Loading...
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?