HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOUNCIL - AGENDA ITEM - 11/20/2007 - PUBLIC HEARING AND RESOLUTION 2007-104 APPROVING T ITEM NUMBER: 24
AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY DATE: November20, 2007
FORT COLLINS CITY COUNCIL STAFF: Ken Waldo
SUBJECT
Public Hearing and Resolution 2007-104 Approving the Programs and Projects That Will Receive
Funds from the Federal Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program and Home
Investment Partnership (HOME) Program Grants, and the City's Affordable Housing Fund.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends adoption of the Resolution. The CDBG Commission presents a list of
recommendations as to which programs and projects should receive funding.
FINANCIAL IMPACT
The Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program and Home Investment Partnership
(HOME)Program provide Federal funds from the Department of Housing and Urban Development
(HUD) to the City of Fort Collins which can be allocated to housing and community development
related programs and projects, thereby,reducing the demand on the City's General Fund Budget to
address such needs. City funds for this item have been appropriated as part of the Affordable
Housing Fund in December 2006.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Resolution will complete the fall cycle of the competitive process for allocating City financial
resources to affordable housing programs/projects and community development activities.
BACKGROUND
This Resolution establishes which programs and projects will receive funding with CDBG and
HOME funds for the FY 2007 Program year, which started on October 1, 2007, including the use
of Carry-over CDBG Entitlement Grant funds, Carry-over HOME funds, funds from the FY 2007
HOME Grant,funds from the HOME Community Housing Development Organization(CHDO)Set
Aside, HOME Program Income, and funds from the City's Affordable Housing Fund. The CDBG
Commission presents a list of recommendations as to which programs and projects should receive
funding.
November 20, 2007 -2- Item No. 24
The following table summarizes the amount and sources of available funds:
AMOUNT SOURCE
$361,920 FY 2006 CDBG Reprogrammed Funds
312,937 FY 2007 CDBG Unprogrammed Funds
120,187 FY 2006 HOME Reprogrammed Funds
$172,499 FY 05/17Y 06 HOME CHDO Reprogrammed Funds
480,792 FY 2007 HOME Grant
96,139 FY 2007 HOME CHDO Funds
50,000 FY 2007 HOME Program Income
83,000 FY 2006 Affordable Housing Fund
133,000 FY 2007 Affordable Housing Fund
$1,810,474 Total Funding Available
Reprogrammed funds are funds returned to the City from projects that were previously allocated
funding but the project failed to materialize. Unprogrammed funds are from previous grants that
have yet to be allocated to specific projects. HOME Community Housing Development
Organization(CHDO)set aside funds represent a portion ofthe HOME grant that must be earmarked
for CHDO agencies.
The CDBG Commission presents recommendations as to which programs and projects should
receive funding from the available funding sources presented above. The following tables present
the allocations recommended by the Commission to the City Council within each major category:
Affordable Housing
Applicant Funding Commission's Unfunded
Project/Program Request Recommendation Balance
HO-1 City of Fort Collins— $250,000 $250,000 $0
Home Buyer Assistance
HO-2 Fort Collins Housing $14,613 $0 $14,613
Corporation—First Step
Expansion- Administration
TO-3 Fort Collins Housing $192,144 $0 $192,144
Corporation—First Step
Expansion
HO-4 Neighbor-to-Neighbor $244,866 $244,866 $0
— Coachlight Driveway
Parking Lot Repairs &
Improvements
Total $701,623 $494,866 $206,757
All funding recommendations in the Affordable Housing category are in the form of
a"Due on Sale Loan + 5% Simple Interest Loan."
November 20, 2007 -3- Item No. 24
Public Facility
Applicant Funding Commission's Unfunded
Project/Program Request Recommendation Balance
PF-1 City of Fort Collins— $55,671 $55,671 $0
Crossroads Safehouse:
Facility Safety Rehabilitation
The funding recommendation in the Public Facilities category is in the form of a
"Due on Sale Loan+ 5% Simple Interest Loan."
A summary ofthe Commission's funding recommendations by category is presented in the following
table:
Recommended Funding % of Total Cate ory
$494,866 89.9% Affordable Housing
$55,671 10.1% Public Facilities
$550,537 100.0% Total Allocated to Programs and Projects
The CDBG Commission has recommended that$550,537(30.4%)of the available funding amount
of$1,810,474 be allocated leaving a balance of$1,259,937(69.6%)from all of the funding sources
to be carried over and made available for allocation in the 2008 spring cycle of the competitive
process. The following table summarizes the utilization of funds from all sources.
Recommended Funding % of Total Category
$550,537 30.4% Allocated to Programs and Projects
$1,259,937 69.6% Carry-over to 2008 Spring Cycle
$1 810 474 100.0% Total Funds Available
ATTACHMENTS
1. Background and Summary of the CDBG Commission's Recommendations for Funding.
2. Background Information on the Competitive Process.
3. Affordable Housing Board's List of Priority Projects.
4. Background Information on the CDBG and HOME Federal Programs.
5. CDBG Commission's Comments on Proposal.
6. Formulation of Funding Recommendations Session.
7. PowerPoint presentation.
ATTACHMENT 1
BACKGROUND AND SUMMARY OF CDBG COMMISSION'S
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FUNDING
At the November 20, 2007, regular City Council meeting, the Council will be conducting a public
hearing and consider the adoption of a resolution establishing which programs and projects will
receive funding with Community Development Block Grant (CDBG), Home Investment
Partnership (HOME), Affordable Housing Program funds for the FY 2007-2008 Program year.
The resolution establishing which programs and projects will receive funds represents the
culmination of the fall cycle of the Competitive Process approved in January 2000 by the Council
for the allocation of the City's financial resources to affordable housing programs/projects and
community development activities. Additional background material about the Competitive
Process is included in Attachment 2.
Since early January of this year, the CDBG Commission and members of the City staffs
Affordable Housing Team have conducted public hearings to assess community development and
housing needs in Fort Collins, conducted technical assistance training workshops for applicants,
and solicited applications for funding. The City's Affordable Housing Board reviewed the
written applications for affordable housing projects and forwarded a priority ranking of proposals,
as well as comments and questions, to the CDBG Commission. See Attachment 3 for a copy of
the Board's materials sent to the CDBG Commission. The CDBG Commission, in addition to
reviewing the written applications, personally interviewed each applicant, analyzed the
applications, and formulated a list of recommendations to the City Council as to which programs
and projects should receive funding.
The Competitive Process established refined criteria to determine priorities between proposals
received by the City. The ranking criteria are divided into five major categories. Each category is
given a total number of points that has been weighed according to its importance with respect to
local and federal priorities. The five major categories are:
1. ImpactBenefit
2. Need/Priority
3. Feasibility
4. Leveraging Resources
5. Capacity and History
The Impact/Benefit criteria provide greater rewards to proposals that target lower income groups.
The Need/Priority criteria help assure the proposal meets adopted City goals and priorities. The
Feasibility criteria reward projects for timelines and documented additional funding. The
Leveraging Resources criteria reward proposals which will return funds to the City (loans) and for
their ability to leverage other resources; and, the Capacity and History criteria help gage an
applicant's ability to do the project and reward applicants who have completed successful projects
in the past (have good track records). A sample ranking sheet used to assist the CDBG
Commission and the Affordable Housing Board is also presented in Attachment 2.
1
The Commission also considered the funding guidelines contained in the Priority Affordable
Housing Needs and Strategies report adopted by the Council on July 20, 2004. These guidelines
include:
• HOME funds should generally be allocated as follows: 90% for Housing projects
and 10% for Program Administration. HUD HOME Program regulations also
require the City to set aside 15% for Community Housing Development
Organization (CHDO) projects and allow an allocation of 5% for CHDO
operations;
• CDBG funds should generally be allocated as follows: 65% for Housing projects;
15% for Public Services, and the balance for Public Facilities and Program
Administration.
• funds allocated to housing should generally be divided as follows: 70% for rental
projects and 30% for homeownership opportunities; and
• the average subsidy should be $7,400 per unit, with relatively more funding to
projects producing housing for lower income families.
The CDBG and HOME Programs are ongoing grant administration programs funded by the
Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). The City of Fort Collins has received
CDBG Program funds since 1975 and HOME Program funds since 1994. The City is an
Entitlement recipient of CDBG funds and a Participating Jurisdiction recipient of HOME funds,
meaning the City is guaranteed a certain level of funding each year. The level of funding is
dependent on the total amount of funds allocated to the programs by Congress and on a formula
developed by HUD, which includes data on total population, minorities as a percentage of
population, income levels, housing stock conditions, etc. Additional background information on
the City's HOME and CDBG Programs is presented in Attachment 4.
AVAILABLE FUNDS
The following table summarizes the amount and sources of available funds:
AMOUNT SOURCE
$361,920 FY 2006 CDBG Reprogrammed Funds
312,937 FY 2007 CDBG Unprogrammed Funds
120,187 FY 2006 HOME Reprogrammed Funds
$172,499 FY 05/FY 06 HOME CHDO Reprogrammed Funds
480,792 FY 2007 HOME Grant
96,139 FY 2007 HOME CHDO Funds
50,000 FY 2007 HOME Program Income
83,000 FY 2006 Affordable Housing Fund
133,000 FY 2007 Affordable Housing Fund
$1,810,474 Total Funding Available
2
SELECTION PROCESS
The selection process for the City's FY 20076-2008 Competitive Process began on January 11,
2007, when the CDBG Commission held a public hearing to obtain citizen input on community
development and affordable housing needs. The City Planning and Community Development
office placed legal advertisements in local and regional newspapers starting in July to solicit
requests for housing and community development projects for FY 2007-2008. The application
deadline was Thursday August 16, 2007. At the close of the deadline the City received five (5)
applications requesting a total of approximately$757,294.
Copies of all applications were forwarded through the City Manager's office to the City Council
on September 6, 2007 and placed in the Council Office for review. Copies of the housing
applications were distributed to the Affordable Housing Board and copies of all applications were
distributed to the CDBG Commission.
On Thursday September 13 the Affordable Housing Board conducted a special meeting to review
the housing proposals and prepared a priority listing of applications to the CDBG Commission.
On Thursday September 27 the Commission met to hear presentations and ask clarification
questions from each applicant. The Commission then met on Thursday October 11 for the
purpose of preparing a recommendation to the City Council as to which programs and projects
should be funded for the FY 2007-2008 program year. At this meeting the Commission reviewed
the written applications, the applicant's verbal presentation, the information provided during the
question and answer session, and reviewed the performance of agencies who received funding in
other previous years. The Commission then worked on the formulation of their list of
recommendations.
CDBG COMMISSION'S LIST OF RECOMMENDATIONS
The Commission had to decide which applicants presented programs and projects which best fit
the City's needs, had to insure funding allocations were kept within HUD regulations, and
followed the funding guidelines contained in the Priority Affordable Housing Needs and
Strategies report.
Listed below is a summary of each applicant's initial request for funding and the Commission's
list of recommendations.
AFFORDABLE HOUSING APPLICATIONS
HO-1 CITY OF FORT COLLINS -HOME BUYER ASSISTANCE
Request: $250,000 (HOME Funds)
Recommendation: $250,000 ($120,187 FY 06 HOME Funds, $79,813 FY 07
HOME Funds, and $50,000 HOME Program Income)
This program is administered by the City Planning and Community Development Department and
provides zero-percent interest, deferred loans to eligible first-time homebuyers. A five percent fee
3
is added to the loan balance at the time of repayment. The assistance covers down payment and
closing costs to a maximum of$10,600 for households at 51%to 80% of Area Median Income.
Approximately 45 households will be assisted with the program this year.
HO-2 FORT COLLINS HOUSING AUTHORITY- FIRST STEP EXPANSION -
HOMELESS INDIVIDUALS MENTAL HEALTH AND SUBSTANCE ABUSE ISSUES:
ADMINISTRATION OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING FUNDS
Request: $14,613 (Affordable Housing Funds)
Recommendation: $0
Request for Administration funds from the Affordable Housing Fund for an expansion of the
existing First Step tenant-based rental assistance (TBRA)program targeting single homeless or
near homeless individuals with complex needs in conjunction with the Single Room Occupancy
(SRO) or Integrated Dual Disorders Treatment (IDDT) programs.
HO-3 FORT COLLINS HOUSING AUTHORITY- FIRST STEP EXPANSION -
HOMELESS INDIVIDUALS MENTAL HEALTH AND SUBSTANCE ABUSE ISSUES
Request: $192,144 (HOME Funds)
Recommendation: 0
FCHA proposes to expand its First Step transitional housing assistance program in order to
provide housing assistance for additional homeless and near homeless adults who have substance
abuse and mental health issues and who are willing to participate in treatment. This expansion
would supplement the existing First Step Program and the Single Room Occupancy(SRO)
program. This effort is in coordination with the Community Mental Health and Substance Abuse
Partnership of Larimer County with the Larimer Center for Mental Health (LCMH) as the
primary partner agency. LCMH has submitted a five-year grant application to the Federal
Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration(SAMHSA) for an Integrated Dual
Disorders Treatment (IDDT)program to serve this population. IDDT is an evidence-based
treatment approach which has been successful in serving the "Library Park" individuals in other
cities. If the SAMHSA grant is not successful, LCMH and the Partnership members are still
committed to serving this population and the housing piece is critical to people's success.
HO-4 NEIGHBOR TO NEIGHBOR COACHLIGHT PLAZA APARTMENTS
DRIVEWAY & PARKING LOT REPAIRS & IMPROVEMENTS
Request: $244,866 (HOME Funds)
Recommendation: $244,866 (CDBG Funds)
Neighbor to Neighbor (N2N) is seeking assistance to preserve existing affordable housing at
Coachlight Plaza Apartments, which has 68 project-based Section 8 units. In the past year, N2N
has begun work on Phase I of curb, gutter and sidewalk repairs to improve ADA accessibility and
4
neighborhood safety by adding cut-ins for wheelchair access and repairing cracked and damaged
sidewalks and curbs. N2N prioritized these safety and accessibility improvements in the first
phase of repairs to the sidewalks and curbs for their 2006 request, and is now seeking funds for
Phase II, which will include full asphalt replacement, the addition of speed bumps, scaling &
striping, and addition of signage to include handicapped parking, fire lane, no parking, speed
limit, and visitor parking.
PUBLIC FACILITY APPLICATIONS
PF-1 CITY OF FORT COLLINS, ON BEHALF OF CROSSROADS SAFEHOUSE:
CROSSROADS FACILITIES SAFETY REHABILITATION
Request: $55,671 (CDBG Funds)
Recommendation: $55,671 (CDBG Funds)
Crossroads Safehouse requests target safety and security issues for:
1. alarms for: a) 33 bedroom and upstairs windows,b) 6 windows in staff offices on the first
floor; and c) 2 basement windows;
2. an intercom system to notify of an intruder, explosion, flooding, danger or natural disaster,
including fire;
3. replacement of torn, uneven, waffling and dangerous first-floor carpeting with ADA-
appropriate flooring;
4. replacement of inadequate front door and adjacent unalarmed pane glass window;
5. four additional cameras that will make visible four currently invisible potential Safehouse
break-in locations;
6. exterior perimeter lighting, i.e., via photo cells; and
7. replacement of the existing security fence for the facility.
A summary of the Commission's funding recommendations by category is presented in the
following table:
Recommended Funding % of Total Category
$494,866 89.9% Affordable Housing
$55,671 10.1% Public Facilities
$550,537 100.0% Total Allocated to Programs and Projects
The CDBG Commission has recommended that $550,537 (30.4%) of the available funding
amount of$1,810,474 be allocated leaving a balance of$1,259,937 (69.6%) from all of the
funding sources to be carried over and made available for allocation in the 2008 spring cycle of
the competitive process. The following table summarizes the utilization of funds from all
sources.
Recommended Funding % of Total Category
$550,537 30.4% Allocated to Programs and Projects
$1,259,937 69.6% Carry-over to 2008 Spring (CDBG Funds)
$1,810,474 100.0% Total Funds Available
5
The CDBG Commission has recommended full funding for two (2) affordable housing proposals
and full funding for the one public facility proposal. The Commission has also recommended no
funding for two (2) affordable housing proposals. In the Commission's opinion, the two
applications recommended for full funding all fit the City's funding objectives, the selection
criteria, and the funding guidelines while the two applications recommended to not receive
funding did not meet the criteria. The Commission did not recommend funding for all
applications simply because there were sufficient funds to cover all requests.
The Commission's reasons for full or no funding are presented in Attachment 5.
The carry-over amount of$1,053,180 may seem high. However, staff has received information
indicating the Housing Authority and CARE Housing are preparing to submit proposals in the
2008 Spring cycle of the competitive process requesting over $2.2 million. The Authority and
CARE requests do not include potential amounts from Habitat for Humanity or Neighbor-to-
Neighbor, agencies that also traditionally apply to the City for funding assistance.
Attachment 6 contains information on how the Commission's session where they formulate their
funding recommendations was to be conducted.
6
ATTACHMENT
Background Information on the Competitive Process
for the Allocation of City Financial Resources
to Affordable Housing Programs/Projects
and Other Community Development Activities
hi February of 1999, the City Council approved the initial Priority Affordable Housing Needs
and Strategies report, which contained the following strategy:
Change from an administrative funding mechanism...to a competitive application process
for the Affordable Housing Fund.
Between September and November of 1999, a subcommittee consisting of members from the
Affordable Housing Board and the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Commission
met with staff to review issues and develop options for establishment of a Competitive Process.
In addition, the staff solicited ideas from existing affordable housing providers. The
subcommittee established the following Mission Statement for their work:
Develop a competitive application process and establish a set of shared criteria for the
allocation of the City's financial assistance resources to affordable housing
projects/programs that address the City's priority affordable housing needs.
Competitive Process
Five options for a Competitive Process were reviewed and discussed by the subcommittee. The
subcommittee reached a general consensus to support a Competitive Process that involved both
the Affordable Housing Board and the CDBG Commission. The option selected would have the
Affordable Housing Board providing recommendations to the City Council in regards to
affordable housing policy. In addition, the option would have the Affordable Housing Board
reviewing all affordable housing applications for CDBG, HOME and Affordable Housing funds.
The Board would then provide a priority listing of proposals to the CDBG Commission. The
CDBG Commission would then make the final recommendations to the City Council for funding.
Funding Cycles
The subcommittee also agreed that there should be two funding cycles per year, one in the spring
and the other in the fall. CDBG Program funds would be allocated in the spring to affordable
housing programs/projects and other community development activities (public services, public
facilities, etc.). HOME Program and Affordable Housing funds would be allocated in the fall
primarily to affordable housing programs/projects.
7
The staff and subcommittee agreed that overlaying the new process and cycles would be
heightened staff technical assistance to applicants. Both the subcommittee and staff recognize
that a semi-annual process will require additional meetings by both the CDBG Commission and
Affordable Housing Board, and will require more time from current City staff, and increase the
City Council's involvement.
Schedule
The subcommittee also discussed two alternative schedules for the funding cycles. The option
selected incorporates a spring cycle that starts in January and ends in May, and a fall cycle that
starts in July and ends in November.
Review Criteria
The subcommittee also discussed and agreed to a new set of review criteria to be used to rank
proposals. The criteria are divided into the following five major categories:
1. Impact/Benefit
2. Need/Priority
3. Feasibility
4. Leveraging Resources
5. Capacity and History
The Impact/Benefit criteria provide greater rewards to proposals that target lower income groups
and provide longer benefits. The Need/Priority criteria help assure the proposal meets adopted
City goals and priorities. The Feasibility criteria reward projects for timeliness and documented
additional funding. The Leveraging Resources criteria reward proposals which will return funds
to the City(loans) and for their ability to leverage other resources. And, the Capacity and History
criteria help gage an applicant's ability to do the project and reward applicants that have
completed successful projects in the past (have good track records). See next page for a detailed
criteria scoring sheet.
Application Forms
Three application forms have also been developed. One form for Housing proposals, one form
for Public Facility proposals, and one form for Public Service proposals.
City Council Adoption
On January 18, 2000, the City Council approved Resolution 2000-13, formally adopting the
Competitive Process for the allocation of City financial resources to affordable housing
programs/projects and community development activities and the component parts discussed
above.
8
RANKING CRITERIA
The ranking criteria are divided into five major categories. Each category is given a total number of points that has been weighed
aclording,to its importance with respect to local and federal priorities.
Impact/Benefit maximum 30points)
1. Primarily targets low incomepersons? 0-10)
(all units 0-30%of AMI= 10 pts; at least half of the units at or below 30%of AMI and the remaining
units at 31-50%of AMI=8 pis;at least half of the units at 31-50%of AMI and at least half of the units
at 51-60%of AMI=6 pis; at least half of the units at 51-60%of AMI and half the units at 61-80%of
AMI=4 ts;all units between 61-80%AMI=2 ptsl
2. Project produces adequate community benefit related to cost? 0-5)
Does the project provide assistance for persons to gain self-sufficiency or maintain independence,or
3. serve a s ecial population? 0-5
4. Does the project provide long-term benefit or affordability? 0-10
1-10 1 yrs=3 pis, 1I-19 yrs=6 pts, 20-30 yrs=8 pts,permanent= 10 is
Sub-total
Need/Priori maximum 15points)
1. Meets a Consolidated Plan priority? (0-5)
2. Project meets goals or objectives of City Plan and Priority Needs and Strategies study? 0-5
3. Has the applicant documented efforts to secure other funding? (0-5)
Sub-total
Feasibilit maximum 15 oints
1. The project will be completed within the required timeperiod? (0-3
2. Pro'ect budget is justified? Costs are documented and reasonable.) 0-4)
3. The level of public subsidy is needed? Private funds are not available. (0-4)
4. Has the applicant documented efforts to secure other funding? (0-4)
Sub-total
Le eriteing Resources maximum 20 oints
I. Does the project allow the reuse of our funding? (0-10)
A. Principal and interest(30-year amortization or less) 10 poin
B. I Principal and no interest or principal and balloon payment(repayment) 6 points
C. I Due-on-sale loan 4 points
2. Project levera es other financial resources? Includin in-kind (0-10
A. Less than 1:1 0 points
B. 1 1:Ito 1:3 4 points
C. 1:4 to 1:6 7 points
D. More than 1:7 10 point
Sub-total
Ca acitv and History maximum 20 DoinW
L Applicant has the capacity to undertake the proposedproject? 0-10
2. If previously funded,has the applicant completed prior projects and maintained regulatory compliance? 0-10)
3. If new,applicant has capacity to maintain regulatory compliance? (0-20
Sub-total
GRAND
TOTAL
9
ATTACHMENT 3
After careful review and discussion of the housing applications, the Fort Collins Affordable
Housing Board established a list of priorities as a means for assisting the CDBG Commission as
they prepare for applicant interviews.
The following table presents the Board's listing of priority projects, the applicant's initial funding
request, and the CDBG Commission's funding recommendation.
AHB's Ranking Applicant's CDBG
of Priority Project Initial Funding Commission's Unfunded
Projects Request Recommendation Balance
1 HO-1 City of $250,000 $250,000 $0
Fort Collins—
Home Buyer
Assistance
2* HO-2 Fort $14,613 $0 $14,613
The Affordable Collins Housing
Housing Board Corporation—
considered these First Step
two requests Expansion -
together as one Administration
request.
2* HO-3 Fort $192,144 $0 $192,144
The Affordable Collins Housing
Housing Board Corporation—
considered these First Step
two requests Expansion
together as one
request.
4 HO-4 Neighbor- $244,866 $244,866 $0
to-Neighbor—
Coachlight
Driveway
Parking Lot
Repairs &
Improvements
10
ATTACHMENT
ADDITIONAL BACKGROUND INFORMATION
on the
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM
CDBG PROGRAM NATIONAL OBJECTIVES
The primary objective of the CDBG Program is the development of viable urban communities, by
providing decent housing and a suitable living environment and expanding economic
opportunities, principally for persons of low and moderate income. Programs and projects funded
with CDBG funds must address at least one of the following three broad National Objectives:
(1) provide a benefit to low or moderate income households or persons,
(2) eliminate or prevent slum and blight conditions, or
(3) meet urgent community development needs which pose an immediate and serious
threat to the health and welfare of the community.
Presented below is a comparison of City CDBG expenditures for programs and projects
categorized according to the National Objectives:
National Objectives
Low/Moderate Slum/Blight Urgent
Income Benefit Elimination Need
National Average 90% 10% 0%
City Expenditures
for:
2006 100% 0% 0%
2005 100% 0% 0%
2004 100% 0% 0%
2003 100% 0% 0%
2002 100% 0% 0%
2001 100% 0% 0%
2000 100% 0% 0%
1999 100% 0% 0%
1998 100% 0% 0%
1997 ol;o 0% 0%
CDBG PROGRAM ELIGIBLE ACTIVITIES
CDBG funds can be used on a wide range of activities including:
(1) acquiring deteriorated and/or inappropriately developed real property (including
property for the purpose of building new housing);
(2) acquiring, constructing, rehabilitating or installing publicly owned facilities and
improvements;
11
(3) restoration of historic sites;
(4) beautification of urban land;
(5) conservation of open spaces and preservation of natural resources and scenic areas;
(6) housing rehabilitation can be funded if it benefits low and moderate income
people; and
(7) economic development activities are eligible expenditures if they stimulate private
investment of community revitalization and expand economic opportunities for
low and moderate income people and the handicapped.
Certain activities are ineligible, under most circumstances, for CDBG funds including:
(1) purchase of equipment,
(2) operating and maintenance expenses including repair expenses and salaries,
(3) general government expenses,
(4) political and religious activities, and
(5) new housing construction.
12
ADDITIONAL BACKGROUND INFORMATION
on the
HOME INVESTMENT PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM
HOME INVESTMENT PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM GUIDELINES
(Adopted by the Fort Collins City Council, July 18, 1995)
PURPOSE:
The purpose of the Home Investment Partnership (HOME) Program is to increase the supply of
decent, safe, and affordable housing in the City of Fort Collins for an extended period of time.
All of the HOME funds must benefit low and very low income households which are defined by
the Department of Housing and Urban Development as having a total household income not
exceeding 80% of the median household income for the Fort Collins area.
ELIGIBLE PROJECTS: HOME funds must be used in the following ways:
1. DIRECT HOUSING ASSISTANCE:
Down payment assistance: To help low-income individuals to purchase housing for their
principal residence. Applicants must meet income guidelines of no more than 80% of the
current median household income for the Fort Collins area and will be required to attend a
homebuyer workshop. Assistance is in the form of zero percent deferred loan up to a
maximum of$10,000 to help cover downpayment and closing cost expenses. The funding
is repaid with a 5% simple interest charge when the property is sold or transferred out of
the buyer's name. Restrictions will apply which will assure the property remains
affordable. This is accomplished by the"recapturing" of the HOME investment.
Tenant based rental assistance: To help low-income households avoid eviction and
homelessness, TBRA provides up to two years of housing subsidy and case management
services to stabilize households and put them on the road to self-sufficiency.
2. NEW CONSTRUCTION of units for homeownership as well as rental occupancy targeted
for low-income individuals and families which are developed, sponsored, or owned by
community housing development organizations (CHDOs), non-profit agencies, and for-
profit developers.
3. ACQUISITION of undeveloped, or developed, land resulting in the development or
purchase of units for homeownership as well as rental occupancy. All regulations
regarding income guidelines, purchase price limitations, resale limitations, rental rates,
etc., will apply to acquisition projects.
13
ELIGIBLE PROPERTY TYPES:
Eligible property types for purchase include both existing property or newly constructed homes.
Eligible property includes a single-family property, a condominium unit, a manufactured home
(including mobile homes on a permanent foundation), or a cooperative unit. For purposes of the
HOME program, homeownership means:
(1) ownership in fee simple title, or
(2) a 99 year leasehold interest, or
(3) ownership or membership in a cooperative, or
(4) an equivalent form of ownership which has been approved by the Department of
Housing and Urban Development.
The value and purchase price of the HOME assisted property to be acquired must not exceed 95%
of the area median purchase price for that type of housing as established by HUD. RECAPTURE
RESTRICTIONS WILL APPLY. (The value must be verified by a qualified appraiser or current
tax assessment.) Initial purchase price limit established by HUD is currently $212,015.
HOME PROGRAM PRIORITIES
The 2005-2009 Consolidated Plan identifies the following priorities for housing related needs:
1. Stimulate housing production for very low, low and moderate income households.
2. Increase home ownership opportunities for very low, low and moderate income
households.
3. Increase the supply of public housing for families and those with special needs.
Implementation and funding of activities to address these priorities will come, in part, from the
City of Fort Collins HOME Investment Partnership Program.
14
ATTACHMENT 5
4 „
�4
N#n t i Y x
*
a v
Commission members present:
Bob Browning, Chair
Eric Berglund, Vice-Chair
Jeff Taylor
Kay Rios
Cynthia Torp
Dennis Vanderheiden
Jennifer Wagner
Tom LeSavage
Staff:
Ken Waido
Heidi Phelps
Julie Smith
Sharon Thomas
15
MEETING HIGHLIGHTS
Mr. Browning called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m.
Preliminary comments were made. Although monies exist to fund each of the applicants
on this cycle, the Commission reaffirmed its belief that it bears a fiduciary responsibility
to City Council and the taxpayers to be prudent in its funding decisions. Funding
recommendations are to be made based orfthe merits, or lack thereof, of each program
and not because funds are available.
In the Commission's view, the one project not recommended for funding, the Fort Collins
Housing Authority's First Step Expansion Program, is not a housing proposal at all: it is a
counseling program, a substance-abuse program, or a case management program — but
not a housing program. With this in mind, the success of the program isn't measured by
how many people receive housing, but in how many people achieve the goals of the
program, and these goals, as well as the program success rate to date, are insufficiently
delineated. The applicant could not provide sufficient evidence to justify maintaining the
existing program, much less its expansion.
More importantly, because the City has already maximized the amount of administrative
funding taken from Federal grants, the only money left is the Affordable Housing Fund.
This fund was not intended to pay salaries, especially salaries of people already
employed by the FCHA.
Following discussion, moved by Ms. Rios, seconded by Mr. Berglund: To adopt the
proposed funding recommendations for presentation to City Council. Motion
carried unanimously.
The meeting adjourned at 6:30 p.m.
16
HOUSING
HO-1 City of Fort Collins - Homebuyer Assistance.
Request: $250,000
Moved by Ms. Wagner, seconded by Ms. Rios: To recommend full funding.
Given the current state of the economy and lack of availability in conventional financing,
this program represents an absolute need. The starter home market will also see more
home buyers, given the current economy and climate in the mortgage industry. It is likely
that the demand will exceed this level of funding. A concern does exist for the amount of
administrative costs being funded.
Motion approved unanimously.
Funding recommendation: $250,000
HO-2 FCHC: First Step Expansion - ADMIN
Request: $14,613
Moved by Ms. Rios, seconded by Mr. Browning: To recommend no funding.
The element of administrative costs is particularly challenging. The Affordable Housing
Fund was not established in order to pay salaries, and this portion of the request would
constitute a departure from the intended use of those funds. The original intent of the
Fund was to pay for bricks, sticks, and to cover the gap in federal housing programs.
Unfortunately, tenant-based rental assistance (TBRA) cannot be funded as a Public
Service through CDBG. Short-term rental assistance available under CDBG is limited to
three months or less. HOME does have a specific category for this use. However, the
only other resource for TBRA administration is through the City's overall HOME
administrative budget, which is already at maximum.
Motion carried 7-0, with one abstention.
Funding recommendation: $0
HO-3 FCHC: First Step Expansion
Request: $192,144
Moved by Mr. Taylor, seconded by Ms. Rios: To recommend no funding.
17
The project itself could well be valuable and needed on its own. The program's success,
however, hasn't been adequately demonstrated. Additionally, the Commission
traditionally provides housing funds to create and preserve affordable housing inventory
and structures its funding allocations to recoup its investment.
The presentation made reference to a four- to six-year process for a given participant.
Perhaps the biggest issue with this application is the funding request encompassing a
project over a two-year time period representing funding for a program that, once
implemented, cannot be sustained. The funding request for the first two years will not
generate the monies needed for the projected longer timeline. Self-sufficiency was stated
as not being a goal of the program, but no long range goals were given.
The applicant's presentation did not resolve questions of feasibility and viability of the
program as a whole. The first program funded for 2006 is still unproven in its results, and
the project should reach some measurable goals before being considered for expansion,
in terms of City funding. The start of the initial project was hampered because of other
funding delays and front-end issues with identifying and gathering the right people for the
program.
The number of security deposits requested (48) versus the number needed (24) is not
only a concern from a fiscal prudence standpoint, but speaks to client instability.
The Commission discussed a reduction in recommended funding, looking at a lesser
funding amount for the security deposit portion, in particular. However, the applicant's
funding request stated a "Full Funding Only" proviso.
Lastly, the Commission is not suggesting that this program not be funded, only that it
should not be funded now. There might be, given adequate proof of prior success, a
place for funding the expansion of this project in the future.
Motion carried, 7-0, with one abstention.
Funding recommendation: $0
HO-4 Neighbor to Neighbor: Coachlight Driveway Parking Lot Repairs and
Improvements
Request: $244,866
Moved by Ms. Rios, seconded by Mr. Berglund: To recommend full funding.
The applicant provides decent, affordable housing. The renovations on the property are
an indication of the good efforts to keep the property at that level and set that standard.
The applicant helps to maintain affordable housing inventory and has made great strides
in putting its finances in order. The program has a good track record that encourages
18
continued support. This program serves the housing needs of low-income residents of
the City.
Motion carried 6-1, with one abstention.
Funding recommendation: $244,866
PUBLIC FACILITIES
PF-1 City of Fort Collins/Crossroads Safehouse: Facility Safety Rehab
Request: $55,671
Moved by Mr. Berglund, seconded by Ms. Torp: To recommend full funding.
This is a program that provides a great service for the community without duplication
elsewhere. While this is a City-owned facility with an overarching need for continued,
maintenance, this program maximizes its dollars for the fundamentals of their program
with the result that some upkeep cannot be done on the remaining budget. The safety
issue is an additional call for funding support. A significant amount of CDBG money has
already been invested in this property, and the work needs to be finished. However, in
terms of repayment from a property sale standpoint, the amount of CDBG funding
already invested exceeds, or will soon exceed, market value of the properties. Future
CDBG monies invested would, in effect, function as a grant rather than the intended due
on sale loans.
Motion carried unanimously.
Funding recommendation: $55,671
Report produced by Meadors Court Reporting, LLC
315 West Oak Street, Suite 710
Fort Collins, Colorado 80521
970.482.1506
970.482.1230 fax
meadors()renorterworks.com e-mail
19
ATTACHMENT 6
City of Fort Collins Community Development Block Grant(CDBG) Commission
Formulation of Fundina Recommendations Session
The CDBG Commission has prepared this hand-out to help you to understand how the
Commission's meeting for the purpose of formulating funding recommendations to the City
Council is conducted. It is the Commission's wish that our methodology be understandable to
even the most casual observers. As you might imagine, the entire process is complex and time-
consuming, especially given that grant requests greatly exceed the amount of available funding.
City Staff will prepare an electronic matrix showing each application, the funding requested, and
the total funds available. The Commission will discuss the pros and cons of every application.
The order which applications are discussed is not important and there is no danger of `running
out' of funds before all applications are fully discussed. There will be preliminary funding
motions made, seconded, and approved throughout the process and these recommendations will
be added into the matrix. It must be emphasized that the matrix is a working document, and any
figures used, whether they be for full, partial, or zero funding, are for discussion purposes only. It
is also possible that the total funds listed in the matrix might exceed the total of funds available at
any point in the process.
After each application has been discussed, the Commission will start to adjust the matrix to start
producing its recommendation for funding to Council. Funding contained on the matrix may be
drastically changed in either a positive or negative manner during this part of the process. When
the Commission agrees on the matrix as indicated by a motion to accept it, a second to the
motion, and a positive majority vote, the process is over and the recommendation will be
forwarded to the Council.
While the Commission's main purpose is to provide Council with the best funding alternative, the
Commission is also sensitive that the funds being recommended for expenditure are taxpayer-
provided. For this reason, it is entirely possible that not all funds will be recommended for
expenditure, even if there are some applicants recommended for zero, or reduced, funding.
The last point to be made is while this meeting is open to the public, to be fair to applicants who
are not present at the meeting, no public comments will be taken.
21
2007 FALL CYCLE
COMPETITIVE PROCESS
Allocating City Financial Resources to
Affordable Housing Programs
and
Community Development Activities
AVAILABLE FUNDING
AMOUNT SOURCE
$674,857 CDBG Program
747,118 HOME Program
172,499 HOME CHDO
216,000 City's Affordable Housing Fund
$1,810,474 TOTAL FUNDING AVAILABLE
1
APPLICATIONS RECEIVED
CATEGORY NUMBER of REQUESTED
PROPOSALS FUNDING
Affordable 4 $701 ,623
Housing
Public Facilities 1 $55,671
TOTALS 5 $757,294
REVIEW PROCESS
• Affordable Housing Board
— Reviews Written Affordable Housing Proposals
— Provides Listing of Priority AH Projects
• CDBG Commission
— Reviews All Written Proposals
— Interviews Each Applicant
— Provides Funding Recommendations to the City
Council
• City Council
— Final Decision on Funding Allocations
2
SUMMARY OF THE CDBG COMMISSION'S
FUNDING RECOMMENDATIONS
RECOMMENDED % of
FUNDING TOTAL CATEGORY
$494,866 89.9% Affordable Housing
$55,671 10.1% Public Facilities
$550,537 100.0% TOTAL ALLOCATED
$550,537 30.4% Total Allocated
$1 ,259,937 69.6% Carry-over to 2008
$1,810,474 100.0% AVAILABLE FUNDS
3
RESOLUTION 2007-104
OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS
APPROVING THE PROGRAMS AND PROJECTS THAT WILL RECEIVE
FUNDS FROM THE FEDERAL COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
BLOCK GRANT (CDBG)AND HOME INVESTMENT PARTNERSHIP
(HOME) GRANTS, AND THE CITY'S AFFORDABLE HOUSING FUND
WHEREAS, the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program and the Home
Investments Partnership (HOME) Program are ongoing grant administration programs funded by
the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD); and
WHEREAS, the City of Fort Collins has received CDBG Program funds since 1975 and
HOME funds since 1993; and
WHERAS,the City Council has budgeted General Fund dollars into an Affordable Housing
Fund for use in assisting affordable housing programs/projects; and
WHEREAS,on January 18,2000,the City Council approved Resolution 2000-013,formally
adopting a competitive process for the allocation of City financial resources to affordable housing
programs/projects and community development activities; and
WHEREAS,since January 2007,the CDBG Commission has held a public hearing to obtain
citizen input on community development and affordable housing needs,and has heard presentations
and asked clarification questions from each applicant that submitted a proposal to the City
requesting funding; and
WHEREAS, the CDBG Commission met in a special meeting for the purpose of preparing
a recommendation to the City Council as to which programs and projects should be funded with
carry-over CDBG Entitlement Grant funds, Carry-over HOME funds, funds from the FY 2007
HOME Grant,funds from the HOME Community Housing Development Organization(CHDO)Set
Aside, HOME Program Income, and funds from the City's Affordable Housing Fund.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT
COLLINS that the administration is authorized to submit an application to HUD as follows:
AFFORDABLE HOUSING
FY 06 CDBG Entitlement Grant
$244 866 1 Neighbor-to-Neighbor—Coachlight Driveway Parking Lot Repairs
FY 06 HOME Grant
$120 187 1 City of Fort Collins—Home Buyer Assistance Program
FY 07 HOME Grant
$79 813 1 City of Fort Collins—Home Buyer Assistance Program
FY 07 HOME Program Income
$50 000 1 City of Fort Collins—Home Buyer Assistance Program
PUBLIC FACILITIES
FY 06 CDBG Entitlement Grant
$55 671 1 Crossroads Safehouse—Facility Safety Rehabilitation
Passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Council of the City of Fort Collins this 20th
day of November, A.D. 2007.
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk