The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutAGENDA REPORT 1996 0117 CC REG ITEM 07IITEM � � ► _,'f.` CITY OF MOORPARK - CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT TO: The Honorable City Council FROM: Donald P. Reynolds Jr., Administrative Services Manager l,_4?-- DATE: January 5, 1996, (CC Meeting of January 17, 1996) % SUBJECT: Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Status Report and Consider Development of 1996/97 Funding Objectives Executive Summary This is the annual CDBG report which initiates the 1996/97 appropriation process. The body of the report provides a detailed background, provides the status of each current program, and describes possible uses for this year's grant. Staff is recommending that funds continue to be provided for public services to the maximum amount allowed by law, that administrative funds be set -aside for the estimated needs of the upcoming fiscal year, and that the balance of the grant be applied towards a street improvement project and /or affordable housing that will allow the City to expend funds in compliance with HUD requirements, (which includes a requirement to maximize expenditures by not having a surplus balance of CDBG funds greater than 1.5 grant years based upon the amount of the most recent grant year). In conformance with procedures established for the CDBG program on April 12, 1989, staff recommends the following schedule for the 1996/97 CDBG program: Request For Proposals Staff to Review Proposals Open Public Hearing, Receive Public Testimony Budget and Finance Committee Review Final Appropriations Proposals Due to County 1/18/96 to 2/16/96 2/19/96 to 2/23/96 3/6/96 3/11/96 3/20/96 by 4/1/96. The 1996/97 funds (estimated to be $200,000) will most likely be available for the City's use between July and September, 1996. 01 00010 BACKGROUND The City participates in the annual appropriations of grant funds for CDBG program as part of the Urban County Entitlement program, ( "Entitlement program ") administered by the County of Ventura, in cooperation with the cities of Port Hueneme, Ojai, Fillmore, Santa Paula. The Housing and Community Development Act of 1974, as amended, established three national objectives for the Community Development Block Grant: 1) to benefit a majority of low and moderate income persons; 2) to eliminate slum and blighted conditions, and; 3) to meet a particularly urgent health and safety need in the community. The distribution of the CDBG monies is based upon a formula incorporated into a three year "cooperative agreement," (entering its second year on July 1, 1996), between the Entitlement cities and the County. The first two cooperative agreements distributed funds using a simple per- capita formula. The third cooperative agreement moved to a formula closely resembling HUD's by distributing the money based on an average of population, poverty levels and overcrowded housing. The current cooperative agreement applicable to the 1996 CDBG program has incorporated the entire HUD approach to distributing funds by applying specific percentages to each of the three criteria. The changes to the cooperative agreement have reduced the City's portion of the Entitlement grant from 11 percent to 8.4 percent per year. This reduction to the City has cost approximately $75,000 per grant year, based on an annual Entitlement award of 2.8 million dollars. All of Moorpark's past appropriations have focussed on the "low /mod" benefit criteria through either public services, housing, infrastructure improvements in eligible neighborhoods, and administrative expenses related to the management of these programs. A family of four is considered to be a low income family if the total family income is less than 80 percent of the median income. In 1995, 80 percent of the median income is $40,200. Although technically, a majority of the funds used under this national objective have to benefit the "low /mod" income criteria, HUD has established a target of 75 percent low and moderate income benefit. This application of the national objective allows a CDBG project to benefit less than 75 percent while above a majority level of low income persons, as long as other CDBG projects are used to benefit a higher majority to reach an average of 75 percent. The grant is limited in its funding of public service activities and administrative funds. Public services are limited to a 15 percent cap placed on the "project" funding appropriation, ( "project" funding is the City's total grant amount less administration funds). The amount of administrative funds are calculated based upon a formula prescribed in the three year cooperative agreement using 10 percent of the grant amount of the Entitlement appropriation from HUD, regardless of the amount made available for projects in each jurisdiction. Attachment "A" summarizes the City's past CDBG appropriations since its 010 000101 CDBG RFP's 1996/97 inception in 1986. The use of funds has varied from one program in 1986, to 11 different programs in 1991/92, to 10 programs currently. When the County and City fund the same program, a Joint Powers Agreement (JPA) can be executed where the County assumes responsibility for managing the activities. Attachment "A" symbolizes the JPA programs by placing a "J" after the project title. Last year, the Long Term Care Ombudsman and Fair Housing programs were administered by a JPA. The County will hold its hearing March 12, 1996, and based on the Board of Supervisor's decisions, the City will know which proposals will be eligible for a JPA before making its final decisions on March 20. PROGRAM STATUS Attachment "B" describes the financial status of the City's current programs. It shows that all but $33,682 of the $1.8 million received, are projected to be spent this fiscal year. Therefore, staff estimates that a second hearing will be scheduled at the same time as the annual hearing for new monies, to consider reappropriation of the $33,682. The projection through June 30, 1996, includes $250,000 for the Wicks and Valley Road projects which may not begin until the next fiscal year. The City's public service programs include four existing and two new services. The existing programs are currently operating and meeting the service levels projected one year ago, and include: low income legal services; Catholic Charities case worker; Senior Nutrition and Adult Literacy. One new program is a child health care referral program for low income children, and although Interface has been operating in Moorpark, the City's CDBG contribution will not be in effect until the end of this month. The other new program was Project Pride. It was subsequently determined not to use CDBG funds because of regulatory concerns expressed by the Moorpark Unified School District. The projected year -end balance of $33,682 includes the original $6,000 set - aside for Project Pride, and must now be used for a different project. The City's First Street project concluded recently leaving $61,727 available for re- appropriation. However, for the purposes of presenting those funds which are not budgeted, $41,543 of this amount has been applied to the $208,457 set -aside for the Wicks and valley Road improvements to reflect the $250,000 appropriated for this purpose. A minor amendment will be presented to the Council in March to finalize this change with the County and HUD. The removal of architectural barriers to persons with limited mobility was completed in December at Mountain Meadows Park. The current balance shown in Attachment "B" includes some direct costs by the City which were in addition to the contract. The City's earthquake assistance for the Mayflower Market is not reflected in the attachments because of its special eligibility intended 3 ' 010 A CDBG RFP's 1996/97 to meet the urgent health safety needs created after the January 17, 1994, earthquake. The contract has been in effect since August, 1995. Staff has not received any reimbursement claims for the project, although verbal reports indicate that the project is approximately 1/3 complete. DISCUSSION HUD Expenditure Objective The County's Entitlement CDBG program is operating at a higher capacity than it was when placed on probation by HUD in 1990 and again in 1993 for not using the grant fast enough. During these years, Moorpark took action to expend monies more quickly, and assisted the County effort to be removed from probation. As can be seen in Attachment "B" in the column "Current Balance ", there is currently $331,616 available in the City's letter of credit, which is 1.22 grant years. To remain out of probation, the City's balance has to stay below 1.5 grant years. it is presumed that the Wicks and valley Road improvements, using $250,000, will easily keep the City below the HUD threshold. New Reaulations Last year's changes to the Department of Housing and Urban Development will take full effect this year. The most significant change is the development of the Consolidated Plan. This five year description of the unmet needs of low income persons in Moorpark and across the County, was first published in May 1995. Each year's CDBG allocations represent the one year action plan for local government, to address the described un- met needs of the community. Each program funded by the City Council has to have a corresponding need described in the Consolidated Plan in order to be approved by HUD. All of the current program are described as "needs" by the Plan. The Consolidated Plan was streamlined during its first year, and one new requirement is being addressed this year related to equal housing opportunities. A new study is being developed as addressed by staff in separate report to Council on this agenda to analyze "impediments" to fair housing in the community. Congress took action this year to enforce Section 3 of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. This provision has always required data for federally funded work regarding how many new hires were created for low income residents. Now however, the law requires that action be taken promote new hires from the low income neighborhood being assisted. City bid solicitation language will be modified to include forms and certifications from contractors to show that if new hires are required, how many will originate from Moorpark's low income communities. A response of 110" new hires, may be deemed as a non - responsive bid on a City CDBG project, under certain circumstances related to this law. 4 W010, CDBG RFP's 1996/97 In June and July of 1995, the Mayor sent letters to City Congressional representatives in support of the CDBG program which was being targeted for significant budget cuts. Since this time, staff has been informed by the County that no significant cuts will be made this year. Nonetheless, there is no federal budget in place at this time to confirm this information. CDBG Public Staff Meeting (December 4 1995) HUD requires that the public be allowed to share CDBG proposals with agency staff persons prior to final appropriations. A public hearing was held tp meet this requirements at the County Government Center. Over twenty agencies presented their proposals to the Entitlement group and it is estimated that at least half of these will be interested in a portion of Moorpark's CDBG funds. Proposed Funding Priorities Public Improvements Improvements to the City infrastructure in the low and moderate communities have continued to be a successful way to use CDBG, are represented to HUD in the Consolidated Plan to be an ongoing need, and continue to represent a significant need in the City. Last year, $208,457 was appropriated for this purpose. In addition to the $250,000 needed for improvements to Wicks and Valley Roads, another $350,000 of improvements to City infrastructure have been identified for fiscal year 1996/97. A storm drain for Everett Street is needed at an estimated cost of $100,000. An overlay to Bonnie View Drive is needed at an estimated cost $50,000. Both of these projects are within the CDBG eligible census tract. Improvements to the alleys between First Street and Second Street, Second Street and Third Street, and adjacent to the east side of Moorpark Avenue are estimated to cost $200,000. Any use of the 20 percent set -aside for affordable housing from the Moorpark Redevelopment Agency (MRA) may be combined with CDBG activities. This includes the current Housing Rehabilitation program. These projects, if funded with any amount of CDBG, would then become subject to HUD regulations. For this reason, staff does not recommend using CDBG in conjunction with MRA funds for the rehabilitation program. The Consolidated Plan lists housing and the rehabilitation program as a need in the City. Other improvement projects identified by the Consolidated Plan include development of a low income day care center and the downtown park. Low income day care has been presented to HUD as one of the City's greatest needs, but little progress has been made to locate a suitable area for a development of this type. The downtown park is proceeding quickly 5 CDBG RFD's 1996/97 without the assistance of CDBG. The Senior Advisory Committee has identified a need for a drop ceiling at the Senior Center. Because the City renovated this building in 1990, it was not identified to HUD as a priority in the Consolidated Plan. With a modification to the Consolidated Plan, staff could receive approval and move ahead at a cost of between $3,000 and $5,500. It has been discussed by staff that the funds not used by the Project Pride program could be reappropriated for this purpose. Public Services Many proposals were received by the City in 1995 from local and county- wide public service agencies. Recently, the City has been able to create concepts of possible uses without the need to contract for services. With 34 percent of the City's population being less than 18 years old, child development services remain the highest priority when compared to those of other low income populations. To this end, the City appropriated funds last year for the At -Risk Teen program and the child health care program operated by Interface. New ideas are being evaluated by staff in hopes of developing some locally controlled activities to benefit Moorpark residents. If the ideas appear to be feasible and there is adequate funding available, they will be included in the March public hearing. As usual, many agencies will provide proposals to the City based on the participation at the December public hearing. For the March hearing, staff will summarize these proposals, compare then to the needs described by the Consolidated Plan and allow the Council to determine how the CDBG funds will be distributed to meet the City's most urgent needs. A ministration Since 1989, the City has approved the expenditure of CDBG for administrative purposes. This amount has ranged from between $19,070 to $25,740, and accounts for approximately half of the salary and benefits of the Administrative Services Manager and a portion of the Senior Planner in Community Development. Staff projects a small surplus of the current appropriation of $5,000, which may be re- appropriated for a public improvement project in March. The needs for fiscal year 1996/97 are estimated to be to $18,000, which will leave $6,000 available from the 1996/97 allocation for new projects For the past four years, in response to a HUD mandate, the County requested that 1% of the Administrative funds ($1,890 in 1992/93, $1,980 in 1993/94, $1,600 in 1994/95 and $1,600 in 1995/96) be contributed to n 1 CDBG RFP'S 1996/97 "affirmatively further fair housing." This year, as presented in another report to Council on this agenda, the City may be appropriating an additional $1,200 to complete the HUD required Fair Housing Impediment Study. RECOMMENDATION That the City Council authorize staff to request proposals for the use of CDBG funds for the upcoming 1996/97 appropriations,- eeRsistenr w4r the � and pursuant to the following schedule: Request For Proposals Staff to Review Proposals Open Public Hearing, Receive Public Testimony Budget and Finance Committee Review 1/18/96 to 2/16/96 2/19/96 to 2/23/96 3/6/96 3/11/96 Final Appropriations 3/20/96 Proposals Due to County by 4/1/96. Attachments: A) Five Year Overview of Past Appropriations Expenditure and Distribution Analysis B) Expenditure Analysis of Past 7 00(L11W ATTACHMENT A Overview of Past and Proposed Appropriations CATEGORICAL PERCENT DISTRIBUTION PROGRAM 1986/87 1987/88 1988/89 1989/90 1990/91 1991/92 1992/93 1993194 1994/95 1995/96 TOTAL OF FUNDS OF FUNDS ADMINISTRATION 0 - -------------------------------------------------------------------------- 0 19070 19810 19010 21620 4701 18488 0 - - 21000 - - -- - 123699 6.72% 7.11% Fair Housing 0 0 0 0 0 0 1890 1980 1600 1600 7070 0.38% PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS 78.27% Virg. Colony 133660 52321 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 185981 10.11% Charles Street 0 1795 105266 44734 57358 81773 109094 149739 0 0 549759 29.88% Handicap Ramps 0 0 0 92266 42790 0 0 0 0 0 135056 7.34% First St. Proposal 0 21460 0 0 0 60000 40999 13597 167447 0 303503 16.50% Food Share 0 0 0 0 5000 2000 0 0 0 0 7000 0.38% ADA Play Equip. (MMP) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 25300 0 25300 1.38% Casa Pacifica 0 0 0 0 25000 0 0 0 0 0 25000 1.36% Wicks/Valley Road 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 208457 208457 11.33% AFFORDABLE HOUSING 3.18% CEDC (Acq.) 0 53540 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 53540 2.91% Aquisition 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% Networking 0 5000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5000 0.27% PUBLIC SERVICES 11.44% Sr. Nutrition 0 0 0 10000 10000 10500 10000 10000 12000 12000 74500 4.05% Sr. Lifeline 0 0 0 5480 0 0 0 0 0 5480 0.30% Vocational Tmg. 0 0 0 5437 0 0 0 0 0 0 5437 0.30% Adult Literacy 0 0 0 0 8000 5000 5000 5000 5000 5000 33000 1.79% Homeless Omb. 0 0 0 0 500 500 500 2000 2000 0 5500 0.30% Legal Services 0 0 0 563 7000 1200 3650 4506 4506 1884 23309 1.27% Senior Equip. 0 0 0 0 0 1987 0 0 0 0 1987 0.11% iW Long Term Care Omb. 0 0 0 0 0 2500 1000 2000 2790 3300 11590 0.63% Cath. Charities 0 0 0 0 0 7500 7500 8000 8000 8000 39000 2.12% Child Health Care 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4591 4591 0.25% 4 At Risk Teen 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6000 6000 0.33% ----------------------------------------------- Totals ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 133660 134116 124336 178290 174658 - ------------------------------------------ 194580 184334 215310 --- — ------------ 228643 ------- --------- 271832 ------- ------- 1839759 -- - - - - -- -- 1 - - - - - — 100.00% ATTACHMENT B ANALYSIS OF EXPENDITURES AND BALANCE STATEMENT CURRENT BUDGETED AND/ AVAILABLE FOR PROGRAM 1986/87 1987/88 1988/89 1989/90 1990/91 1991/92 1992/93 1993/94 1994/95 1995/96 TOTAL BALANCE OR OBLIGATED REAPPROPRIATION - - - - -- - ADMINISTRATION 0 - 0 19070 19810 19010 21620 4701 18488 0 21000 - 123699 ------------------ 23010 ------------------- 18153 4857 Fair Housing 0 0 0 0 0 0 1890 1980 1600 1600 7070 0 0 0 PUBLIC IMPROVMENTS Virg. Colony 133660 52321 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 185981 0 0 0 Charles Street 0 1795 105266 44734 57358 81773 109094 149739 0 0 549759 0 0 0 Handicap Ramps 0 0 0 92266 42790 0 0 0 0 0 135056 0 0 0 First St. Improvements 0 21460 0 0 0 60000 40999 13597 167447 0 303503 61727 41543 * 20184 Food Share 0 0 0 0 5000 2000 0 0 0 0 7000 0 0 0 ADA Play Equip. (MMP) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 25300 0 25300 2641 0 2641 Casa Pacifica 0 0 0 0 25000 0 0 0 0 0 25000 0 0 0 Wicks/Valley Road 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 208457 208457 208457 208457 * 0 AFFORDABLE HOUSING CEDC (Acq.) 0 53540 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 53540 0 0 0 Aquisition 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Networking 0 5000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5000 0 0 0 PUBLIC SERVICES Sr. Nutrition 0 0 0 10000 10000 10500 10000 10000 12000 12000 74500 11296 11296 0 Sr. Lifeline 0 0 0 5480 0 0 0 0 0 5480 0 0 0 Vocational Tmg. 0 0 0 5437 0 0 0 0 0 0 5437 0 0 0 Adult Literacy 0 0 0 0 8000 5000 5000 5000 5000 5000 33000 4010 4010 0 Homeless Omb. 0 0 0 0 500 500 500 2000 2000 0 5500 0 0 0 Legal Services 0 0 0 563 7000 1200 3650 4506 4506 1884 23309 1884 1884 0 Senior Equip. 0 0 0 0 0 1987 0 0 0 0 1987 0 0 0 Long Term Care Omb. 0 0 0 0 0 2500 1000 2000 2790 3300 11590 0 0 0 Cath. Charities 0 0 0 0 0 7500 7500 8000 8000 8000 39000 8000 8000 0 Child Health Care 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4591 4591 4591 4591 0 At Risk Teen 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6000 6000 6000 0 6000 rn-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Totals 133660 134116 124336 178290 174658 194580 184334 215310 228643 271832 1839759 331616 297934 33682 * $250,000 is budgeted for Wicks and Valley Road Imps., and the balance of $41,543 would most likely come from the completed First Street Project, leaving an anticipated balance in this project of $20,184