HomeMy WebLinkAboutAGENDA REPORT 1997 0115 CC REG ITEM 07LCITY OF MOORPARK
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
TO: The Honorable City Council
FROM: Donald P. Reynolds Jr., Administrative Services Manager
DATE: January 2, 1997, (CC Meeting of January 15, 1996)
ITEM 7 l
/ -IS 7
SUBJECT: Community Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Status Report and Consider
Development of 1997/98 Funding Objectives
Introduction
The following report will summarize past City CDBG appropriations, review the status of these
programs, and suggest certain objectives for the upcoming CDBG appropriations for consideration
by the City Council. 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 public
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 requests
authorization to distribute requests for proposals during the months of January and February.
Proposals are due to the City on February fourteenth, and the citizen participation process is initiated
and completed in the month of March. It has been the City's practice to open the public hearings at
the first Council meeting in March, (March 5), refer the proposals and public testimony to the Budget
and Finance Committee, and conclude the process with the Committee's recommendations at the
second meeting in March (March 19). The City's proposals are required to be provided to the County
April 1, 1997. The 1997/98 funds are estimated to $199,098 (which unlike last year is almost
guaranteed) and will most likely be available for the City's use between July 1, 1997, and August 14,
1997. In 1995/96, the City received $204,055
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, and 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 uses of the CDBG, are targeted to meet those needs described in the five year Consolidated Plan.
The Consolidated plan is designed to represent each jurisdiction's needs for low and moderate income
000135
CDBG RFP's 1997/98
support, and show which areas are being addressed by various types of federal assistance ranging
from homeless shelter grants, to CDBG. Each year, the City provides an annual update to the
County, which is submitted with each year's grant appropriations. This is referred to as the Annual
Action Plan, and includes all forms of assistance including those funded with local resources. It
provides a focus for the use of block grant monies, based upon the perceived needs of each
community.
The distribution of the CDBG monies is based upon a formula incorporated into a three year
"cooperative agreement," (entering its third year on July 1, 1997), between the Entitlement cities and
the County. Originally the formula was based solely on population. The current cooperative
agreement applicable to the 1997/98 CDBG program has incorporated the entire HUD approach to
distributing funds by applying specific percentages to each of the three criteria; 1) overcrowded
housing; 2) number of citizens living at poverty level, and; 3) total population. 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 is considered to be a low income
family if the total family income is at or less than 80 percent of the median income. In 1996, this
income figure was below $41,600 for a family of four. 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 by a 15 percent cap placed on the City's allocation from the County. 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 use of CDBG appropriations since its inception in 1986 and
presents the formula breakdown applicable to this year's anticipated grant. City uses have been
focussed on public improvements (80 %), with 11 percent used for public services, and the balance
for administrative costs and planning activities. The specific programs are summarized in Attachment
"B ", and has varied from one program in 1986, to 11 different 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. Last year, the Long Term Care
I
Owb
CDBG RFD's 1997/98
Ombudsman and Fair Housing programs were eligible for this funding. The County will hold its
hearing early in March, 1997, 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 19.
Attachment "B" also describes the financial status of the City's current programs, through the end
of the first quarter. To be in compliance with the HUD expenditure limit of having only 1.5 grant
years available in the federal letter of credit, the City should have on June 30, 1997, a balance of no
more than $306,083. The current balance is $461,153, or 2.25 grant years. The improvements
funded for Wicks Road, Valley Road and the Everett Street storm drain ($310,999) should draw
sufficient funds down in the next six months for the City to be within this HUD limit.
The City's public service programs consist of six different activities, providing services to a wide
variety of the needy population in Moorpark. Attachments "B" and "C" detail the status of funding
for these programs. In 1996/97, the available public service monies dropped by 26 percent, from
$34,775 in 1995/96 to $25,600. The City met this challenge temporarily by funding each service the
full amount, but for nine months rather than twelve. In 1997/98 the City anticipates receiving
$29,864, which is 14 percent less than the 1995/96 amount made available, but more than last year.
In terms of productivity, all programs are operating at anticipated levels of service except the Literacy
program. Between the quarter ending September 30, 1994, and the same quarter in 1996, the
program has declined 36 percent. Enrollment during that period fell from 25 students 16, but the cost
stayed the same. Unfortunately, this is the result of a decrease in volunteer tutors, not students.
Training sessions are being held each quarter, but the program has yet to rebound.
No public improvement projects have been initiated in the past twelve months with CDBG support.
The City has not initiated its improvements to Wicks Road/Valley Road neighborhood, but has
completed designs. Staff is looking towards the initiation of this project in early spring of this year.
The expansion of the Senior Center has been delayed due to the vacancy of the Director of
Community Services position.
The City's earthquake assistance for the Mayflower Market is not reflected in the attachments because
of its special eligibility intended to meet the urgent health safety needs created after the January 14,
1994, earthquake. The contract is 95 percent complete, pending the result of soils tests performed
after the initial grading.
DISCUSSION
New Regulations
The majority of changes to the federal regulations in the past year relate to streamlining
3
OW137
CDBG RFP's 1997/98
administration. Specifically, changes have occurred to the Common Rule governing administration
of all federal grants, the Single Audit, and minor changes to general accounting procedures. These
changes have very little impact on project eligibility.
WOOMOISTMM, I u • •••
HUD requires that the public be allowed to share CDBG proposals with agency staff persons prior
to final appropriations. A joint public hearing was held December 4 at the County Government
Center. More than 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
lic Im
Improvements to the City infrastructure in the low and moderate communities have continued to be
an efficient way to use CDBG. They are a large potion of the City's Action Plan represented to
HUD in the Consolidated Plan. Last year, $156,855 was appropriated for this purpose.
While considering public improvements for the current fiscal year, the City opted to fully fund the
street improvements, and initiate a fund for the expansion of the Senior Center. Currently, $104,296
has been set -aside for this project.
The MRA Housing Rehabilitation program could include the use of CDBG as grants or loans, within
the project area or outside of the area. CDBG appears to be a more flexible resource than the original
proposal to use HOME monies due to more lenient regulations. Staff is comparing the two potential
resources currently, and will report to the Council on the Rehabilitation program prior to the March
hearings.
Another possible improvement project identified by the Consolidated Plan include development of
a low income day care center. 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 downtown for a
development of this type. For example, a house could be purchased and renovated for this purpose
in a low income area of the City, and then the services could be contracted by the City rent -free to
a service provider, (to use CDBG for the service, would require the use of the public service dollars).
The City's goal for CDBG public service monies should reflect the demographic needs of the
population as defined in the Consolidated plan. For example, if 18 percent of the community consists
of senior citizens, then 18 percent of the public service dollars should be used for these needs. With
34 percent of the City's population being less than 18 years old, child development services remain
0
CDBG RFP's 1997/98
the highest priority when compared to those of other low income populations. Attachment "C"
shows that 36 percent of the public service dollars have been used for senior nutrition alone, and only
four percent has been used for children or teen programs. The difficulty is that HUD refers to senior
as known low income residents, and teen programs require cumbersome record keeping in Moorpark,
where only ten percent of the teen population is believed to be of low income status.
New concepts for City public service programs may include funding for code enforcement activities
in the eligible census tract north of High Street, and providing support for both the COPS and
Adalante police service programs for the same census tract area. The City could also contract for low
income day care services, consider uses to augment day laborer outreach, and provide employment
for those with mental handicaps on projects that could benefit City maintenance efforts, and document
scanning duties.
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.
PUT, l�l
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 one third of
the salary and benefits of the Administrative Services Manager and a portion of the Senior Planner
in Community Development. In 1996/97, most of these funds were budgeted for the Associate
Planner position, but it has not been filled after six months of recruitments, and will consequently have
to be moved back to Administrative Services at least for this fiscal year.
As previously reported to the Council, the City is only being reimbursed for 50 percent of the actual
cost for grant administration. When proposed to the County that the City solicit 100 percent
approval per the requirements stipulated by OMB Circular A -87, (which was revised in 1996) the
County referred to this request as being almost impossible, and that even the County does not have
an approved plan from HUD for billing indirect and general overhead expenses. As a result, only
$138,000 of a need close to $210,000 has been collected.
Staff projects a need for administrative support at approximately $18,000, freeing up six to seven
thousand dollars for non - public service projects.
For the past four years, in response to a HUD mandate, the County requested that approximately 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 "affirmatively further fair housing." A new service provider was
acquired in 1996, and the system is much more active than before.
5
OW135
CDBG RFP's 1997/98
That the City Council authorize staff to request proposals for the use of CDBG funds for the
upcoming 1997/98 appropriations, consistent with this report and pursuant to the following schedule:
Request For Proposals 1/16/97 to 2/14/97
Staff to Review Proposals 2/14/97 to 2/21/97
Open Public Hearing, Receive
Public Testimony 3/5/97
Budget and Finance Committee
Review 3 /6%97 to 3/12/97
Final Appropriations 3/19/97
Proposals Due to County by 4/l/97.
Attachments: A) Distribution of past CDBG Monies and a breakdown of this year's anticipated
grant award
B) Expenditure and Distribution Analysis
C) Focus on Public Service Funding
2
OW140
ATTACHMENT "A"
PAST USES OF CDBG AND THEIR DISTRIBUTION
PERCENT
PROGRAM — __T - -- - - TOTAL -- - -- DISTRIBUTION
ADMINISTRATION 138669 7%
PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS 1616611 79%
AFFORDABLE HOUSING 1 58540 - - 3%
PUBLIC SERVICES 229994 11%
1997/98 CDBG ANTICIPATED GRANT AMOUNT AND DISTRIBUTION
- _ _ - - -- PERCENT
PROGRAM _ TOTAL DISTRIBUTION
r
ADMINISTRATION 18000 9%
PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS
or AFFORDABLE HOUSING
PUBLIC SERVICES
131234
� 1
im
76%
15%
o(A -0 .411
ATTACHMENT B
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT
OVERVIEW AND STATUS THROUGH SEPTEMBER 30, 1996
ADMINISTRATION
19070
19810
-
19010
21620
4701
18488
6172
00
15000
123871 1
11600
15780
Farr Housing
1890
1980
16001
1600
_
1600
W7-0-!
_
Fair Hsng Irrtped.Stdy.
_
- 1128
-
1128
- 0
p
Day Laborer Study
-
_
5000.
.._
50004
Sppp
.
5000
...._..... _ . - _......
PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS
V�r9,..COY
133660
52321
I
1$5961
__....
Charles Street
17951
1062661
447341
573581
81773
109094
149739]
5497591
0
01
-I
Handicap Ramps
92256
427901
136W
0
0I
I First St Improvements �
21480
(
_ I
600001
j
40999
135971
I
138833
274869'
01
01
_I
Food Share
i
50001
20001
f
7000
0'
0i
ADA Equip. MMP
Play P (
23631
23631'
0�
01
Casa Pacifica
1
l
25000 I
25000
0
0
Wicks/Valley Road
y
I
30283
228157;
525591
310999
310999
3109991
Senior Center Ex nsiop
Pa
1042961
1042%
1042%
104 1
AFFORDABLE HOUSING
CEDC (Acq.)
53540i
53540
0
Acquisition
Networking
00
5000
5000,
0 T
01
PUBLIC SERVICES
Sr. Nutrition
1
10500}
10000
10000 1
12000
12000
9"
83500
.....
9000
1
90001
Sr. Lifeline
'
5480:
I
I_
548a
p
0
Vocational Tmg.
I
5437
1
5437'_..
0
�
0
i
r
-
Adult Literacy
t
8000
5000
5000
5000
50001
50001_
3600
j-
366pp}
3600
3600
i
I
- _
_ _
Homeless Omb. I}
500
500
500
2000
2000
li
5500 j
0
0
- -r
Legal Services
!
5 63
7000
1200
3650
4506
45061
1884
2000
253091
2000
2000
Senior E ui
P
q
I
1987
}
1987
0
0
Long Term Care Omb.
j
2500
1000
2000
27901
3300
3000
145901
.._
0
3000
Cath. CharitiesI
7500
7500
8000
8000 !
8000 ,
-_
6900
45000
6000
6000
Child Health Care
I
I
4591
2000.
6591 i
2878
2878
At Risk Teen
0
0
Attachment C.
(PAGE 1 OF 2)
The Chart below shows the funding trends for the public service dollars available from CDBG.
The City initiated the funding of public services in 1989 /90, and in general, has received more
funds for this purpose each year, until 1996/97. In 1996/97, the amount of funds dropped to the
level they were in 1991/92. Page 2 isolates just the public services, and details how each program
was funded over the past seven years.
35000
30000
25000
20000
15000
10000
5000
0
CDBt
T --
86/87 87/88 88/89 89/90 90/91 91/92 92/93 93/94 94/95 95/96 96/97 97/98
CDBG GRANT YEAR
0061,4 3
G
ATTACHMENT C
PAGE 2� OF
11988/891198W901199W91 1991/92 1992/98 1993194 1994195
1986/87 1987/88 1 L
1995196. 1 1996/97 I
CURRENT
TOTAL BALANCE
BUDGET—ED-1 or
FY 1996!91
- --1
PROGRAM
- -- - — --
PUBLIC SERVICES
Sr. Nutrition
10000 10000 105001 10000 1 10000
12000 j
12000 ! 90001
83500 }
9000
9000
5480
5480
0
01
Sr. Lifeline
1
pl
Vocational Tmg.
54371
j j
i
1
543.7
}
0
{
Adult Literacy
8000 5000 5000 5000
50001
50001 , 3600
36600
3600
3600
Homeless Omb.
i
500 500' 500 2000
2000
5500
Legal Services
e9
563 7000 1200' 3650 4506
4506:
I
1884' 2000''
25309
2000 ,
2000
i
Senior Equip.
1987
,I
1987 I
:'+
0
0�
Long Term Care Omb.
2500 1000 i 2000
2790
3300 30001
14590
0 r
3000
_...._.._
I 7500, 75001 8000,
8000
8000 6000
45000'
60001
6000
Cath. Charities
_+
_ _
Child Health Care
1
�
4591 , 20001
65911
2878
2878
I �
i
O
0
At Risk Teen
i
G