury) conducted a limited investigation into Affordable Housing plans and achievements of the county's ten cities. This study focused on Very Low Income and Low Inconte families of four for the years of 2000 -2005 and for the year 2006. Large disparities were found in the goals, plans, and achievements. The future social, economic, and environmental health of the county is dependent upon quality housing for all income levels. The Grand Jury learned that all ten cities are well aware of the problems of Affordable Housing and are dealing with them despite difficult state requirements and local land use regulations. Additional constraints include public resistance to development of open space, cumbersome approval processes, and funding priorities. Data received from the cities are displayed in the Attachment. The charts for each city depict the range of housing units unique to that city and cannot be directly compared to any other city. The data reflect the most accurate evaluation of past and current plans and achievements according to the best information available to both housing staff members and the Grand Jury. Where there are no numbers in the chart, the data were not provided by city staff. In general cities are paying very little attention to the Very Low Income level of needs for housing. They are doing a more adequate job with the Low Income level. In this study the Grand Jury did not include information on specialized programs such as the Housing Authorities (both Area and in the cities), the Ag Futures Alliance Farm Worker Housing Task Force, Habitat for Humanity, Senior Concerns, and private groups with other specialized interests and programs. While acknowledging that housing for farm workers, military personnel, and senior citizens is scarce, and efforts to remedy this problem continues to be a challenge separate from overall family housing, the Grand Jury did not address those.problems in this report. Background According to the California Department of Housing and Community Development: State law recognizes the vital role local governments play in the supply and affordability of housing. Each governing body (City Council or Board of Supervisors) of a local government in California is required to adopt a comprehensive, long -term general plan for the physical development of the city, city and county, or county. ... housing element law, enacted in 1969, mandates that local governments adequately plan to meet the existing and projected housing needs of all economic segments of the community. The law recognizes that, in order for the private market to Affordable Housing Attachment 1 �` � D - -1C. `.1 Ventura County 2005 — 2006 Grand Jury Final Report adequately address housing needs and demand, local governments must adopt land use plans and regulatory systems which provide opportunities for, and do not unduly constrain, housing development.... The Grand Jury became aware of the extensive need for Affordable Housing, which includes both purchase and rental units in the cities and County of Ventura, during discussions with county and city leaders. While there is great demand in Ventura County for skilled professional and technical personnel including teachers, nurses, public safety staff, hospital personnel, and county and city employees, as well as service workers, the cost of housing in many cases prohibits them from living in the county. It is not uncommon for long term renters to be priced out of the housing market due to high rental rates resulting in relocation, long commutes, or even homelessness. Methodology The Grand Jury collected data on income limits for families of four. Very Low Income families average $40,300 per year and Low Income families average $64,500. The Grand Jury interviewed housing staff in the ten cities in the County and collected data on housing goals, achievements, and plans for two separate time periods; past years from 2000 to 2005, and the current year 2006. The Grand Jury reviewed state guidelines for Affordable Housing and the unique interpretation by each city. Data was double checked with each city housing staff for accuracy. Findings F -01. Affordable housing is acknowledged as a serious challenge in the County and in all ten cities. F -02. Each of the cities is currently addressing the challenge of Affordable Housing within the constraints of state law, local land use regulations, and their unique city needs. F -03. Very Low Income limits for families of four average $40,300, and Low Income limits average $64,500. Many professional entry -level salaries, including those of teachers and nurses, fall into the Very Low Income range. F -04. To date, efforts have fallen short of the need to provide housing for Very Low Income and Low Income level residents, with the greatest need in the Very Low Income level. F -05. Some cities are constrained in their efforts to provide Affordable Housing because of local public opposition. F -06. The City of Port Hueneme has a unique problem. The City has limited open space for new housing and currently focuses only on programs that provide financial assistance using existing housing units. F -07. Lack of Affordable Housing inhibits the region's ability to attract new business and industry as well as qualified employees to the area. 2 Affordable Ho} yy Ee u sing {( i A U� V �'* W Ventura County 2005 - 2006 Grand J Final F -08. Specialized programs and organizations within the County, including the Housing Authorities (both Area and in cities); the Ag Futures Alliance Farm Worker Housing Task Force; Habitat for Humanity; Senior Concerns; and private groups with other specialized interests, assist low income families. These organizations were not addressed in this study. Conclusions C -01. The lack of Affordable Housing is acknowledged by county and city leaders as a serious challenge facing all segments of the County. (F -01, F -02, F -06) C -02. Most cities in the County are making efforts to address Affordable Housing, despite financial and political obstacles. (F -02, F -04, F -05) C -03. Continued lack of Affordable Housing and failure by cities to solve the needs of Very Low Income and Low Income residents will cause increasing adverse economic challenges. (F -06) C -04. Local opposition to Affordable Housing impacts the ability of government and business to employ those who provide services desired by local residents. (F -05, F -07) C -05. There is considerable disparity among cities in terms of goals, achievements, and planned Affordable Housing units (see Attachment). (F -02) Recommendations R -01. Each city should increase efforts to work with businesses and developers to actively pursue solutions to the social, economic, and environmental problems associated with the issues of Affordable Housing. (C -03) R -02. Each city should educate its residents on how local services (education, police, health care, etc.) depend upon the availability of Affordable Housing. (C -04) Responses Responses Required From: Camarillo (R -01, R -02) Fillmore (R -01, R -02) Moorpark (R -01, R -02) Ojai (R -01, R -02) Oxnard (R -01, R -02) Attachment Port Hueneme (R -01, R -02) Santa Paula (R -01, R -02) Simi Valley (R -01, R -02) Thousand Oaks (R -01, R -02) Ventura (R -01, R -02) Affordable Housing Data from Ten Cities in Ventura County Affordable Housing 3 Attachment 1 Ventura County 2005 — 2006 Grand Jury Final Report (This page intentionally blank) 12 Affordable Housing AttaGhT, ntk1 Ventura County 2005 - 2006 Grand Jury Final Report Attachment: Affordable Housing Data from Ten Cities in Ventura County Affordable Housing Attachment 1 Ventttra County 2005 — 2006 Grand Jury Final Report CITY OF CAMARILLO HOUSING UNITS GOALS ACHIEVED PLANNED HISTORY (2000 -2005) VERY LOW INCOME 392 48 344 LOW INCOME 210 238 6 CURRENT (2006) VERY LOW INCOME 6 0 6 LOW INCOME 6 0 6 CAMARILLO HOUSING UNITS (2000 -2005) 400 350 300 250 UNITS 200 150 100 50 0 1 2 3 1 -GOALS 2- ACHIEVED 3- PLANNED VERY LOW INCOME ® LOW INCOME I CAMARILLO HOUSING UNITS (2006) 400 300 UNITS 200 150 100 50 0 1 2 3 1 -GOALS 2- ACHIEVED 3- PLANNED VERYLOW ii INCOME Ii ® LOW INCOME 12 Affordable Housing Attachment 1, .. s 4C� a:i 4 V Ventura Cowity 2005 - 2006 Grand Jury Final Report CITY OF FILLMORE HOUSING UNITS GOAL ACHIEVED HISTORY (2000 -2005) PLANNED VERY LOW INCOME 150 49 LOW INCOME 97 56 CURRENT (2006) VERY LOW INCOME 101 0 LOW INCOME 41 50 FILLMORE HOUSING UNITS (2000 -2005) 54 81 5 72 FILLMORE HOUSING UNITS (2006) 160 :( , 140 120 100 UNITS 80 60 ' ❑ VERY LOW 40 " INCOME 20 -- ® LOW INCOME j,; 1 2 3 1 -GOALS 2- ACHIEVED 3- PLANNED Affordable Housing 3 Attachment 1 p , 0 k'L�," 1 1 Ventura County 2005 — 2006 Grand Jury Final Report CITY OF MOORPARK HOUSING UNITS GOAL ACHIEVED PLANNED HISTORY (2000 -2005) VERY LOW INCOME 269 131' 138 LOW INCOME 155 179 38 CURRENT (2006) VERY LOW INCOME 138 9 approved 100 LOW INCOME 38 2 approved 36 MOORPARK HOUSING UNITS (2000 -2005) I 300 - - - j 250 200 UNITS 150 - 100 o VERY LOW 50 INCOME ■ LOW INCOME 0 1 2 3 - -— - 1 -GOALS 2- ACHIEVED 3- PLANNED MOORPARK HOUSING UNITS (2006) 300 -- i 250 200 ' I UNITS 150 _ — 100 ! ❑ VERY LOW 50 - - INCOME j ®LOW INCOME 1 2 3 1 -GOALS 2- ACHIEVED 3- PLANNED 12 Affordable Housing Attachment 1 Ventttra County 2005 — 2006 Grand Jury Final Report CITY OF OJAI HOUSING UNITS GOAL ACHIEVED PLANNED HISTORY (2000 -2005) 1 2 3 1 -GOALS 2- ACHIEVED 3- PLANNED - - - - - -- - OJAI HOUSING UNITS (2006) 25 20 UNITS 15 10 VERY LOW 5 r; INCOME 0 I ® LOW INCOME 1 2 3 I, 1 -GOALS -- -- - - - J 2- ACHIEVED 3- PLANNED Affordable Housing 5 Attachment 1 Ventura County 2005 — 2006 Grand Jury Final Report CITY OF OXNARD HOUSING UNITS GOAL ACHIEVED PLANNED HISTORY (2000 -2005) VERY LOW INCOME 797 388 LOW INCOME 489 460 CURRENT (2006) VERY LOW INCOME 409 39 LOW INCOME 29 20 OXNARD HOUSING UNITS (2000 -2005) 800 �__ - - -� - -- 700 600 500 UNITS 400 300 200 100 0 1 2 3 1 -GOALS 2- ACHIEVED 3- PLANNED 409 29 188 506 a VERY LOW INCOME ® LOW INCOME OXNARD HOUSING UNITS (2006) 800.1 - � t 600 UNITS 400 N 300 p VERY LOW 200 100 i A> i INCOME 0 1 2 3 1 -GOALS 2- ACHIEVED 3- PLANNED ® LOW INCOME 12 Affordable Housing Attachment 1 1 d j2a0,,ps J r` Ventura County 1005 — 2006 Grand Jury Final Report CITY OF PORT HUENEME HOUSING UNITS GOAL ACHIEVED PLANNED HISTORY (2000 -2005) VERY LOW INCOME 35 LOW INCOME 39 86 CURRENT (2006) VERY LOW INCOME 8 8 LOW INCOME 15 15 PORT HUENEME HOUSING UNITS (2000 -2005) 100 80 UNITS 60 40 20 0 1 2 3 1 -GOALS 2- ACHIEVED 3- PLANNED a VERY LOW INCOME ■ LOW INCOME i r PORT HUENEME HOUSING UNITS (2006) I 100 80 UNITS 60 40 20 0 1 2 3 1 -GOALS 2- ACHIEVED 3- PLANNED i ❑ VERY LOW INCOME ® LOW INCOME Affordable Housing 7 Attachment 1 zJ Ventura County 2005 — 2006 Grand Jury Final Report CITY OF SANTA PAULA HOUSING UNITS GOAL ACHIEVED HISTORY (2000 -2005) VERY LOW INCOME 200 15 LOW INCOME 250 25 CURRENT (2006) VERY LOW INCOME 20 20 pending LOW INCOME 20 20 pending SANTA PAULA HOUSING UNITS (2000 -2005) 250 200 UNITS 100 50 0 1 2 3 1 -GOALS 2- ACHIEVED 3- PLANNED PLANNED 75 82 20 20 - -- �o VERY LOW INCOME ■ LOW INCOME SANTA PAULA HOUSING UNITS (2006) 250 200 UNITS 100 �— 50 VERY LOW 0 I INCOME 1 2 3 I ■LOW INCOME � j 1 -GOALS 2- ACHIEVED 3- PLANNED 12 Affordable Housing Attachment 1 Ventura County 2005 — 2006 Grand Jury Final Report CITY OF SIMI VALLEY HOUSING UNITS GOAL ACHIEVED PLANNED HISTORY (2000 -2005) VERY LOW INCOME 414 367 LOW INCOME 254 265 CURRENT (2006) VERY LOW INCOME 3 16 LOW INCOME 91 20 SIMI VALLEY HOUSING UNITS (2000 -2005) 3 91 0 31 VERY LOW INCOME ® LOW INCOME i I SIMI VALLEY HOUSING UNITS (2006) 500 400 ; UNITS 200 - ---- - - - - -- VERYLOW 1000 ; INCOME 1 2 3 ® LOW INCOME 1 -GOALS -- - -- - - - - -' 2- ACHIEVED 3- PLANNED Affordable Housing Attachment 1 9 � tr•r, ey�. o i Ventura County 2005 — 2006 Grand Jury Final Report CITY OF THOUSAND OAKS HOUSING UNITS GOAL ACHIEVED PLANNED HISTORY (2000 -2005) VERY LOW INCOME 127 127 50 LOW INCOME 154 154 40 CURRENT (2006) VERY LOW INCOME 50 several pending 50 LOW INCOME 40 several pending 40 THOUSAND OAKS HOUSING UNITS (2000 -2005) 160 140 120 100 UNITS 80 40 20 1 2 3 1 -GOALS 2- ACHIEVED 3- PLANNED I-EIVIERY LOW 1 INCOME ■ LOW INCOME THOUSAND OAKS HOUSING UNITS (2006) 160 140 120 100 UNITS 60 40 20 0 1 2 3 i 1 -GOALS 2- ACHIEVED 3- PLANNED IL rO VERY LOW INCOME ® LOW INCOME it Affordable Housing Attachment 1 �:k11,.0 Vetttttra County 2005 — 2006 Grand Jury Final Report CITY OF VENTURA HOUSING UNITS GOAL ACHIEVED PLANNED HISTORY (2000 -2005) VERY LOW INCOME 325 106 40 LOW INCOME 181 7 32 CURRENT (2006) VERY LOW INCOME 40 54 40 LOW INCOME 32 42 52 VENTURA HOUSING UNITS (2000 -2005) 350 300 250 UNITS 150 100 50 0 1 2 3 1 -GOALS [1:1 VERY LOW it INCOME '! ■ LOW INCOME 2- ACHIEVED 3- PLANNED ' VENTURA HOUSING UNITS (2006) 350 300 250 UNITS 150 150 0 1 2 3 1 -GOALS 2- ACHIEVED 3- PLANNED i O VERYLOW__�� INCOME ■ LOW INCOME Affordable Housing 11 Attachment 1 Ventura County 2005 - 2006 Grand Jury Final Report (This page intentionally blank) 12 Affordable Housing Attachment 1