Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1998-10-26 City Council (16)City of Palo Alto City Manager’s Report TO: HONORABLE CITY COUNCIL FROM:CITY MANAGER DEPARTMENT: PLANNING AND COMMUNITY ENVIRONMENT DATE:OCTOBER 26, 1998 CMR:409:98 SUBJECT:CONSOLIDATED ANNUAL PERFORMANCE AND EVALUATION REPORT (CAPER) FOR HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITIES DURING FISCAL YEAR 1997/98 This is an informational report and no Council action is required. BACKGROUND The preparation and submittal of a Consolidated Annual Performance and Evaluation Report (CAPER) is required by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) for the receipt of federal. Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds. The attached document was submitted to HUD on September 30, 1998 following the required 15- day public review period.. DISCUSSION The CAPER provides a summary of the resources available and the programmatic accomplishments in affordable housing, and community development during the 1997/98 fiscal year. It includes the status of actions taken during the 1997/98 fiscal year to implement the strategies and objectives described in the City’s Consolidated Plan for the period July 1, 1995 to June 30, 2000; an evaluation of the progress made during the year in addressing identified priority needs and objectives; and an accounting of CDBG program expenditures. ATTACHMENTS Attachment A: Consolidated Annual Performance and Evaluation Report PREPARED BY: Suzanne Bayley, Senior Planner DEPARTMENT HEAD REVIEW: G. EDWARD GAWF X0, Planning and Community Environment CMR:409:98 Page ’1 of 2 CITY MANAGER APPROVAL: EMILY Assistant City Manager CO:CDBG Citizens Advisory Committee Human Relations Commission Palo Alto Housing Corporation Mid-Peninsula Housing Coalition Stevenson House Lytton Gardens League of Women Voters Urban Ministry of Palo Alto CMR:409:98 Page 2 of 2 CONSOLIDATED ANNUAL PERFORMANCE AND EVALUATION REPORT .(CAPER) July 1, 1997 through June 30, 1998 CITY OF PALO ALTO CALIFORNIA Prepared By: Department of Planning and Community Environment Anne Cronin Moore, Interim Director Public Review and Comment Period: September 14 - 28, 1998 For Submittal To HUD: September 30, 1998 For information, contact: Suzanne Bayley, CDBG Coordinator (650) 329-2428, or Catherine Siegel, Housing Coordiiaator (650) 329-2108 1997/98 CAPER TABLE OF CONTENTS PART I. ,INTRODUCTION ....................................................1 A. Description of Report ......................................................2 B. Description of Public Review Process .....................~ ...................2 C. Overview of Identified Needs and Priorities ....................................2 D. Summary of Accomplishments ..............................................3 PART II. AFFORDABLE HOUSING . . .........................................5 A. Resources ................................................................6 1. Resources Available Within the City of Palo Alto .. ~ ........................6 a. Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Funds ..................6 b. Local Housing Funds ................." ...........................7 c. HOME Investment Partnership Act Funds ............................7 d. State of California Funds ........................: ................7 e. Redevelopment Funds ............................................8 2. Other Resources Obtained by Nonprofits and Others .........................8 B. Accomplishments ....................................., ....................10 1. Programmatic Accomplishments ........................................10 a. New Construction Rental Housing .................................10 Page Mill Court Apartments Alma Place SRO Apartments b. Preservation of Existing Affordable Rental Housing ........... .......: 12 Sheridan Apartments Veterans Workshop Group Home c. Acquisition and Rehabilitation of Existing Rental Housing ...... ........13 Ventura Avenue Apartments Lytton Gardens I & II d. Below Market Rate Home-ownership and Rental Program .....’ .........14 e. Rehabilitation of Owner occupied Single Family Homes ...............14 2. Persons and Households Assisted with Housing ..............~ .............15 a. Table 1A .....................................................16 C. Assessment of Performance ................................................17 1. Evaluation of Progress in Meeting 1997/98 Goals ............................17 2. Evaluation of Progress in Meeting 1995-2000 Goals ..........................17 3. Barriers to Fulfilling Housing Strategies ..... ...........¯ ........ ...........17 a. Federal or State Barriers .........................................18 b. Barriers Related to Local Market Conditions ..............." ..........19 c. Discussion of Most Serious Barriers ................................19 d. Federally Subsidized Housing At-Risk of Conversion to Market Rate .....20 4. Actions to Address Obstacles . .~ ...................................: .....21 5. Adjustments to Affordable Housing Strategies .............................21 a. Public Policies ..................................: ....¯ ..........21 PART III: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ....................................22 A. Resources ...............................................................23 1. Resources Available within the City of Palo Alto "23 a. Federal Funds ..................................................23 b. Local Funds (Human Service Resource Allocation Process) .............23 c. Other Funds ....................................................23 B. Accomplishments .........................................................23 1.~ Summary of Accomplishments with CDBG Funds ..........................23 Table 3-1 .............................................................25 2. Summary of Accomplishments, Palo Alto General Fund Money ...............27 3. Actions Taken to Affirmatively Further Fair Housing ........................28 4.’ Actions Taken to Address Needs of Homeless Persons ............... ........29 a. Santa Clara Collaborative on Housing and Homelessness ...............29 b. Emergency Ordinance .............’ ..............................29 c. Housing and Shelter .............................. ...............30 d. Employment Opportunities .................................~ ......31 e. Homeless Services .............................................31 5. Other Actions .......................................................32 a. Lead Based Paint Hazard Reduction ......................’ ...........32 b. Intergovernmental Cooperation ...................................32 6. Changes to Annual Action Plan .........................................32 C. Assessment of Performance .................................................33 1. Evaluation of Progress in Meeting Annual Community Development Goals ......33 2. Evaluation of Progress in Meeting 1995-2000 Goals .....................’ ....33 3. Barriers to Fulfilling Strategies ..............................i ..........33 4. Timely Expenditure of Funds ...........................................33 5. Adjustments to Community Development Strategies .........................34. PART IV: APPENDIX ...................................................~ ....35 A.Copy of Ad and Public Review Notice for CAPER B.1997/98 Goals and Objectives C.Grantee Performance Financial Report for Fiscal Year 1997/98 PART I. INTRODUCTION INTRODUCTION ’ A. Description of Report Over the past few years, the U. S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) has designed a new grants management and reporting system to implement the concept of consolidated planning. The consolidated planning system is intended to relate and link identified needs within a community to the federal and local resources available to meetthose needs; and to strengthen partnerships among all levels of government and the private sector. The annual reporting portion of this system is now know as the Consolidated Annual Performance and Evaluation Report (CAPER). Preparation and submittal of the CAPER is a condition for the City (and nonprofit organizations within the City) to apply for federal community development and housing assistance funds such as Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) and HOME funds. The CAPER replaces the . previously required CDBG Grantee Performance Report, and the Annual Performance Report for the Housing Affordability Strategy of the Consolidated Plan. The CAPER provides a summary of the resources available and the programmatic accomplishments in affordable housing and community development during the 1997/98 fiscal year. It evi~luates the actions taken during the year to implement the strategies and objectives described in the City’s Consolidated Plan for the period July t, 1995 to June 30, 2000; and the progress made during the past year in addressing identified priority needs and objectives. B. Description of Public Review Process A notice, regarding the draft CAPER was mailed to interested organizations and persons. Copies of the CAPER were made available at City Hall. A notice informing the public of the availability of the CAPER was published in the Palo Alto Weekly on Friday, September 11, 1998. A copy of that notice is appended to this report. " /The draft CAPER was available for public review and comment for a 15 day period, beginning on Monday, September 14, 1998 and concluding at 5:00 p.m. on Monday, September 28, 1998. Questions or comments regarding the CAPER should be directed to Suzanne Bayley, CDBG Coordinator, City of Palo Alto, Department of Planning andCommunity Environment, 250 Hamilton Avenue, 5th Floor, Palo Alto, CA 94301. E-mail: suzanne_bayley@city.palo- alto.ca.us. No public comments on the draft report were received. C. Overview of Identified Needs and Funding Priorities Palo Alto’s Housing and Community DevelopmentNeeds were identified in the Consolidated Plan for the period July 1, 1995 to June 30, 2000. Not surprising, the provision of affordable rental housing units was identified as the most critical need in Palo Alto. This includes the provision of housing affordable to persons who are homeless, or at-risk of homelessness, and persons with special needs, such as the frail elderly, developmentally disabled, physically disabled, and those persons with severe mental illnesses. While all types of housing areneeded in Introduction the City, the Consolidated Plan objectives focus on the creation and preservation of rental housing. Permanent housing for families with children, the elderly, singles and very small households is the highest priority followed by transitional housing with supportive services. While the creation of additional new units of affordable housing is the most desirable option, the preservation of existing subsidized units which are at-risk of converting to market rate units, is also a high priority need. Non-housing community development needs in Palo Alto include public services and public facilities and improvements. Public service needs include supportive services and employment opportunities for lower income, at-risk, homeless, or disabled populations. There is a need to expand, modernize, rehabilitate, and make accessibility improvements to existing public facilities serving the same populations. See Appendix B for a listing of the 1997/98 Goals and Objectives. D. Summary of Accomplishments Overall, fiscal year 1997/98 was a verybusy and productive year for the City of Palo Alto. The City has exceeded both its annual goals as well as the five year goals identified in the Consolidated Plan. A summary of CDBG/Housing accomplishments follows: July, 1997. Clara Mateo Alliance opened a new 40 bed homeless shelter with supportive services at the Veterans Administration Hospital in Menlo Park. August, 1997. Palo Alto Housing Corporation acquired Ventura Apartments, 12 existing units of family housing in Palo Alto. August, 1997. Mid-Peninsula Housing Coalition broke ground on Page Mill Court, 24 new units of permanent rental housing for persons with developmental disabilities. Actual project completion and occupancy will be in fiscal year 1998/99. October, 1997..Neterans Workshop preserved Margarita House in Palo Alto as a group home for seven low income, disabled veterans. November, 1997. Emergency Housing Consortium opened a new regional homeless Reception Center with a capacity.of 250 shelter beds and supportive services in San Jose. January, 1998. Palo Alto Housing Corporation secured an acquisition agreement with the owners of the Sheridan Apartments, 57 units of existing subsidized senior housing in Palo Alto. The project was at risk of converting to market rate units. February, 1998. Palo Alto Housing Corporation completed the construction and initial rent-up of Alma Place, 107 new units (106 rental units plus a manager’s unit) of Single Room Occupancy (SRO) housing in the downtown area. Introduction February, 1998. Community Association for Rehabilitation (CAR) completed the installation of an accessible restroom and changing area, and a new fire alarm system in their warm water swim therapy center on Middlefield Road in Palo Alto. February, 1998. An emergency, temporary service center for very low income and homeless persons was established in the Cal Train parking lot in response to E1 Nino flooding and the forced closure of the Red Cross and Urban Ministry operations. May, 1998. Lytton Gardens used CDBG funds to complete the installation of electronic doors in the common areas of the residential facility for the elderly. Smoke doors were also installed on the upper floors for fire safety. June, 1998. Ventura Community Center. Various CDBG funded improvements and upgrades were completed at the community center, serving one of Palo Alto’s lower income neighborhoods. Improvements included roofing, electrical upgrades, restroom accessibility, and parking lot resurfacing. All of the public service activities and programs funded with CDBG funds were carried out as anticipated. This included the provision of services for homeless persons such as shelter, food, message and mail, and counseling; affordable housing information and referral; para-transit subsidies for low income, disabled persons; complaint investigation and ombudsmen services for the frail elderly in long-term care facilities; and fair housing counseling and advocacy services. These activities are described later in this report in more detail. 4 PART II. AFFORDABLE HOUSING AFFORDABLE HOUSING A. Resources 1. Resources Available Within the City of Palo Alto a. Community Development Block Grant Funds In fiscal year 1997/98, the City of Palo Alto allocated a total of $1,040,000 in federal Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds to local projects. This represents $782,000 in CDBG funds from HUD, $70,000 in anticipated program income for fiscal year 1997/98, $152,500 in unallocated program income from prior program years, and $35,500 in reallocated funds. The reallocated funds include $21,000 originally allocated in fiscal year 1996/97 to Innovative Housing for rehabilitation of a shared home in East. Palo Alto, $1,746 in unused Senior Home Repair funds, and $12,754 in unused City of Palo Alto administrative costs. The main source of program income is from loan payoffs from the City’s Housing Improvement Program (HIP) single family rehabilitation program. The other source is from the Palo Alto Housing Corporation when rental income exceeds expenses on the proportionate share of properties acquired or rehabilitated with CDBG funds. Of the total 1997/98 allocation, $699,200, or 67 percent was directed toward housing activities: the creation, rehabilitation, or preservation of affordable housing units: $48,000 to Palo Alto Senior Housing Project, Inc. (Adlai E. Stevenson House) to re-roof a portion of the 120 unit residential facility which provides affordable housing tO senior adults. 455 E. Charleston Road, Palo Alto. $51,000 for Veterans Workshop to acquire a 100% interest in a single family home which is used as a shared home for seven low income, disabled veterans. Funds will enable the house to be retained as affordable shared housing. 442 Margarita Avenue, Palo Alto. / $17,600 to Alliance for Community Care (formerly Miramonte Mental. Health) for a feasibility study to ascertain the future use of a large single family residence in downtown Palo Alto. The purpose of the study is to assess existing conditions and estimate the funding necessary for rehabilitation and conversion into either a multi-family or single room occupancy type of shared housing use. 650 Waverley Street, Palo Alto. $582,600 to the City’s New Housing Development Fund for projects to increase or preserve the number of housing units affordable to low and very low income persons. This amount, added to the carry-over fund balance of $577,649, made the total available for 1997/98 $1,160,249. 6 Affordable Housing b. Local Housing Funds The City of Palo Alto maintains a local housing trust fund which has two sub-funds: the "Commercial Housing In-Lieu Fund" and the "Residential Housing In-Lieu Fund". These funds are the only source of local funding and subsidies for affordable housing within the City. They are used to provide matching funds, to pay for costs which exceed HUD limits, to fund the cost of features and amenities inel!gible under federal housing programs, for pre-development expenses, and feasibility studies, site acquisition and similar purposes. Commercial Housing In-Lieu Fund: Palo Alto requires commercial and industrial development projects to pay a housing mitigation fee per Chapter 16.47 of the Municipal Code. The fees are deposited in the Commercial Housing In-Lieu Fund - and the accumulated fees and interest earned on the fund are made available for the creation of new low and moderate income housing units under the "Housing Reserve Guidelines" adopted by the City Council. The Commercial Fund had a July 1, 1997 balance of approximately $370,000, and fees of approximately $1.5 million were collected during the fiscal year. Residential Housing In-Lieu Fund: Pursuant to Program 13 (the Below Market Rate Program) of the City’s adopted Housing Element, Palo Alto collects housing in-lieu fees from residential developments that cannot provide on-site below market units. These fees, interest earnings of the Fund and other miscellaneous revenues related to housing are placed in a special fund - the Residential / Miscellaneous In-Lieu Fund. This fund, pbr adopted City policy, is used mainly to provide funding for acquisition or rehabilitation of low and moderate income housing, but may also be used for assistance to new housing construction projects. At the beginning of the. 1997/98 fiscal year, the Residential Fund had an unrestricted balance of $13,000, during the year $847,500 was collected in fees, of which $825,800 was committed to the Sheridan project, leaving a yei~r end balance of $34,700. . c. Home Investment Partnership Act (HOME) Funds The City of Palo Alto is not an entitlement jurisdiction for the federal HOME program. Because the City is an entitlement jurisdiction for the CDBG program, the City does not participate in the urban county HOME program through the County of Santa Clara. The City is only eligible to. " apply for HOME funds through the State of CaliforniaHOME program. The City did not receive any HOME funds during fiscal year 1997/98. Expected changes to the State’s funding criteria, which will increase the preference for rural communities with high poverty, will make it even less likely that Palo Alto can submit competitive applications for HOME funds in the future. d. State of California Funds: There were no State housing funds available to the City of Palo Alto during the fiscal year. e. Redevelopment Funds: available. The City does not have a redevelopment agency. Affordable Housing There are no funds 2. Other Resources Obtained by Nonprofits & Others : HUD Section 8 - Moderate Rehabilitation Program Palo Alto Housing Corporation (PAHC) owns and manages a number of apartment buildings where a portion of the units have rents subsidized under the old Section 8 Moderate Rehabilitation program. The Project-based Section 8 contracts for this rental assistance program were originally written for terms of 5 to 15 years and are beginning to expire. Currently, HUD only provides extensions on a one year basis. During the fiscal year, PAHC applied for sixteen units of new, five-year project based Section 8 subsidies. They were tentatively awarded six Section 8 subsidies, with three of the units at Waldo Apartments, and three at various ofher properties.. HUD Shelter Plus Care - Section 8 PAHC entered into an agreement with the County Housing Authority for up to 3 units of Project Based Section 8 rental assistance at the Barker Hotel SRO to homeless persons participating in the Shelter Plus Care program, and up to 6 units at the new Alma Place SRO. This assistance is only available to new residents with special needs. During the fiscal year, two persons lived at the Barker under the program, one for three and a half months, the other for less than one month. One person was placed at the Alma Place SRO in May, 1998 and continues to reside there. Three additional Section 8 slots were designated to the Barker in July, 1998, and two additional tenants moved in under the program. The main obstacle in the program is getting ai~plicants to the properties when openings are available. This and other issues will be the subject of discussion with non-profit social service providers in order, to expedite the process, and fully utilize this housing assistance resource. HUD Tenant Based Section 8 Rental Assistance The Housing Authority of Santa Clara County administers the Section 8 Program for the City of Palo Alto. In fiscal year 1996/97, the Housing Authority issued 41 individual Section 8 certificates or vouchers to.households in Palo Alto. This is an increase of more than 40 percent over the 29 certificates and vouchers issued the prior year. Since the number of individual vouchers and certificates used in Palo Alto has been declining over the past few years, this number is surprising. The increase in numbers was discussed with Santa Clara County Housing Authority staff; and it was learned that a new tracking/computer system had been installed during the past year. This might account for the increase in the numbers. The owners of the 156 unit Palo Alto Gardens Apartments did not renew their project-based Section 8 Rental Assistance Contract with HUD. In July of 1998, eligible tenants will receive special Section 8 vouchers directly from HUD. These vouchers will have lower rents for a one year period, and then revert to regular Section 8 rental vouchers. At that time, the tenant’s share of Affordable Housing the rent may increase dramatically. This will be a hardship for the majority of the tenants who are elderly and on fixed incomes. Tenants may take their vouchers and move, but it is difficult to find rental property owners who will accept Section 8 vouchers. There are no units of public housing in Palo Alto. As of 7/01/98, the 41 units were distributed as follows: The Housing Authority of the County of Santa Clara Tenant Based Section 8 Vouchers and Certificates Issued 0 bedrooms 1 bedroom 2O Certificate/Voucher Size 2 3 4 bedrooms bedrooms bedrooms 11 2 0 5 TOTAL bedrooms 0 41 White/Cauc. 34 Black 4 Distribution by Racial Group Native Asian/Pacific American Islande.r 0 3 TOTAL 41 Hispanic 10 Distribution by Ethnicity Non-Hispanic 31 TOTAL 41 Low Distribution by Income Very Low 41 TOTAL 41 Elderly 19 Disabled .11 Distribution by Status Families 11 TOTAL 41 Male 15 Distribution by Head of Household Female 26 TOTAL 41 B. Accomplishments Affordable Housing 1. Programmatic Accomplishments and Leveraging of Other Resources The City of Palo Alto, by itself and in conjunction with nonprofit housing developers, undertook the following activities to meet its’ priorities for affordable housing development and assistance as stated in the FY 97-98 Annual Plan of the Consolidated Plan. Although all housing activities are multi-year in nature, one major new housing project was completed and occupied in 1997/98, and another completed just after the close of the fiscal year. Approximately 140 new units were added to the City’s affordable housing stock, and more than 60 units preserved as affordable housing during this period. a. New Construction Rental Housing Page Mill Court Apartments - Permanent Housing for Persons with Special Needs: 24- Units of New Construction o 2700 Ash Street, Palo Alto. Page Mill Court is a new residential development for very low-income adults with developmental disabilities who are capable of living in their own apartment with assistance. The project, sponsored by Mid-Peninsula Housing Coalition (MPHC), and Adult Independence Development Center, is designed to provide a variety of supportive living situations. The complex consists of 24 one- and two-bedroom units, along with a community building. It is located at 2700 Ash Street and Page Mill Road near the California Avenue business district. When completed, the complex is expected to house 31 residents. On July 17, 1997, HUD issued the Firm Commitment in the amount of $2,556,600 which was a 31% increase over the original fund reservation of $1,944,600. Building permits were issued on July 30, 1997, the HUD closing occurred on July 31, 1997 and the ground breaking ceremony was held on August 7, 1997. Most of fiscal 1997/98 was spent on actual construction. Although completion was originally scheduled for May, 1998, an extremely wet winter delayed the completion until after the close of the fiscal year. Between October, 1997 and February, 1998, MPHC implemented a marketing plan, conducted outreach activities to the targeted population, screened applications, and concluded the resident selection process. Leveraging:. The City 0fPalo Alto’s investment in this project is $936,400 ($505,400 in City Housing Reserve funds; $431,000 in CDBG funds) out of a total development budget of $3.86 million, or 24% of the total budget. The HUD Section 811 program funded 67% of total development costs plus the annual operating subsidies throflgh the Section 8 rental assistance. The remaining 10% of dev.elopment costs was contributed by the other jurisdictions since the project will serve the entire area of northern Santa Clara County. 10 Affordable Housing Contributions were made by the County of Santa Clara, the Cities of Sunnyvale and Los Altos, and the Town of Los Altos Hills. The permanent sources of funding andthe percentage share of each source for this project are summarized below: PAGE MILL COURT FUNDING SOURCES HUD Section 811 Capital Advance 67%$2,556,600.00 Palo Alto CDBG 11%$431.00 Palo Alto Housing Reserve 13%$505,400~00 Sunnyvale CDBG 1%$50,000.00 Los Altos CDBG 1%$50,000.00 Los Altos Hills CDBG 2%$75,000.00 Urban County of Santa Clara CDBG 5%$188,000.00 Private Grants --$4,000.00 Total 100%$3,860,000.00 Alma Place SRO Apartments -Housing for Very Low & Extremely Low Income Renters: 107-Units of New Construction - 753 Alma Street, Palo Alto. Alma Place, 107 new units of Single Room Occupancy (SRO) housing in the downtown area was completed in February, 1998. The developer is the local nonprofit, Pal0 Alto Housing Corporation (PAHC). The target population is single, working adults with incomes below 35% of the area median income. PAHC offices were also moved onto the first floor of the new building, and are now accessible to wheelchair users. 106 units are available for rental, with one unitreserved for the resident manager. Rents range from $330 to $490 per month depending on size and location within the complex. All units are accessible and adaptable for persons with disabilities. 40 of the units were rented to tenants whose incomes are below 30% of the area median income, and 66 of the units are rented to tenants whose incomes are between 31% and 50% of median income. As of June 30, 1998, 124 persons resided in Alma Place. Leveraging: The total permanent City investment in this project is expected to be in the range of $2.2 million to $2.3 million, or about 27% of the development budget of $8.288 million, depending on.actual, audited costs. A total of $2.650 million in funding was provided during the predevelopment and construction phases ofthe project development, 11 Affordable Housing some of which was repaid by the AHP loan and the Varian funds. The City’s investment leveraged over $6.0 million from private sources including a private bank loan and AHP loan, the housing mitigation payment from Varian Associates, the tax credit equity investors payments and developer equity. More important, however, was the early commitment of City funds for the up-front, high-risk phases of the project for feasibility studies, site option payments, environmental testing, zoning entitlements and financing applications, which enabled PAHC to secure the other subsidies and investments The permanent sources of funding and the percentage share of each source for this project are summarized below: ALMA PLACE FUNDING SOURCES California Federal Bank - 15-year amortized loan 4.7%$390,500 California Federal Bank - AHP Loan 4.2%$346,159 Varian Associates - Private grant for construction loan costs 1.7%$140,000 PAHC Alma Place - developer equity 0.6%$52,028 Edison Housing - State & Federal Low Income Housing Tax 62.2%$5,150,819 Credits City of Palo Alto.- Local Housing Trust Fund (long term loan)26.6%$2,208,840 Total 100%$8,288,346 b. Preservation of Existing Affordable Rental Hous!ng Sheridan Apartments - Subsidized Section 8 units for the elderly and persons with disabilities in dan~er of converting to market rate units: (57 existing units at 360 Sheridan Avenue, Palo Alto): This 57 unit, one-bedroom apartment complex is located between Birch and Ash Streets, in the California Avenue business district. The three story building was constructed in 1979, and was designed for independent .living by the elderly and persons with. disabilities. The " developers utilized an FHA-insured loan, and received a 20-year commitment of federal Section 8 rental assistance for all 57 units. The land was originally purchased from the City at.market value, but with deed restrictions intended to ensure that the project remained under the Section 8 program as long as subsidies were available. With the current Section 8 contract set to expire in April 1999, the owners decided to sell. The PAHC attempted to negotiate a purchase agreement in order to preserve the units as affordable housing, but in October, 1997, the owners accepted an offer .from an investor buyer for $5.8 million. The 12 Affordable Housing investor later withdrew from the deal when the implications of the City deed restrictions became clear. On January 13, 1998, PAHC executed an agreement with the owners of the Sheridan Apartments on the principal terms of an acquisition, including a $5.1 million purchase price. On February 2, 1998 the City Council approved an agreement with PAHC for pre- development activities related to the completion of due diligence activities needed to. evaluate the property and prepare financing applications. Funding for the pre-development agr.eement, in the amount of $145,500, was appropriated from the CDBG Housing Development Fund. PAHC intends to preserve the Sheridan in its existing use as Section 8 assisted housing for very-low income seniors and other persons with disabilities. In May, 1998 the City Council committed a total of $2.5 million in CDBG and City Residential Housing In-Lieu funds to the project, and PAHC submitted a tax credit application. In late August, 1998, PAHC was informed that they had been awarded both state and federal tax credits. It is expected that the acquisition will be completed by the end of 1998, and the necessary rehabilitation completed in 1999. Veterans Workshop Group Home - Existing Transitional Housing for Persons with Disabilities: Shared Transitional Housing for Veterans with Disabilities at 442 Margarita Avenue, Palo Alto. In October, 1997, Veterans Workshop acquired a 100% interest in an existing group home for low income veterans which they had previously owned in conjunction with another nonprofit Sponsor, Veterans Task Force (VTF). VTF wanted to sell their interest in the single family residence in Palo Alto in order to pursue other service oriented programs for veterans. Extremely low rents, and ongoing supportive services did not provide sufficient cash flow for additional debt on the property. The City provided $51,000 in CDBG funds to Veterans Workshop to purchase VTF’s share of the property in order to retain its use as affordable transitional housing for seven low income, disabled veterans. Leveraging: A low interest state loan was utilized in the original purchase of the house, but no leveraging was used in. the 1997 purchase of VTF’s interest in the property. c. Acquisition and Rehabilitation of Existing Rental Housin~ Ventura Avenue Apartments - 12 two and three bedroom units at 290 - 310 Ventura Avenue, Palo Alto. In satisfaction of the City’s Below Market Rate Program, seven units of affordable rental housing were provided by the developer of the 651 Hamilton project, a luxury senior condominium development where it was not practical to provide affordable units On site. The developer provided the seven units by selling a twelve unit building to the Palo Alto 13 Affordable Housing Housing Corporation for 5/12 of the purcha.s~ and rehabilitation costs. PAHC rented seven of the units to very low income households. Market rents on the remaining five units covers the debt service on the entire building, and no additional City housing money was needed to complete the transaction. Over time, and as the project can afford, additional units in the building will be will be rented to lower income households. Lytton Gardens I & II - 318 units of Subsidized senior housing at 656 Lytton Avenue and 649 University Avenue in Palo Alto. Rehabilitation in the amount of $56,518 was completed on the common areas of the senior residential facility. Power-assist door hardware was installed on 22 interior/exterior doors to provide ease of access and exit to the elderly residents. The doors were difficult to manage, due to the level of strength required, for the frail elderly, andthose in walkers and wheelchairs. Additionally, elevator smoke doors were added for fire protection and so that non-ambulatory ensiors could safely reside on the upper floors. d. Below Market Rate (BMR) Ownership & Rental Programs BMR Home Ownership Units: This is a local, inclusionary housing program in which units are constructed and donated by housing developers (usually 10% of the total units in proje’cts of 10 or more units). The units are sold at affordable prices with 59-year deed restrictions. When an owner decides to sell the unit, they must be resold to other eligible buyers from a waiting list at an affordable price with a new 59-year deed restriction. There are currently a total of 144 units in the ownership program inventory. No new BMR units were added to the program during the fiscal year, but there are several projects under construction which will provide additional units in the next fiscal year. During the period of this report, five re-sale units were purchased by income eligible buyers. One unit was purchased by a very low income buyer (income of less than 50% of median), three units were purchased by low income buyers (incomes of between 50% and 62% of median), and one unit was purchased by a moderate income buyer (income of 63% to 100% of median). BMR Rental Units: There are also 33 BMR rental units in three separate multi-family rental developments. These units are rented at below market rents to eligible low and moderate income households. The specific income eligibility varies from project to project. Five new BMR rental units will be added to the program inventory in FY 1998-99 that are presently under construction. They are part of a 46-unit Los Robles Apartments project. e. Rehabilitation of Existing, Owner-Occupied Single Family Homes The City may provide CDBG funds to very low income owners in cases where there is an urgent need for City financial assistance due to serious health or safety problems. During the year, there 14 Affordable Housing were no applications for this program. The Senior Home Repair Program, operated by the Senior Coordinating Council, provided 87 minor home repair jobs to low income older adult homeowners. $8,282 in CDBG funds were utilized for subsidizing the cost of painting, plumbing, electrical repairs, accessibility improvements, and other minor repairs to help seniors remain in their own homes as long as possible.. 2. Persons and Households Assisted with Housing The attached Table 1A shows 120 households assisted with rental housing during the period covered by this report. The table counts only persons or households newly occupying housing, receiving rental subsidies for the first time, or living in newly rehabilitated or constructed housing units regardless of when the financing or subsidies were awarded. Units receiving multiple subsidies are only counted once. The projects reported in Table 1A include Ventura Avenue Apartments (7 units), Alma Place SRO (106 units), and Margarita Group Home (7 units). Not included are units which are vacant or in the process of renting up, or units under construction or which are in the pre-development stages. Also not included are units assisted with Shelter Plus Care or counseling services, information and referral or minor home repair assistance, neither does Table 1A report homeless persons or households who receive overnight shelter. These activities are discussed in Part III of this report. 15 Affordable Housing Table 1A Summary of Housing Accomplishments Name of Grantee: City of Palo Alto Statei CA . Prinritv No.~_H ~t~.nnrv J Renters 0 - 30% of Median Family Income (MFI) *40 31 - 50% of MFI 72 51 - 80% of MFI Total 112 Owners 0-30% of MFI 31 - 50% of MFI 51 - 80% of MFI Total Homeless * * Individuals 8 Families Total 8~ Non-Homeless Special Needs Total Total Housing 120 Total 215 Housin9 120 As annually adjusted by HUD ¯ *Homeless families and individuals assisted with transitional and permanent housing Pro~iram Year: 1997/98 Total Housing Hispanic 21 Non-Hispanic White 82 Black 4 Native American 1 Asian/Pacific 12 Other Total Racial/Ethnic 120 16 Affordable Housing C. Assessment of Performance 1. Evaluation of Progress in Meeting Annual (1997-98) Affordable Housing Goals - 25 Households To Be Assisted Per Year Over Five.Years The City’s Consolidated Plan goal is to assist an average of 25 units per year over the five year period of the 1995-2000 Consolidated Plan. During fiscal 1997/98, 120 units were assisted, far surpassing the annual production goal of the Consolidated Plan. Housing activities which were not completed as planned for 1997/98 include the Arastradero Park Apartment Water Rehabilitation System, the Emerson North Apartment rehabilitation project, Alliance for Community Care Waverley St. House feasibility study, and the Stevenson House roofing project. Agreements were finalized on the Arastradero Park and Alliance for Community Care projects, and work has commenced. It is expected that all of the projects can be completed in the 1998/99 program year. 2. Evaluation of Progress in Meeting Overall Goals for the Period 1995-2000 As discussed above under the evaluation of progress towards the annual goal, the City has exceeded the goal of 125 very low and low income rental units over the five year period. The 120 units assisted this year, along with the 6 units assisted in previous years, brings the total assisted to 126 units. This figure exceeds the annual average production goal and the 5-year housing goal. Based on projects already completed, under construction, or under contract, it is now estimated that the housing production total for the five year period will be 200 units (130 units of new construction; 70 acquired and rehabilitated rental units). The City’s greatest need is affordable housing, and the majority of CDBG and local funds have been targeted and expended to preserve or increase the affordable housing stock. All of the CDBG funds have been used to carry out activities which benefit low and moderate income persons. 3. Barriers to Fulfilling Housing Strategies There are many barriers that Palo Alto faces in meeting its affordable housing strategies, most of which are beyond the control of the City. Some barriers are the result of decisions and priorities set by the federal or State government that have limited housing funding, made funding difficult to obtain for activities within Palo Alto or eliminated key programs of local importance. Other barriers result from Palo Alto’s distinction of having one of the most expensive housing markets in the country coupled with a lack of land suitable for new housing. Some federal housing resources are not readily available to the City of Palo Alto. Problems include lack of Congressional appropriations for certain programs, limitations in federal regulations which make some programs very.difficult to use in Palo Alto, lack of appropriate and available housing sites and a lack of interest or capability on the part of nonprofits in pursuing some federal programs. The principal barriers to fulfilling the City’s affordable housing goals and objectives are discussed below. 17 Affordable Housing. a. Barriers Related to Federal or State Funding Levels and Priorities: Changes by the State’s Tax Credit Allocation Committee in the method of determining awards for the c.ompetitive federal and State housing tax credits which has made it much more difficult to obtain tax credit awards. A new lottery tie-breaker system, instituted in 1997, makes the process very uncertain, especially £or family projects where there is the highest demand for the tax credits. There are also now very restrictive caps which limit the total amount of tax credit awards within certain counties including Santa Clara County. There is far greater demand in Santa Clara County for the competitive tax credits than the amount allowed under the allocation cap. Problems of utilizing federal housing programs, such as Section 202 and 811, in areas with high construction and land costs (i. e. limitations on the amount of HUD subsidies, which then results in the need for large (about one-third or more of total development budget including land cost) local funding contributions to make projects feasible. The Page Mill Court Section 811 project is an example of this barrier. HUD funds represented only about two-thirds of the project’s total development costs. Limited amount of federal CDBG funds that the City receives on an entitlement basis from HUD, and the barrier of not being qualified for HOME funds, on an entitlement basis. Changes approved by Congress in March, 1996, in the HUD preservation program (LIHPRHA - Low Income Housing Preservation and Rehabilitation Homeownership Act, also known as Title VI)which permitted owners of certain HUD financed projects (such ag Arastradero Park and Palo Alto Gardens)to pre-pay their HUD insured mortgages and opt- out of the HUD low income use restrictions. Key 1996 changes in the law included the loss of the right that nonprofits previously had to priority purchase of these projects, and elimination of funding for nonprofit purchases. The lack of State or federal funding for the preservation of/older, HUD-subsidized and Section 8 assisted rental housing by acquisition by nonprofit housing organizations. $15 million in new State funding for this purpose passed the State legislature, but was vetoed by the Governor. Reduction in the term of project-based Section 8 contract renewals from the 20 year. contracts of the 1970’s to the one year renewals presently authorized by Congress. Elimination of new or incremental increases in HUD’s budget for the Section 8 tenant- based rental assistance program (Section 8 certificates and vouchers adrrfinistered by local housing authorities) since FY 1994. 18 b. Barriers Related to Local Housing Market Conditions: Affordable HouSing Limited vacant land suitable for housing construction and strong competition from developers of market-rate housing and commercial projects for any available site. Extremely high prices for sites suitable for new housing and for existing residential properties suitable for acquisition and rehabilitation. Limited local funding sources for affordable housing. Extremely low rental vacancy rate (less than 1%) and high housing demand means that even the most modest existing rental units are usually occupied by households with incomes above the HUD low income limit which means that rehabilitation programs or acquisition and rehabilitation programs must relocate existing tenants in order to utilize federal funds. ¯Low vacancy rates and high rental rates have made it difficult for persons to find housing in Palo Alto using tenant-based Section 8 Certificates and Vouchers. Section 8 Fair Market Rents (FMRs) are so far below the actual market rents that households receiving Section 8 assistance cannot locate housing within the time allowed and must either leave the bay area or turn in their Section 8 assistance unused. c. Discussion of Most Serious Barriers: The most serious barrier is the lack of dependable access to HOME funds. The fact that the City does not qualify as an entitlement jurisdiction for HOME funds is a significant barrier to meeting the City’s housing objectives. HOME is the principal federal housing subsidy program directly available to local governments. The City can only obtain funding on a competitive basis from the State of California’s statewide allocation. The State holds only one competition round each year. Palo Alto is at a disadvantage in the State’s process because of the percentage Of ranking points assigned to rural applicants and those from jurisdictions with high poverty rates. The maxifflum award from the State is $1 million per applicant. While the City and PAHC successfully obtained, and implemented, a major acquisition and rehabilitation of the 26-unit Barker Hotel SRO with a FY 1992 HOME grant from the State, the City has not been able to access the State’s HOME funds since that time. The City applied for a FY 1995 HOME grant of $1 million for the Alma Place SRO and the Page Mill Court project, but the application was not funded because both projects scored low on the readiness criteria. There are many obstacles that have prevented the City from obtaining HOME funds, which has, in -turn, affected progress towards our housing objectives. The primary obstacles are listed below: Extremely high demand and competition for State HOME funds requires that applications be near perfect to receive funding. 19 Affordable Housing The State’s rating criteria favors rural and Community Housing Development Organizations (CHDO) applicants, and jurisdictions with high rates of poverty. Since Palo Alto does not fit these priorities, the City is at a great disadvantage in the competition. There are no qualified CHDOs operating in the Palo Alto area, and the local nonprofit housing developers are not interested in creating CHDOs and pursuing HOME funds directly. The State’s once per year application process is too inflexible for use with the kind of major rental housing project that are usually done in Palo Alto. It is unlikely that project timing and readiness will coincide with the State’s application schedule in a manner that will earn maximum points. Another serious barrier is the expiration of project-based Section 8 contracts & insufficient funding from the Federal Government for contract renewals. Some of Palo Alto’s largest subsidized housing developments have project-based Section 8 rental assistance contracts which have expired or will expire in the next few years. Most of these projects are owned and operated by nonprofit housing organizations who desire to continue the low income use under their HUD insured financing and regulatory agreements. Renewal of the Section 8 rental assistance contracts for all these projects is critical in order to preserve affordable rents for the. extremely low income tenants who occupy these units. Many of these projects serve elderly and disabled persons who would find it very difficult to move and who would be unlikely to be able to secure comparable housing even if they were provided with a Section 8 voucher. While legislation passed by Congress in 1997, expresses a policy commitment to continued funding of elderly units, it is not at all clear if funding will actually continue to be provided in future years. There is continued uncertainty regarding the future of Section 8 Assistance & owner actions under 1997 "’Mark-to-Market" Legislation: Congress passed the Multifamily Assisted Housing Reform and Affordability Act (MAHRAA) in October, 1997. Regulations for this new law are being formulated and new policies will only ~begin to be implemented fully in FY 1998. it is still unclear / .how this new law will affect properties in Palo Alto with Section 8 project-based assistance. d. Federally Subsidized Rental Housing At,Risk of Conversion to Market-Rate: Palo Alto Gardens Apartments: The owners of the 156-unit Palo Alto Gardens project, a Goldrich and Kest limited partnership, did not renew their Project based Section 8 contract with HUD, and in June, 1998 all of the eligible tenants received Section 8 vouchers with special rents for one year only. In June, 1999 the vouchers will return to the regular Section 8 rents, and thus the tenant’s share of the rent will increase greatly. The voucher solution has serious problems for these extremely low income tenants in highrrent markets such as Palo Alto’s. While tenants may take their Section 8 voucher and move, it is difficult to find rental property owners who will accept Section 8 rents when they can easily rent on the open market for $200 to $300 more. 2O Affordable Housing Mid-Peninsula Housing Coalition (MPHC) has expressedinterest in pursuing a purchase of the property, and a group of Palo Alto Gardens residents have met with the Mayor and City management to discuss how the City could assist MPHC in the purchase. However, as noted in this report, there are no specific federal or State subsidy funds for housing preservation. The low income housing tax credit program is the only resource available and, with the real estate values in the Bay Area, substantial additional subsidy funds are needed to make this type of acquisition feasible. Rough estimates of the amount of gap funds needed to acquire Palo Alto Gardens could approach $2 million in addition to funds from the housing tax credit program and a first mortgage funded by tax-exempt bonds. 4. Actions to Address Obstacles to Maintain Affordable Housing, or Eliminate Barriers to Affordable Housing Creation of Countywide Housing Trust Fund Palo Alto has been a participant in the efforts of the Santa Clara County Housing and Homeless Committee, the Silicon Valley Manufacturing Group and the County of Santa Clara in an initiative to establish a countywide Housing Trust Fund. Staff participated in the feasibility studies on the fund and the City is represented on the newly appointed steering committee which will govern the Fund. A delegation of business and housing leaders recently met with Secretary Cuomo in Washington to discuss how HUD could assist in this effort. Palo Alto will work with County staff to explore the possibility of applying for a special loan of HUD funds which would be used to help capitalize the Trust Fund. A recent foundation grant will allow the funding raising campaign to proceed in earnest in 1998-99. 5. Adjustments or Improvements to Affordable Housing Strategies No adjustments to the affordable housing strategies have been identified at thi~ time. a. Public Policies On July 20, 1998; the City.Council approved and adopted the I998-2010 Comprehensive Plan which included a new Housing Element in compliance ~’ith State law. As part of that effort, the City’s housing related goals, policies and programs have been reevaluated. The revised Plan places an emphasis on creating new housing opportunities by use of tools such as minimum densities, designating higher densities near transit and services, mixed use projects and strengthening other zoning incentives. The revised Plan also continues the former plan’s emphasis on, and protections for, existing rental units. The next step is to adopt corresponding changes in the City’s zoning ordinance to implement the new policies and programs. 21 PART III~ COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 22 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT A. Resources Available 1. City of Palo Alto Non-Housing Community Development Resources a. Federal Funds The primary federal resource in the City of Palo Alto for non-housing community development activity is the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program. The City of Palo Alto is an entitlement jurisdiction under the CDBG regulations and receives annual funding on a formula basis. The purpose of the CDBG program is to developviable urban communities by providing decent housing and a suitable living environment, and by expanding economic opportunities, principally for low-and moderate-income persons. The City receives no other direct federal fun.ding for community development projects. As explained earlier in this report, the amount of CDBG funds available for allocation in 1997/98 was $1,040,000. This includes grant funds of $782,000, 1997/98 anticipated program income of $70,000, $152,500 in program income from prior years, and $35,500 in reallocated funds. For 1997/98 the City allocated a total of $340,800, or 33 percent of its CDBG funds to non-housing activities, including public services, fair housing, and CDBG program administration. b. Local Funds - Human Service Resource Allocation Process The City of Palo Alto provided $1,024,888 in General Funds to address priority human service needs in the community..The funds were allocated through the Human Service Resource Allocation Process (HSRAP), by the City’s Office of Human Services in the Community Service Department. The projects funded addressed community needs in the following categories: nutrition, child care, youth/teens, seniors, homeless/low income, disability, information & referral, women; and family support. c. Leverag!ng All of the local non-profit agencies leverage CDBG and HSRAP funding with money from local businesses, corporal?ions, foundations, and individual donors. B. Accomplishments 1. Summary of Accomplishments with CDBG Funds The attached financial expenditure report summarizes the accomplishments of each activity funded with Community Development Block Grant funds in 1997/98. The report also specifies the number and ethnicity of all persons who benefitted from each activity. Following is a brief recap of the accomplishments of the public service and other community development activities which were completed during the 1997/98 fiscal year. $36,100 to Community Association for Rehabilitation (CAR) for Betty Wright Swim Center improvements: The therapeutic warm water swim center was upgraded with an 23 Community Development accessible changing area and restroom, and a new audible/strobe fire alarm system which meets ADA standards. Agency serves children and adults with disabilities. $56,518 to Lytton Gardens I and II for accessibility improvements to the common areas of the senior residential facility were completed. Automatic electronic doors were added for ease of access for frail elderly and disabled residents. Smoke doors were also added to the upper floor elevators for fire safety purposes. $167,201 to Ventura Community Center for general improvements to the community facility in the lower income Ventura neighborhood. Improvements included roofing, parking lot resurfacing, electrical upgrades, restroom accessibility andother general rehabilitation. $35,000 to the Palo Alto Housing Corporation. Provided housing information and referral to 3,224 housing seekers, updated, published and distributed an affordable housing directory, and provided 448 counseling sessions for 35 low income Barker Hotel tenants (many of whom were previously homeless). $11,000 to Emergency Housing Consortium. Provided 46 unduplicated homeless persons with supportive services and 2,156 shelter nights in emergency and transitional housing. $66,900 to Urban Ministry_ of Palo Alto. Provided 20,486 sacks of groceries and 23,964 prepared meals to homeless and low income individuals. The drop-in-center served approximately 118 persons per day, a total of 30,570 during the course of the fiscal year. The rotating church shelter provided 142 unduplicated homeless individuals with emergency shelter at local churches. $13,400 to Catholic Charities. Provided 141 site visits to Palo Alto long-term care facilities. 719 unduplicated seniors were represented or assisted for various patient rights issues. 116 residents complaint cases (including allegations of elder abuse) were logged, investigated, and resolved. $6.000 to Outreach and Escort. Provided 2,3 !9 subsidized paratransit rides for 99 disabled very low income residents. $11,000 to Senior Coordinating Council’s Senior Home Repair Program. C~mpleted 87 subsidized home repair jobs for 57 low income senior homeowners. $17.500 to Mid-Peninsula Citizens for Fair Housing. Opened and investigated 21 cases involving allegations of housing discrimination. The chart on the following pages reflects the accom)lishments and beneficiaries served with 1997/98 CDBG expenditUres: Community Development Table 3-1 Summary of Community Development Accomplishments for Public Facilities and Improvements Name of Grantee: Paio Alto State: CA Program Year: 1997/98 Priority Need Category Actual Number of Actual Number of ¯ Proiects Assisted Projects Completed Public Facilities Senior Centers Handicapped Centers Homeless Centers 1 1 Youth Centers Neighborhood Facilities 1 1 Child Care Centers Parks and/or Recreation Facilities Health Facilities Parking Facilities Abused/Neglect Facili:~ies AIDS Facilities Other Public Facilities Public Improvements Solid Waste Improvements Flood Drain Improvements Water Improvements Street Improvements Sidewalk Improvements Sewer Improvements Asbestos Removal Other Infrastructure Improvements Other Other 25 Community Development Priority Need Cate~lory Ii Actual Number of Persons Served Public Services Senior Services 806 Handicapped Services Youth Services Transportation Services 99 Substance Abuse Services Employment Training Crime Awareness Fair Housing Counseling 21 Tenant/Landlord Counseling 3224 Child Care Services Health Services Other Public Services (homeless assistance)237~ Accessibility Needs Other Community Development Energy Efficiency Improvements Lead Based Paint/Hazards Code Enforcement Other Note: Numbers reflect persons assisted with CDBG funds o(aly compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) of 1990, this document may be provided in other accessible formats. For information contact: Fred Herman, ADA Director, City of Palo Alto 250.Hamilton Avenue, 5th Floor * Palo Alto, CA 94301 415/329-2550 (voice) ### 26 Community Development 2. Summary of Accomplishments with Palo Alto General Fund Money Allocated through the Human Service Resource Allocation Process (HSRAP) The City of Palo Alto Human Service Resource Allocation Process (HSRAP) provided $1,024,888 in General Fund dollars to the following agencies for services to lower income elderly, disabled or special needs residents of Palo Alto during the 1997/98 fiscal year. Adolescent Counseling Services $65,178 for on-campus counseling program American Red Cross $22,098 for homeless prevention services and single parent support programs ¯ Community Association for Rehabilitation $28,736 for program support services for children with disabilities and their families La Comida de California $6,307 for senior nutrition program Mayview Community Health Center $ 8,853 for health care services for low income, homeless, and uninsured persons YWCA Rape Crisis Center $10,260 for the rape crisis center and the teen assault prevention project Alliance for Community Care $6,975 for casework counseling of mentally ill homeless Palo Alto Community Child Care $374,338 for subsidized child care for income eligible residents Peninsula Area Information & Referral Services $54,233 for tenant/landlord mediation services Peninsula Center for the Blind & Visually Impaired $9,803 for rehabilitation services for residents with visual disabilities Second Harvest Food Bank $6,284 for Operation Brown Bag (groceries for income eligible seniors) Senior Coordinating Council $381,662 for services and programs for seniors Social Advocates for Youth $6,895 for the CASA Say Teen Shelter and the teen "Safe Place" Program / Support Network for Battered Women $23,295 for shelter, counseling and other services for battered women and their children Mid Peninsula Access Corp. $5,000 to provide informational Spanish language videotaped forums. YMCA of the Mid-PeninsulaS7,894 for a swimming program for disadvantaged children. Youth Community Services $12,077 for a program teaching leadership skills and community service to area middle and high school students. In addition to the General Fund and CDBG money described above, the City also provided $25,000 to the new Clara Mateo Homeless Shelter for first year start-up and operational costs. This donation was made from a portion of a gift to the City to be used for homeless services on behalf of a local family. 27 Community Development 3. Actions Taken to Affirmatively Further Fair Housing The City contracts with Mid-Peninsula Citizens for Fair Housing (MCFH) to promote equal opportunity in housing for all persons protected by federal and State fair housing laws. Services include information and referral, community outreach and education, discrimination complaint checking and investigation, legal referrals and assistance in resolving complaints. The City also contracted with Peninsula Area Information and Referral Service (PAAIRS) for tenant/landlord information, referral and mediation services. Unfortunately, by the middle of the fiscal year, PAAIRS was unable to complete their contract commitment. The City subsequently contracted with Project Sentinel for mediation and tenant/landlord services. Palo Alto’s Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice conducted in February, 1996 indicated a lack of affordable housing options for persons of low and moderate income as an impediment. Housing discrimination was also identified, with cases based on familial status the most often reported. To further address these issues, the City has: Contracted with MCFH to complete a video regarding familial status discrimination in rental housing. The video was completed in September, 1998 and used as an educational outreach tool. It has been aired on the local cable access channel three times, and used in conjunction with other educational presentations. Sponsored a Landlord Workshop for owners of real property on March 21, 1998. The workshop focused on Palo Alto’s one year lease ordinance, the City’s mediation program and other housing issues. Targeted a majority of its CDBG and local housing funds to increasing/preserving the supply of housing affordable to persons with lower incomes and/or special needs (Alma Place, Page Mill Court, Margarita House, Ventura Apartments, Sheridan Apartments). MCFH conducted, and collaborated on a number of community forums and presentations regarding discrimination issues, as summarized below: Participated in Northem Califomia Fair Housing Coalition Meetings Sponsored an attorneys’ dinner to exchange information on fair housing cases and legislative issues Attended Tri-County Apartment Association Trade Show and distributed brochures Collaborated with Project Sentinel, Mental Health Advocacy Project and Asian Law Alliance in organizing an accessibility workshop at Stanford University Presented information emphasizing the connections between fair housing agencies and police departments to the Bay Area Hate Crime Investigators Association. Particip,ated in a community television program dedicatedto "The Housing Crisis" 28 Community Development Participated in a workshop sponsored by Kaleidoscope of Cultures regarding housing discrimination. Participated in a panel discussion at San Jose’s Housing Forum on homelessness prevention and the lack of housing in the Bay Area. During fiscal year 1997/98, MCFH investigated 21 cases of reported discrimination. Six of the cases (29%) related to familial status (presence of a minor child); five cases (24%) to a physical disability; four cases (19%) to race, three cases (14%) to mental disability; two cases (9%) to national origin; and one case (5%) to age. Of the cases received, 15 (71%) had a positive outcome: successful conciliation, referred to attorney, or counseled/assisted; two cases (10%) had negative outcomes: unable to test, unsuccessful conciliation; and four cases (19%) are pending The City has an affirmative marketing policy and procedures which apply to housing funded with federal assistance through the City. Mid Peninsula Housing Coalition conducted an affirmative marketing campaign and outreach activities for initial tenant selection for Page Mill Court Apartments for developmentally disabled adults. 4. Actions Taken to Address Needs of Homeless Persons a. The Santa Clara County Collaborative on Housing and Homelessness City staff continued to attend Santa Clara County Homeless Collaborative’s Steering Committee meetings. The Collaborative is a partnership of representatives of the County, key cities, service and shelter providers, affordable housing providers and other nonprofit groups throughout the Santa Clara Valley. The mission of the Collaborative is to position the region to attract new and existing federal funds for housing and homelessness and to improve the effective and efficient use of these funds. A new county-wide homeless survey is being Organized for completion in the 1998/99 program year.. City staff assisted three local non-profit agencies in a collaborative HUD McKinney Homeless grant application. The application, from Mountain View Community Services, Urban Ministry of Palo Alto, and Clara-Mateo Shelter, requests money to hire ~dditional staff (casework counselors, mental health workers, and employment counselors), maintain additional transitional housing beds and other activities to aid the area’s homeless population. b. Emergency Urban Ministry_ Drop-In Center Operation. City staff assisted the Urban Ministry of Palo Alto (UMPA) in securing a temporary location for their morning drop-in center activities after severe storm and flooding occurred in Palo Alto in the early part of February, 1998. Flooding which caused a sewerbackup and bacterial contamination forced the closure of the Red Cross facility and displaced UMPA services. Due to the vital nature of the services provided by Urban Ministry to their clients, especially in times of such critical weather conditions, the City Council passed an emergency ordinance on February 23, 1998 to assist Urban Ministry. The ordinance allowed UMPA to provide services in a specified location in the parking lot of the Cal Train Depot for a period of 120 days. Staff facilitated an agreement with 29 Community Development Valley Transportation Agency, Urban Ministry, and Stanford University, to allow temporary occupancy of the site. The City also provided $3,722. in additional General Fund money for emergency expenses. UMPA was able to move back into their location at the Red Cross on June 15, 1998. c. Housing and Shelter Clara-Mateo Alliance Homeless Shelter ¯ On July 7, 1997, the new.bed Clara-Mateo Alliance Homeless Shelter opened on the grounds of the Veterans Administration (VA) Hospital in Menlo Park. The 45-bed shelter sits on the border between southem San Mateo County and northern Santa Clara County. An advisory committee, comprised of representatives of the VA, Santa Clara and San Mateo Counties, and the Cities of paloAlto, Menlo Park, and Redwood City, oversees the project. The Salvation Army was selected as the service provider. The VA provides an in- kind contribution of the facility, a vacant wing of an existing hospital, as well as the costs of insurance, utilities, and maintenance. The shelter, which officially opened for clients on July 14, 1997, provided 458 persons with shelter during the fiscal year. 410 of the clients were male (90%), which 48 (10%) were female. 432 of the shelter clients were single individuals, eight were couples, and three were families with children. Veterans comprised 79% of the population served, while non-veterans comprised 21%. 49% of shelter participants claimed no income at the time of admission, 20% were employed, and ~he balance received some sort of benefit such as unemployment insurance, disability, SSI etc. Emergency Housing Consortium (EHC) Reception Center Emergency Housing Consortium successfully opened their new Reception Center facility in November, 1997. The facility will be used as year-round shelter for homeless persons with a transitional housing component for single individuals with physical, emotional or mental disabilities, and a transitional component for up to ten families. Although the shelter is located in South San Jose at 2011 Little Orchard Street, it is intended to serve persons from North Santa Clara County as well as other areas. The Reception Center provides 125 year-round shelter beds, including emergency shelter and beds for transitional living, but has the capacity to expand to 250 beds during the cold weather months of November through March. The City of Palo Alto contributed $50,000 in CDBG funds for rehabilitation of the facility. The entire facility is ADA accessible. During fiscal 1997/98 the Reception Center provided 1,639 individuals with shelter and transitional housing, 14 of them had a last significant address in Palo Alto. 30 Community Development d. Employment Opportunities The City of Palo Alto Office of Human Services continued the homeless worker program during fiscal year 1997/98. The City Manager’s discretionary funds were used to provide short-term City employment opportunities to homeless workers for two 12 week periods. Jobs were created in City departments such as Public Works, Facilities Maintenance and Community Services. Applicants were interviewed and screened by City staff, a temporary employment agency, and Urban Ministry, the local provider of homeless services. Selected workers were provided with food vouchers, a voucher for clothing from the local Goodwill, and bicycle transportation. Workers were helped with resumes and skill training. The Urban Ministry continues to operate an employment program for their clients. This includes the "Homeless Garden" project which produces vegetables and flowers for sale to local farmers markets, and restaurants, and the Lawn Service Project which provides gardening services to local businesses and residences. e. Homeless Services In total, the City provided $188,500 in funding for the following services targeted to benefit persons who are very low income or homeless: Urban Ministry. $58,000 in CDBG funds to the Urban Ministry for the provision of homeless support services: shelter, emergency food, and casework counseling and referral. Emergency Housing Consortium $11,000 in CDBG funds for emergencY shelter and supportive services provided by the Sunnyvale Armory, the Transitional Housing Program, the Santa Clara Family Living Center, the Monterey Glen Inn Supportive Housing Program, and the Reception Center. Palo Alto Housing Corporation - Barker Hotel Counseling $5,000 in CDBG funds for casework/counseling sessions for the low income tenants of the Single Room Occupancy Barker Hotel. Man3, of the tenants were previously homeless, and the counseling sessions help them maintain their housing stabd~ty. American Red Cross $10,047 in City General Funds were provided to the Red Cross for Homeless Prevention Services. Mayview Community Clinic $8853 in City General Funds were provided to the Clinic to provide health care and education for male adults and families who are low income, uninsured or homeless. Alliance for Community Care $6,975 in City General Funds were provided for casework management and mental health counseling for Palo Alto’s homeless population. 31 Community Development ¯Social Advocates for Youth $6,895 in City General Funds were provided for the youth shelter and Safe Place Program for homeless youth. City’s Seasonal Jobs Program $47,830 in General Funds were used to sponsor the temporary employment program for homeless workers. Clara Mateo Shelter/Salvation Army $25,000 in funding gifted to the City by a private donor for use on projects to aid the homeless. 5. Other Actions a. Lead-Based Paint Hazard Reduction The City housing and CDBG staff provide information and referral to property owners, developers and nonprofits rehabilitating older housing about lead-based paint hazards. There is not any information which indicates that lower income households are more likely to be exposed to lead paint hazards in Palo Alto than are families in the general population [see the discussion in the City’s Consolidated Plan]. The City requires any housing to be rehabilitated with City financial assistance to be inspected for the existence of lead paint and lead paint hazards. The City will provide financial assistance for the abatement of such hazards in units rehabilitated with City funding. The City requires that all tenants and applicants for rental housing assisted with federal funding be given notice of the possible presence of lead paint in buildings constructed prior to 1978. b. Intergovernmental Cooperation The City.ofPalo Alto has worked closely with neighboring cities and the County during the period to collaborate on area-wide solutions to issues and problems. City staff participates in the countywide Housing Bond Advisory Committee which oversees the Mortgage Credit Certificate program and all County bond financing, the Housing Trust Fund Committee which has been instrumental in creating a program to provide an ongoing source of money for affordable housing in Santa Clara County, and the Countywide Housing and Homeless Collaborative .which addresses the issues of homelessness in Santa Clara County as a whole. 6., Changes to Annual Action Plan There were no changes to the Community Development portion of the Annual Action Plan. Community Development C. Assessment of Performance 1. Evaluation of Progress in Meeting Annual Community Development Goals The City has made significant progress toward meeting its community development goals in the past year, especially in the area of homeless services and more emergency shelter beds. The opening of the Clara-Mateo Shelter Alliance, Emergency Housing Consortium’s Reception Center, and the Alma Place Single Room Occupancy Apartments have created significant opportunities for a number of motivated individuals to move out of homelessness. These efforts contribute significantly to a local continuum of care. All of the public service agencies funded with CDBG funds address the identified needs of providing a variety of human services to low- income, at risk populations. 2. Evaluation of Progress in Meeting Overall Goals for the Period 1995-2000 The City continues to make progress in meeting its identified community development goals. The goal of providing more services directly related to the housing needs of low income persons is being achieved in light of the difficulties faced in this area by lower income renters. A housing services directory was created and is being updated annually by PAHC to further address this need. Public facilities are being modernized and made accessible (CAR- Swim Center accessibility project, and Ventura Community Facility upgrades). All of the CDBG funds have been used to address the city’s top priority housing and homeless goals. The City’s greatest need is affordable housing and the bulk of the CDBG funds have been used to preserve or increase the ¯ affordable housing stock. The City pursued all resources it indicated it would, provided requested certifications of consistency for HUD programs in a fair and impartial manner, and did not hinder Consolidated Plan implementation by action or willful inaction. 3. Barriers to Fulfilling Strategies The increased cost of rental and ownership housing has created a housing crisis for many local residents. Many residents’over the past year were forced into homelessness or forced to leave the area as the result of dramatic increases in rental rates. People already in shelters or sub-standard housing find it increasingly difficult to improve their living situations, and tend to stay in the shelters or sub=standard housing longer. The increase in the cost of residential real estate has also kept many renters from making the step to first time home buyers. 4. Timely Expenditure of Funds The City is above the 1.5 times the annual grant spending requirement of the CDBG program. Although we have worked diligently to reduce the overall letter of credit balance by completing as many outstanding projects as possible, and by re-allocating unspent funds at the first available opportunity, we have not met the target. The high cost of land and housing in this area requires that a substantial amount of funding be available to pursue a housing project. It is difficult to 33 ~ommunity Development remain in compliance with the HUD expenditure performance standard while attempting to save enough money to accomplish a substantial housing project. The expected acquisition of the sheridan Apartments by the end of calendar year 1998, wil! once again bring the City into compliance with this numerical requirement. 5. Adjustments or Improvements to Community Development Strategies No adjustments to the community development strategies have been identified at this time. 34 PART IV. APPENDIX 35 AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION IN THE PALO ALTO WEEKLY 703 High St., Palo Alto, California 94301 . (415} 326-8210 IN THE SUPERIOR CQtJ’RT OF THE STATE OF CAUFORNIA FOR THE COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA 40. STATE OF CALIFORNIA ~.0UNTY OF SANTA CLARA the t~der’.,iOned..,;tale II~I I am, and at ~ a~ ~t~ ~. l~t I ~ ~ uch ~ Su~ ~ud of t~ ~ ~ 2, 1~2. ~ ~ P41~: that ~l~ copy, was ~t ~ ~ not ~ ~t~ b ~k-~ ~ ~ ~ t~n dect~e uncle, ~ of pedury that tt’~ forego~O i~ tn-’o ~nd cea’ect. NOTICE OF PUBLIC REVIEW AND COMMENT PERIOD FOR PALO ALTOIS CONSOLIDATED ANNUAL PERFORMANCE AND EVALUATION REPORT FOR THE PERIO’D JULY 1j 1997 TO. JUNE 30~ 1998 The City of Palo Afro has completed a Draft Consolidated Annual Performance and Evaluation Report (CAPER) for the period Jul,/1, 1997 through June 30, 1998. Preparation and sub?nittal of the report is required by the federal government, Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUO), in order for the City (and nonprot’rl organizations within the City) to apply .for f~deral commur~ity development and housing assistance funds such as Community Development Block Grant (COBG) and HOME funds. The CAPER replaces the previously required COE]G Grantee Performance Report, and the Annual Performance Report for the Housing Affordability Strategy of the Consolidated Plan. The CAPER provides a summed/of the resources’available and the programmatic accomplishments" in affordable housing end community development during the 1997-1998 fiscal year; the status of actions taken during the year to implement the strategies and objectives described in the City’s Consolidated Plan for the I:;erlod July 1, 1995 to June 30, 2 .(~O0;.and the progress made during the past year in addressing identified priority needs and ob}ectives. Public Review and comment Period: The draft CAPER will be available for public review and comment for a 15-day period, beginning on Monday, September 14, 1998 and concluding at 5:00 p.m. on Monday, September 28, 1998. Written comments may be submitted during the review period and should be sent to the City of Palo .A~to, Department of Planning and Community Environment, Attention: Su:’anne Bayley, 250 Hamilton Avenue, 5th Floor, Palo AJto, CA 94301. To obtain a Copy of the Report: Copies are available at the Planning Division Counter, City Hall, 5th Floor, 250 Hamilton Ave., between 8:00 a.m -12:00 noon and 1:00 p.m.-4:00 p.m. or by telephoning 329-2441. For more information, contact S.uzanne 13ayley, CDBG Coordinator, at 329-2428. .. Page 24 ¯ Friday~-September 11, 1998 ~ Home and Real Estate ° Palo Nto Weekly CITY OF PALO ALTO SUMMARY OF CDBG FUNDING PRIORITIES FISCAL YEAR 1997/98 *Note: Priorities are shown in order of importance I.AFFORDABLE HOUSI_NG (Goal: 60% of Budget) A. NE_W__C_O_NS_T.R_U_CTION, CONVERSION_&. ADDIT[ON OF NEW UNITS Permanent housing for families ~vith children Other permanent housing including group homes, seniors, the disabled, shared housing, etc. Transitional housing with supportive services Permanent housing for the homeless or at-risk of homelessness B.P_ILESERVATION OF EXISTING~ LOWER INCOME RENTAL HOUSING Preservation of existing, .federally subsidized multi-family housing owned by profit motivated investors Acquisition and/or rehabilitation of’ existing multi-family rental .housing, including improvements to common areas Acquisition and/or rehabilitation of existing buildings for special needs populations including shared housing and group homes II.PUBLIC FACILITIES AND I~’ITROVEMENTS (Goal: 5% ’of Budget) Rehabilitation of existing facilities for use as shelters for the homeless or other special needs groups PUBLIC SERVICES (Goal: 15% of Budget) Services directly related to the housing needs of low income persons Homeless shelter operating costs and the provision of auxiliary or related services Services which address other needs of low income, elderly or special needs persons AD~M~INISTRATION (Goal: 20% of Budget). 1.Fair housing education, information, referral, advocacy, counseling and complaint resolution 2.CDBG program administration and planning costs Department of Housing & Urban Development COVER ~AGE Office of Community Planning Grantee Performance Report Community Development Block Grant Program OMB Approval No. 2502-0006(exp.~3/31/93) PROGRAM YEAR ENDI2. GRANT NUMBER 06/30/98 I 3.NAME & ADDRESS OF GRANTEE City of Palo Alto 250 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA 94301- 5.NAME AND TELEPHONE NUMBER OF PERSON MOST FAMILIAR WITH INFORMATION IN THIS REPORT 14. NAME & ADDRESS OF C. D. DIRECTOR I Ms. Anne C. MooreDept. of Planning and Community Environment 250 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA 94301- 6.NAME AND TELEPHONE NUMBER OF PERSON TO CONTACT ABOUT DISCLOSURES REQUIRED BY THE HUD REFORM ACT OF 1989 Ms. Suzanne Bayley Ms. Suzanne Bayley (650)329-2428 (650)329-2428 7. Have these Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds been used: a.to meet the community development program objectives in the final statement for this program year? If no, explain, in narrative attachment, how: (I) the uses did not relate to program objectives; and (2) future activities or program objectives might change as a result of this year’s experiences. b.exclusively to either benefit low-and-moderate (low/mod) income persons, aid in the prevention or elimination of slums or blight, or meet community development needs having a particular urgency? If no, explain in a narr.ative attachment. Yes Yes c. such that the grantee has complied with, or will comply with, its certification to expend not less than 70% of its CDBG funds, during the specified period, on activities which benefit low/mod income persons? If no, explain in a narrative attachment.Yes 8. Were citizen comments about this report and/or the CDBG program received? If yes, attach a summary.No 9. Indicate how the Grantee Performance Report was made available to the public: a. BY PRINTED NOTICE (name & date)See Attached b. BY PUBLIC HEARING (place & date)See Attached c. OTHER See Attached i0. The following forms must be completed and attached: a.’ Activity Summary, form HUD 4949.2 d. 1-4-1 Replacement,form HUD 4949.4 b. Activity Summary, form HUD 4949.2a e. Rehabilitation,form HUD 4949.5 c. Financial Summary, form HUD 4949.3 f. Displacement,form HUD 4949.6 This form may be reproduced form HUD-4949.1(II/20/92) On office copiers ref Handbook 6510.2 Previous editions are obsolete Retain this record for 3 years.Run Time: 09:11:46 page 1 of 30 Run Date: 10/02/98 Department of Housing & Urban Development COVER PAGE Office of Community Planning Grantee Performance Report Community Development Block Grant Program OMB Approval No. 2502-0006(exp. 3/31/93) I hereby certify that: This report contains all required items identified above; Federal assistance made available under the Community Development Block Grant Program (CDGB) has not been utilized to reduce substantially the amount of local financial support for community development activities below the level of such support prior to the start of the most recently completed CDBG program year; all the information stated herein, as well as any information provided in the accompaniment herewith, is true and accurate. Warning: HUD will prosecute false claims and statements. Conviction may result in criminal and/or civil penalties. (18U.S.C.1001,1010,1012;U.S.C.3729,3802) Typed Name & Title of Authorized Official Representative June Fleming City Manager ISignature IDate This form may be reproduced form HUD-4949.1(II/20/92) on office copiers ref Handbook 6510.2 Previous editions are obsolete Retain this record for 3 years.Run Time: 09:11:46 page 2 of 30 Run Date: 10/02/98 COVER PAGE U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development Grantee Performance Report Office of Community Planning & Development Community Development Block Program OMB Approval No. 2502-0006(Exp. 3/31/93) 9a.PRINTED NOTICE: A notice regarding the CAPER was published in the Palo Alto Weekly on Friday, September ii, 1998 9b.PUBLIC HEARING: A Public Hearing was held on October 9, 1997 to determine needs. A Public Hearing was held on April 7, 1998 to discuss allocation recommendations. A Public Hearing was held on May ii, 1998 to determine funding allocations. 9C.OTHER: The notice regarding the availability of the CAPER was mai!ed to an interested list of individuals. This form may be reproduced form HUD-4949.1(II/20/92) on office copiers ref Handbook 6510.2 Previous editions are obsolete Retain this record for 3 years.Run Date: 10/02/98 page 3 of 30 Run Time: 09:11:46 oo U 0 o o ~oo o o 121 d o ¯ 121 ~ oo~ 0 oo o o 0 ¯ ’8 o o 0 o N 00,4 ooo o m ~’ oa~ o o ¯ o o o g o o Or-- ~ oo~ o o ~ o~-~ o Financial Summary Grantee Performance Report Community Development Block Program U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development Office of Community Planning & Development OMB Approval No. 2506-0006(Exp. 3/31/93) i. Name of Grantee I 2. Grant Number I 3. Reporting Period City of Palo Alto I B97MC060020 I From 07/01/97 To 06/30/98 Part I: Summary of CDBG Resources i. Unexpended CDBG funds at end of previous period 2. Entitlement Grant from form HUD-7082 3. Surplus Urban Renewal Funds 4. Section 108 Guaranteed Loan Funds(Principal Amount) 5. Program income received by: a. Revolving Funds b. Other (identify below) Grantee (Column A) 0.00 40,518.00 Subrecipient (Column B) 0.00 21,365.00 Total Program Income (sum of columns a and b) 6. Prior Period Adjustments (if negative, enclose in brackets) 7. Total CDBG Funds available for use during this report period Part II: Summary of CDBG Expenditures 8. Total expenditures reported on Activity Summary 9. Total expended for Planning & Administration 168,049.00 10o Amount subject to Low/Mod Benefit Calculation 465,971.50 ii. CDBG funds used for Section 108 principal & interest payments 12. Total expenditures (line 8 plus line ii) 13. Unexpended balance (line 7 minus line 12) 1,436,942.00 782,000.00 0.00 0.00 61,883.00 0.00 2,280,825.00 634,020.50 0.00 634,020.50 1,646,804.50 Part III: Low/Mod credit This Reporting Period ~14. Total Low/Mod credit for multi-unit housing expenditures 15. Total from all other activities qualifying as low/mod expenditures 16. Total (line 14 plus line 15) 17. Percent benefit to low/mod persons (line 16 divided by line i0 this reporting period) Part IV: Low/Mod Benefit for Multi-Year Certifications (Complete only if certification period includes prior years) Program years (PY) covered in certification PY 97 PY 18. Cumulative net expenditures subject to program benefit calculation 19.Cumulative expenditures benefiting low/mod persons 20.Percent benefit to low/mod persons (line 19 divided by line 18) PY 56,518.00 405,276,50 461,794.50 99.1% 0.00 0.00 0.0% This form may be reproduced form HUD-4949.3(II/24/92) on local office copiers ref Handbook 6510.2 Previous editions are obsolete Retain this record for 3 years.Run Date: 10/02/98 page 24 of 30 Run Time: 11:04:16 Financial Summary U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development Grantee Performance Report Office of Community Pla~ning & Development Community Development Block Program OMB Approval No. 2506-0006(Exp. 3/31/93) Part V: For Public Service (PS) Activities Only: Public Service CAP Calculation 21. Total PS expenditures from column h, form HUD 4949.2a 22, Total PS unliquidated obligations from column r,~ from HUD 4949.2a 23. Sum of line 21 and line 22 24. Total PS unliquidated obligations reported at the end of the previous reporting period. 25. Net obligations for public services (line 23 minus line 24) 26. Amount of Progra~ Income received in the preceding program year 27. Entitlement Grant Amount (from line 2) 28. Sum of lines 26 and 27 29. Percent funds obligatedfor Public Service Activities (line 25 divided by line 28) 132,300.00 0,00 132,300.00 0.00 132,300.00 234,927.00 782,000.00 1,016,927.00 13.0 % Part VI: Planning and Program .Administration Cap Calculation 30. Amount subject to planning and adminstrative cap (grant amount from line2 plus line 5) 31, Amount expended for Planning & Administration (from line 9 above) 32. Percent funds expended (line 31 divided by line 30) 843,883.00 16~,o4~,oo 19.9 % LINE i:UNEXPENDED FUNDS NARRATIVE reconciling difference LINE 5a: PROGRAM INCOME NARRATIVE $40,518.00 from Housing Improvement Program (HIP) loan payments and loan payoffs. $21,365 from palo Alto Housing Corporation (PAHC) from various rental projects acquired or improved with CDBG funds. Other Program Income ACtivity NO, I GranteeDescriptionI I Subrecipient *HIP ILow Interest Loans I 40,518.001 0.00 IVarious Rental Properties I 0.001 21,365.00 Total I 40,518.001 21,365.00 This form may be reproduced"form HUD-4949.3(II/24/92) on local office copiers ref Handbook 6510.2 Previous editions are obsolete Retain this record for 3 years.Run Date: 10/02/98 page 25 of 30 Run Time: 11:04:16 Financial Summary Grantee Performance Report Community Development Block Program U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development Office of Community Planning & Development OMB Approval No. 2506-0006(Exp. 3/31/93) Activity Numbers Starting with "*" are old Activities not on this program year’s Activity Summary. GPR HANDBOOK APPENDIX 3: ITEM D UNRECONCILED DIFFERENCE EXPLANATION Difference due to rounding. GPR HANDBOOK APPENDIX 3: ITEM E CALCULATION OF BALANCE OF UNPROGRAMMED FUNDS D.RECONCILIATION OF LINE(S) OF CREDIT (LOC) AND CASH BALANCES TO UNEXPENDED BALANCE OF CDBG FUNDS SHOWN ON GPR Complete the following worksheet and submit with the attachment: UNEXPENDED BALANCE SHOWN ON GPR (line 13 of HUD 4949.3) 1,646,804.50 ADD: LOC balance(s) as of GPR Date Cash on Hand: Grantee Program Account Subrecipients Program Accounts Revolving Fund Cash Balances Section 108 Accounts (in contract) 1,650,804.69 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 SUBTRACT: Grantee CDBG Program Liabilities (include any reimbursements due to the Grantee from program funds) Subrecipient CDBG Program Liabilities (same instructions as above) 0.00)* 0.00)* TOTAL RECONCILING BALIhNCE: UNRECONCILED DIFFERENCE: When grantees or subrecipients operate their programs on a reimbursement basis, any amounts due to the grantees or subrecipients should be included in the Program Liabilities. 1,650,804.69 -4,000.19 This form may be reproduced form HUD-4949.3(II/24/92) on local office copiers ref Handbook 6510.2 Previous editions are obsolete Retain this record for 3 years.Run Date: 10/02/98 .page 26 of 30 Run Time: 11:04:16 Financial Summary U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development Grantee PerformanceReport Office of Community Planning & Development Community Development Block Program ~ OMB Approval No. 2506-0006(Exp. 3/31/93) This form may be reproduced form HUD-4949.3(II/24/92) on local office copiers ref Handbook 6510.2 Previous editions are obsolete Retain this record for 3 years.Run Date: 10/02/98 page 27 of 30 Run Time: 11:04:16 U.S. Department of Housing & Urban Development Office of Community Planning and Development REHABILITATION ACTIVITIES Grantee Performance Report Community Development Block Grant Program OMB Approval Noo 2506-0006(exp. 3/31/93) Name of Grantee I Grant Number I Program Year City of Palo Alto I B97MC060020 I From 07/01/97 To 06/30/98 All grantees must submit this form,I Single-unit I Multi-unit whether or not they have CDBG funded I Activities I Activities rehabilitati°n~programs-I (i Unit)I (2+ Units) I.Check box only if granteehas no CDBG rehabilitation activities: 2. Staffing: number of Staff-Years 0.0 0.0 (FTE staff years to tenths) 3. ~Current Program Year Expenditures: Activity delivery costs from CDBG funds a. Staff costs: Amount expended in 2 above 0.00 0.00 b. Other direct.costs (not included in 4)0.00 0.00 4. Current Program Year Expenditures: For all projects (a+b+c below)0.00 0.00a. CDBG funds expended 0.00 0.00 b. Other public(Federal,State,local) funds exp’d.0.00 0.00 c. Private funds expended 0.00 0.00 5. Project/Units Rehabilitated/Committed a. Number of projects committed(multi-unit only)0 Projects b. Number of units committed 0 0 Units Units 6. Obligations: Amount obligated for projects/units committed in 5a and 5b 0.00 0.00 a. CDBG funds obligated 0.00 0.00b. Other public(Fed.,State, local) funds obligated 0.00 0.00c. Private funds obligated 0.00 0.00 7. Projects/Units Rehabilitated/Completed a. Number of projects completed(multi-unit only) b. Number of units completed 0 Projects 0 0 units Units 8. Cumulative Expenditures :0.00 0.00a. CDBG funds expended 0.00 0.00b. Other public (Federal, State, local) funds exp’ d.0.00 0.00 c. Private funds expended 0.00 0.00 Individuals may copy this form form HUD-4949.5(II/24/92). on office copiers as needed,ref. Handbook 6510.2 Previous Editions are Obsolete Retain this record for 3 years Run Date: 10/02/98 page 28 of 30 Run Time: 11:05:41 ~oO~ o