HomeMy WebLinkAbout2009-12-17 Housing PACKET
Ashland Housing Commission
Regular Meeting Agenda
th
Thursday December 17 2009: 4:00 – 6:00pm
Pioneer Hall - 73 Winburn Way
1. (4:00) Approval of Minutes (5 min)
th
September 24 2009, regular meeting
nd
October 22 2009, Expiring Use and Affordable Housing tour
2. (4:05) Public Hearing/Focus Group Meeting 2010-2015 Consolidated Plan
A.) Introduction
Housing Commission Chair Steve Hauk (5 min)
B.) Background and Review of Survey results
Linda Reid, Housing Program Specialist (10 min)
C.)Break into groups (45 min)
6 tables, 15 minute discussions, 3 rotations
D.) Housing Commissioner/Facilitator Feedback (15 min)
E.)Wrap-up (15 Min)
3.(5.35)Refreshments (20 min)
th
4.(5:55)September 24 2009 MeetingAgenda Items (5 min)
Commissioner items suggested(5 min)
Quorum Check – Commissioners not available to attend upcoming regular meetings
should declare their expected absence.
5.(6:00)Upcoming Events and Meetings
None
Next Housing Commission Regular Meeting
th
4:30-6:30 PM; Thursday January 28 2010 Community Development Building
6. (6:00) Adjournment
In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact the
Community Development office at 541-488-5305 (TTY phone is 1-800-735-2900). Notification 48 hours prior to the meeting will
enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to the meeting(28 CFR 35.102-35.104 ADA Title 1).
ASHLAND HOUSING COMMISSION
MINUTES
September 24, 2009
CALL TO ORDER
Chair Steve Hauck called the meeting to order at 4:33 p.m. at the Community Development and Engineering Services
Building, 51 Winburn Way, Ashland, OR 97520.
Commissioners Present: SOU Liaison: None
Steve Hauck, Chair
Graham Lewis Council Liaison: Carol Voisin
Nick Frost
Aaron Benjamin Staff Present::
Linda Reid, Housing Specialist
Carolyn Schwendener, Account Clerk
Commissioners Absent:
Richard Billin
Regina Ayars
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Voisin/Lewis m/s to approve the minutes of the August 27, 2009 regular meeting. Voice Vote: All ayes, motion passed.
PUBLIC FORUM
No one present to speak
REPORTS AND UPDATES
Subcommittee Report
Finance – None
Education – None
Land Use – None
Liaison Reports
Council – Voisin reported that the Nudity Ordinance failed. The Council is considering banning fireworks. They will
be dealing with the SOU Master Plan as well as the Riparian Ordinance. The Council discussed the disposition of the
public property located at Clay Street, a formality due to the land partition.
Parks –Hauck confirmed that the Parks Department is still working on the language regarding the use of herbicides.
School Board – None
th
Planning – Benjamin reported that at the September 15 Planning Commission meeting it was discussed whether to
consider an eighteenth month extension to currently existing land use approvals. The Commission had a split vote
th
resulting in no decision being made. Benjamin announced on Monday October 5 between 5:30 p.m. and 7:30 p.m. in
the Rogue River room at Stevenson Union a public meeting will be held by SOU to look at the new Master Plan. John
Fregonese will be the moderator.
SOU- None
Staff – None
Croman Site Report – Graham reported that a meeting was held but nothing has been decided as of yet. Hauck
attended the last Transportation Committee meeting and the Mayor appointed him to serve on that Commission.
ASHLAND HOUSING COMMISSION
1
MINUTES
September 24, 2009
CITY OF MEDFORD RENTAL REGISTRY PROGRAM
Louise Dix is no longer with the City of Medford so no presentation was given.
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS UPDATE ORDINANCES
Hauck stated that the Commission will submit the Ordinancechanges and how they relate to Committees, Commissions and
Regional Bodies. The Commission discussed the changes to the ordinance and agreed it generally was not a bad concept and
consolidates things that make sense to consolidate but it takes away voting rights of all Council Liaisons. The Commission
discussed how important it is for the liaison to participate in the meeting, not just observe. Some comments were; the voice of
the Council Liaison is valuable to the discussions, the Commission has a greater connection/contact with the Council
themselves. Passage of the new ordinance may have the effect of discouraging the Council member from attending the
meetings, why even come if you can just read the minutes? In regard to the ordinance change, Voisin will ask the City
Attorney if the liaisons would not be able to vote on the regional bodies outside of the City Commissions.
Lewis/Frost m/s that the Housing Commission Liaison should be a voting member of the Housing Commission. Voice Vote: All
ayes, motion passed.
CDBG CAPER REPORT OVERVIEW AND PUBLIC HEARING
Reid explained the Consolidated Annual Performance Evaluation Report (CAPER) is a document the City compiles for HUD
every year approximately 45 days after the close of the program year. The CAPER summarizes the individual project status
(physical and financial) of those improvements funded with CDBG funds for the Program year 2008. The City funded three
projects in 2008 with CDBG funds:
$345,000 in Capitol Improvement Grant Funds to complete infrastructure improvements in support of an affordable
housing development being done by the Housing Authority of Jackson County
$10,000 to The Fair Housing Council to provide education and outreach to Ashland residents through two local fair
housing trainings and ongoing support of the fair housing hotline.
$10,000 to The Fair Housing Council of Oregon to complete and update of the City’s Analysis of Impediments to Fair
Housing Choice.
Each year we quantify what the City funded and how that helped us get toward whatever goals we stated in Consolidated plan.
The CAPER Report can be found on the City website at: www.ashland.or.us/cdbgcaper2008.
Reid explained that the new Consolidated Plan goals will be written for 2010-2015. Add the Consolidated Plan Ad Hoc sub
committee reports to the agenda.
Lewis/Voisin m/s to approve the CAPER report as presented. Roll Call Vote: Hauck, Frost, Benjamin, Voisin and Lewis. All
Ayes. Motion passed.
HOMELESS LIAISON POSITION OUTLINE
Frost presented his report to the Commissioners describing the position of the Homeless Liaison. It was suggested to rename
the position to Homeless and Supportive Services Liaison. Frost explained their primary duties;
Foster public knowledge and support of official City Housing programs and supportive services.
To recommend to the Commission Housing and Supportive Services programs based on community needs.
To provide feedback to the Commission about the effectiveness of Housing Commission approved or recommended
Housing and Supportive Services programs.
Frost/Lewis m/s to create the position of the Homelessness and Supportive Services liaison in order to more effectively perform
the duties and goals as laid out in the Housing Commission Charter as well as the 2005 five year consolidated plan.
The Commissioners discussed this motion. Voice Vote: All ayes. Motion approved.
OCTOBER 22, 2009 MEETING AGENDA ITEMS
Expiring Use and Affordable Housing Tour at the first part of the meeting.
Voisin would like to start working on the homeless problem that is part of our community.
Quorum Check – Lewis will need to leave before 6:00 p.m.
No reports on the filling of the two vacancies
ASHLAND HOUSING COMMISSION
2
MINUTES
September 24, 2009
UPCOMING EVENTS AND MEETINGS
st
October 6, 2009 7PM City Council Meeting-HC Ordinance 1 Reading, Boards and Commissions update Ordinances.
thnd
October 19, 2009 7PM City Council Meeting-HC Ordinance 2 Reading, Boards & Commissions update
Ordinances.
nd
October 22, 2009 4PM Tour of Expiring Use and Affordable Housing Units in the City of Ashland.
Next Housing Commission Regular Meeting
4:00-6:00 PM; Thursday October 22, 2009 Pioneer Hall
ADJOURNMENT
Respectfully submitted by, Carolyn Schwendener
ASHLAND HOUSING COMMISSION
3
MINUTES
September 24, 2009
ASHLAND HOUSING COMMISSION
STUDY SESSION
MINUTES
Date: 10-22-2009 Start Time: 4:00 PM Adjourned : 5:40 PM
Topic: Expiring Use and Affordable Housing Units Tour
Commissioners in Attendance
Present Absent Present Absent
XStephen Hauck, Chair XAaron Benjamin
XRichard Billin X Graham Lewis
XNick Frost X Carol Voisin, Council Liaison
XRegina Ayers Others in Attendance:
X Linda Reid , Staff Liaison
Points of Interest Discussed at the Meeting
___________________________________________________________________________
__N/A______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
2010-2015 Consolidated Plan Development
Focus Group Meeting
December 17, 2009
Background
The CDBG program was enacted in 1974 under Title 1 of the Housing and Community
Development Act or HCDA. Prior to this point in time there were numerous federal programs
which addressed community development issues. CDBG grew out of the consolidation of eight
categorical programs under which communities competed nationally for funds. The primary
objective of Title 1 of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974, as amended, is the
development of viable urban communities. These viable communities are achieved by providing
the following, principally for persons of low and moderate income:
Decent Housing
A suitable living environment; and
Expanded economic opportunities
To achieve these goals, the CDBG regulations set forth eligible activities and the national
objective that each activity must meet. As recipients of CDBG funds, grantees are charged with
ensuring that these requirements are met.
Within the framework established by the CDBG rules, grantees must make strategic choices
about how they administer their local programs. To begin the process of implementing CDBG
activities, grantees must understand community needs, interests, and objectives in order to make
effective choices about how to administer their CDBG programs. Based on this analysis of the
community, grantees can then make decisions about what types of activities to fund, and how the
activities and organizations will be selected. Completing a Consolidated Plan will help grantees
to determine which activities to prioritize. The Consolidated Plan is long term plan (three to five
years) which describes community needs, resources, priorities, and proposed activities to be
undertaken under the CDBG program.
National Objective:
Low-Mod Benefit
Urgent Need
The Elimination of Slum and Blight
Eligible and Ineligible uses for CDBG funds
Low- and Moderate- Income Guidelines
At least 51% of the funded activity participants must meet low or moderate-income guidelines as
determined by HUD for the Medford-Ashland standard metropolitan statistical area (MSA). Any
activity funded in whole or in part with CDBG must benefit a clientele who are generally presumed
to be persons of principally low and moderate incomes. In addition to those individuals or
households meeting the HUD income limits, the following groups are also “presumed” by HUD to
meet the low-moderate income: abused children, battered spouses, elderly persons,
handicapped persons, homeless persons, illiterate persons, migrant farm workers, persons with
developmental disabilities, persons living with HIV/AIDS, and persons with metal or emotional
disturbances.
Eligible uses
CDBG funds may be used for activities which include, but are not limited to:
Rehabilitation of residential and non-residential structures, including; energy
Improvements, water efficiency improvements, connection to water and sewer lines,
testing for and abatement of lead-based paint.
Acquisition of Property
Relocation and Demolition
Historic Preservation
Lead-based paint testing and abatement as a stand alone program
Public Facilities –not used for the conduct of government
Such facilities include shelters for the homeless; convalescent homes; hospitals,
nursing homes; battered spouse shelters; halfway houses for run-away children,
drug offenders or parolees; group homes for mentally challenged persons.
Public improvements include, but are not limited to, streets, sidewalks, water and
sewer lines, and parks.
Neighborhood/community facilities and facilities and facilities for persons with
special needs.
Emergency use such as temporary housing for disaster victims.
Direct public services benefiting low-moderate income population
subject to a cap of no more than 15% the annual CDBG allocation – in Ashland
this would be approximately $30,000
To be eligible for CDBG assistance, a public service must be either a new
service or a quantifiable increase in the level of an existing service
Provision of public services includes but is not limited to those concerned with;
Job training and employment services, crime prevention, child care, health care,
and substance abuse services, fair housing counseling
Construction of public facilities and improvements, such as sidewalks, water and
sewer facilities, streets, neighborhood centers, and the conversion of school
buildings for eligible purposes
Sidewalk construction and other public services must predominately benefit low-
moderate income populations, thus improvements must be located within
designated low-moderate income neighborhoods.
Activities relating to energy conservation and renewable energy resources
Provision of assistance to profit-motivated businesses to carry out economic
development and job creation/retention activities
Ineligible uses
The general rule is that any activity not specifically identified as eligible is considered ineligible.
Listed below are specific activities, which are ineligible:
New housing construction.
Buildings used predominantly for the general conduct of government (except for
removal of architectural barriers) and other general government expenses.
Political activities.
Purchase of furnishings, motor vehicles and equipment.
Operating and maintenance expenses, including repair of public facilities and
improvements.
General government expenses
Income payments to an individual or family for food, clothing, housing, or utilities
Improvement to buildings used for religious activities.
Financing for political activities or other partisan political activities
Consolidated Plan Survey Results breakdown by need
Critical Need
46Improved Transit Options
26Section 8 Rental Assistance
26Mental Health Care
21Substance Abuse Treatment
High Need
45Preservation of existing affordable rental units
42Homeownership Opportunities for Moderate Income Families (>80%AMI)
39Rental Housing for Moderate-Income Households (>80%AMI)
39Homeowner Rehabilitation Assistance
37Rental Housing for Small Families (2-4)
37Ownership Opportunities for Low-Income Families (>50%AMI)
34Rental Housing for Low-Income Households (>50%AMI)
34Lead Based Paint screening and abatement for rental units
34Energy efficiency improvements to rental housing
32Rental Housing for Extremely low income households (>30%AMI)
32Rental Housing for the Elderly
32Rental Housing for Single Persons
32Supportive Services For Youth
32Physical Health Care
32Downtown Revitalization
24New Construction of Affordable Rental Units
24Rental Housing for Large Families (5 or more)
29Green Development
29Housing For Persons needing Assisted Living
29Housing for Persons w/Mental Illness
26Crisis Center
26Case Management
26Housing for Persons with Developmental Disabilities
26Section 8 Rental Assistance
26Down Payment and Closing Cost Assistance for homeownership
24Life Skills Training
24Job Training for the Homeless
Moderate Need
42Street Improvements
42Public Beautification
39Historic Preservation
37Street Lighting
34Senior Center Improvements
34Rental Housing for the disabled
34Housing For Persons with Alcohol and Drug addiction
32Rehabilitation facililitites
32Housing Placement Support
29Rental Housing Rehabilitation Assistance
26Youth Center
26Supportive Services For Women
26Housing For Persons with Developmental Disabilities
36Sidewalk Improvements
26Down Payment and Closing Cost Assistance for homeownership
24Rental Housing for Large Families (5 or More)
24Life Skills Training
24Job Training for the Homeless
21Substance Abuse Treatment
Low Need
34Housing For Persons w/HIV/AIDS
29Fair Housing Advocates
26Enforcement of Fair Housing Descrimination Laws
24Fair Housing Laws
21Supportive Services For Women
Very Low Need
Consolidated Plan Survey Results breakdown by need
Unmet Needs
Disabled people staying in a shelter with mobility issues or health problems that prevent them staying in one.
Cost of Housing Too High
Housing and Help with utilities. Very thankful for Access, Goodwill, Salvation Army, etc.
Low income to moderate income housing (particularly for families)
There aren't facilities to help homeless shower & have access to laundry facilities. Plese note: Only 9% of our
monthly clients (1,115) are homeless.
Down payment assistance, Homebuying Ashland NSP assistance Ashland.
1. Mental Health, 2. Substance Abuse, 3. Transportation, 4. Diversity, 5. Senior services
1. Mental Health Services for the uninsured. 2. Housing for persons with mental illness. 3. Dental is always an
issue, but an area best addressed through early prevention strategies. 4. Financial support for health services for
uninsured.
Comments
Wages in Ashland are too low. Aid to small businessess to allow them to increase wages would improve livability.
I think CDBG funds should not go to builders that do larger to medium projects, more smaller amounts to single
rehabs or additions.
I have read that transportation can use up to 30% of a low income household's income, and with the costs of car
ownership, this seems like a reasonable valuation. A really effective public tranportation system would make a
huge difference for all low income for all low-income families, not just the few that happent to get the opportunity to
be placed in ome of our subsidized affordable units. Imagine a frequently-running jitney service that you could
hop on and go fromTolman Creek to the plaza; from the hospital to Mountain Meadows; from the schools in the
East Main area to downtown--one that you could use to get home from an evening meeting or to go shopping on
the weekend. Let's use public money for that, not more of these outrageously expensive small housing projects.
Additional sidewalks should be provided for "Safe Routes to Schools". The needs of automobiles shouldn't
dominate transportation planning, but the City's streets are in dire need of repair. Incentives or rquirements should
be included in the zoning ordinance to advance sustainable design of housing and commercial buildings. Public
transportation needs to be enhanced to reduce reliance/dependence on single-occupant vehicles.
Affordable, green transportation throughout Ashland would radically change opportunities for all. In particular, the
economically challenged. It would also support business owners.
We, Ashland citizens, are proud of how independent we are with city water, power, waste management and
telecommunications. Yet we don’t have the same pride of independence with it comes to providing services for
the homeless or struggling in our community. Social equity is our blind side.
1. Survey problem. One can answer more than one answer per question. 2. Need more maintenance and
upgrading of current infrastructure (street marking, plumbing, lighting, etc). 3. Better tree trimming for street lights
and signs through the city. 4. Need better enforcement of current building coses on existing buildings. 5. Need
better enforcement of traffic laws for cars, bicycles and pedestrians.
2010-2015 Consolidated Plan Development
Focus Group Meeting
December 17, 2009
Questions for Round Table Discussions
1. What do you perceive as the greatest unmet needs for housing and human services among the
City's low income Residents?
2. Are there particular groups or populations that have a greater need for housing or services
than others?
3. In your opinion what are the top three priority areas the City should address, what if any, are
the barriers to making an impact in those areas, and what would you tackle first?