HomeMy WebLinkAboutHousing & Redevelopment Authority Packet 08-02-19821
AGENDA
PLYMOUTH HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
Regular Meeting
August 2, 1982
6:30 P.M.
I. Roll Call
II. Approval of Minutes for May 24, 1982 Meeting
III. Home Improvement Grant Program Income Limits and Maximum Grant Amount
IV. Management Services Contract between Plymouth HRA and the City of Plymouth
V. Senior Citizen Housing Site Purchase
VI. HUD's Review of Plymouth's Section 8 Program Administration, June 1982
VII. Final Funding Allocation for Year VIII CDBG Program
VIII. Information Items:
A. The Report of the President's Commission on Housing: Findings and
Observations as noted by NAHRO
B. "Alternate Housing Offers Elderly a New Security", Newspaper Article
from May 30, 1982 Minneapolis Star & Tribune
C. "A Housing Strategy for the '80's", Newspaper Article from July 1,
1982 Minneapolis Star & Tribune
D. "Housing Vouchers Aren't Bane or Panacea, Tryouts Suggest", Newspaper
Article from June 16, 1982 Wall Street Journal
E. "Average Rents for Twin Cities Area", Newspaper Article from Minneapolis
Star & Tribune
F. Plymouth Apartment Rents Relative to other Large Communities in
Hennepin County, May 1982
G. Plymouth HRA Newsletter, Summer 1982 Issue
IX. Adjournment
k,
f
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
3400 PLYMOUTH BLVD., PLYMOUTH. MINNESOTA 55447
TELEPHONE (612) 559-2800
DATE: July 26, 1982
MEMO
TO: James C. Willis, City Manager
FROM: Milt Dale, Associate Planner
SUBJECT: HOME IMPROVEMENT GRANT PROGRAM INCOME LIMITS AND MAXIMUM GRANT AMOUNT
The City's Home Improvement Grant Program for Year VII ended as of June 30, 1982. The
Year VIII Program started July 1, and it is required for each municipality that is a
party to Hennepin County's Joint Cooperation Agreement and administers a Home
Improvement Grant Program to establish an income limit and maximum grant amount for .its
City. In this respect, Hennepin County is recommending an income limit of $12,500
annual adjusted income/household), and a maximum grant of $89250. The City's Housing
Rehabilitation Committee at its meeting of June 28, 1982, undnimously recommended an
Income limit of $13,500, and a maximum grant of S8,100.00. These limits were based on
a 1.4 percent increase over last year's limits, i.e., the same percentage increases
accorded to elderly Social Security recipients as of July 1, 1982.
Staff recommends the income limits ($13,500), and maximum grant (S8,100) as being
consistent with last year's income limit which was based on the maximum income a couple
over 62 years of age could receive in Social Security benefits. Attached is a
Resolution to this effect.
Attachment
I. Resolution
CITY OF PLYIDUTH
Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a meeting of the City Council of
the City of Plya th, Minnesota, was held on tom` _ day of 19
The following members were.present:
The rollow1hy memberswere " sent:
rws
intr e4uced the, following Resolution and roved its
adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 82 -
ESTABLISHMENT OF H014E IMPROVEMENT GRANT PROGRAM INCOME LIMITS AND GRANT LIMITS FOR THE
CDBG PROGRAM, YEAR VIII (JULY 19 1982 - JUNE 309 1983)
WHEREAS, the City of Plymouth believes that the Home Improvement Grant Program provides
an effective way of rehabilitating older dwellings and reducing scarce energy
resources; and,
WHEREAS, Hennepin County and HUD require that each municipality set its owr.+ income
Limits and grant limits for its CD8G Home Improvement Grant Program each year; and,
WHEREAS, the City in Year VII, permitted a
and had a maximum Income limit of $12,600
accepted applications for grants on a first
to do so; and,
maximum grant of $7,500/eligihle homestead
annual adjusted income/household) and has
curve, first serve basis and will continue
WHEREAS, the City believes that ar: inflationary increase in the income limits and
maximum grant amounts is justifiable due to the increases in the cost of l.ivinq,
building materials and labor; a. -W,
WHEREAS, the Federal government has approved an increase in Social Security benefits of
7.4 percent as of July 1, 1982 and that the City will adopt the same percentage
increase over last year's limits;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA,
that the income limit be established at $13,500 and the grant amount at $8,100 for
qualified homeowners dezring Year VIII CDBG Home Improvement Grant Program.
The motion for adoption of the foregoing Resolution was duly seconded by
and upon vote being taken t ereon, t e
0 owing vo n avow thereof:
The following voted against or s a :
Whereupon the Resolution was declared dutypassed and adopted.
CITY CF PLYMOUTH
3400 PLYMOUTH BLVD., PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447
TELEPHONE (612) 559.2800
MEMO
DATE: ' July 23, 1982
TO: HRA Commissioners
FROM: Milt Dale
SUBJECT: Management Services Contract between the Plymouth HRA and the
City of Plymouth
HUD has requested that a Management Services Contract be drawn up between •
the Plymouth HRA and the City of Plymouth to delineate what services the
City provides the housing authority. Presently the City and HRA basically
operate without a formally adopted set of rules and guidelines to govern
their interaction.
As a part of HUD's June 1982 Management Review of Plymouth's Section 8 Program,
Nancy Bratrud reviewed a draft of the Management Services Contract proposed by
staff. Several changes were recommended by Ms. Bratrud and these additions were
incorporated into the revised draft as attached.
This contract will be forwarded to the City Council for "their consideration should
the commissioners recommend its adoption.
Attachments:
1. Resolution
2. Management Services Contract, July 1982
97,
HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
Pursuant to due cail'and Notice thereef,a meeting of _
the Housing and Redevelopment Authority of the City of Plymouth, Minnesota
was held on the day of , 19----. The following
members were presen ,
The following members were absin.-
moved Its adoptiont
introduced the following Resolution and
HRA RESOLUTION NO.
APPROVING A MANAGEMENT SERVICES CONTRACT :;'WEEN THE PLYMOUTH HOUSING &
REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY AND THE CITY OF PLYMOUTH
WHEREAS, the City of Piymooth performs certain functions for ;ile Plymouth
Housing & Redevelopment Authority; and,
WHERZAS, it is necessary to define what housing management services are to
be performed by the city for the Plymouth HIM; and,
WHEREAS, these services be addressed in a written contract to be signed ')y
both parties;
NOW, THEREFORE, ,BE IT RESOLVED BY THE HOUSING &'REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY OF
THE CITY OF PLYMOUTH that the attached Management Services'Contract be
appri.ved, signed by the Chairman of the Plymouth HRA and .be forwarded to
the Plymouth City Council for their consideration.
The notion for the adopt;on of the foregoing Resonation was duly seconded by
and upon vote being taken thereon, the
following vote n favor t ereof:
Tne toaiowing voted against or abstained: ,
Whereupon the Resolution was declared duly passed and a op e .
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
3400 PLYMOUTH BLVD., PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447
TELEPHONE (612) 559-2800
MEMO
DATE: July 15, 1982
TO: HRA Commissioners
FROM: Milt Dale
SUBJECT: SENIOR CITIZEN HOUSING SITE PURCHASE
At its meeting of July 12, 1982, the Plymouth City Council adopted a resolution
authorizing -the purchase of a 5.4 acre site at the northeast quadrant of Plymouth
Blvd. and 37th Ave. No. for the eventual construction of a senior citizen housing
project. The owners of the site, Mr. and Mrs. Oscar Naustdal have agreed to
terms and will receive the sum of $367,298 for the property. The closing date
is now set for July 28, 1982.
Attached is a memo from Frank Boyles relating to the purchase and the resolution
passed by the City Council.
Attachments:
I. Memo from Frank Boyles, July 6, 1982
2. Resolution No. 82-345
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
3400 PLYMOUTH BLVD.. PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447
TELEPHONE (612) 559-2600
MEMO
DATE: July 6, 1982
TO: James G. Willis, City Manager
FROM: Frank Boyles, Assistant City Manager
SUBJECT: ACQUISITION OF SENIOR CITIZEN SITE
Y.1.
SUMMARY: The City Council previously authorized the staff to
proceed to acquire an approximate 5.4 acre proposed senior citizen
housing site at the northeast quadrant of 37th Ave. N. and
Plymouth Boulevard. Based upon the "just compensation" appraisals
and special assessment/'.ax information available on the site, the
City Council has estalished parameters for a site acquisition
offer. The owners of the property, Mr. & Mrs. Oscar Naustdal,
have now formally agreed to terms which fall within the
acquisition parameters established by the City Council. A
resolution is attached which authorizes the acquisition of the
senior citizen parcel and allocates the funding necessary for the
purchase.
Earlier this year the City Council received appraisals of the
proposed senior citizen site in Downtown Plymouth. After
considering the appraisals, the Council declared the appraisal of
0. J. Janski and Associates to constitute "just compensation" for
this parcel. The Janski appraisal was based up.:.i a sale price of
the property of $1.55 per square foot. The appraisal assumed that
any special assessments against the property Wr-e included in this
1.55 per square foot. Council d!.rected tha., :: Staff proceed in
negotiating -for acquisition of the parcel unv4 !IN., assumption that
the purchase price would not exceed $1.55 per ;ovfte foot and that
all current and delinquent taxes and special asstasments against the
parcel be paid at the time of closing through the proceeds of the
acquisition.
On June 11, 1982, a letter was sent to the owners of this property
outlining the City's offer. On June 16, Oscar Naustdal agreed in
writing to this offer. Closing is presently scheduled for July 14.
It is therefore necessary for the City Council to adopt a resolution
approving the acquisition of the 5.44 acre senior citizen parcel and
James G. Willis
July 6., 1982
Page Two
allocating money from the Community Development Block Grant site
acquisition fund for this purchase. As the Council is aware, a
total of $391,214 in CDBG money has been earmarked for said
acquisition. The actual purchase price for this parcel should
amount to $367,298. The remaining $23,916 may be used to recover
administrative, planning, and legal expenses related to this project
and/or may be reallocated by the City for use in other approved CDBG
projects. The staff will be returning shortly with recommendations
on how these funds may be reallocated.
FB/lh
Attach
r
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a special meeting of
7.41
the City Council of the City of Plymouth, M nnesota, was Heldon the
12th day of July , 19,2 . The following members
were present: r and Threinen.
The following members were absent: none
uer ,rrrR ••
CpjMcilmemei s introduced the following Resolution and
moved Its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 82-34.5
AUTHORIZING THE PURCHASE OF THE PROPOSED SENIOR CITIZEN HOUSING SITE
LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST QUADRANT OF PLYMOUTH BOULEVARD AND 37TH AVE. N. AND
ALLOCATING FUNDS THEREFOR.
WHEREAS, the City has participated in the Community Development Block Grant
program and has established a program entitled Senior Citizen Site
Acquisiton; and
WHEREAS, during years of participation in the CDBC program the City has set
aside approximately $391,214 for the purpose of acquiring a senior citizen
site; and
WHEREAS, following a study of alternative locations the City Council has
selected a 5.44 acre parcel at the northeast quadrant of 37th Ave. N. and
Plymouth Boulevard as appropriate for senior citizen housing purposes; and
WHEREAS, just compensation has been established at $1.55 per square foot;
and
WHEREAS, Mr. & Mrs. Oscar Naustdal, present owners of the site, have
accepted a purchase offer tendered by the City in the amount of $1.55 per
square foot,
NOW, THEREFORE, EE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA, that it should and hereby noes authorize the purchase
of the 5.44 acre proposed senior citizen housing site located at 37th Ave.
N. and Plymouth Boulevard,
AND, FURTHER, the cost of said site shall not exceed $1.55 per square foot
which has previously been determined to constitute "just compensation" for
this parcel,
AND, FURTHER, that the current owner shall pay all delinquent taxes and
special assessments against the parcel out of the proceeds of this
transaction at the time of closing,
AMD, FURTHER, the amount of $367,298 is hereby allocated from Account No.
704-704-810..
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing Resolution was duly seconded by
and upon vote being taken thereon, the
following vote .n favor UFFRWT Mayor Davenvort Councilmembers Moen,
The following voted against orabstained: no •
Whereupon the Resolution was declared duly passed and a opte .
19
I
U
JUL 61
MIND
Mr. Rod imtroa, andrmm
Heusi" sed Redsvelopasat Authority
of Plymouth
3400 Plymouth 8oulevud
Plymooth, Mi# 55441
Dear Mr. Hillstroms
Subject: HUD Field Review of Section 8 Existing
Program for Period Ended June 1, 1982
Enclosed is a copy of the Management Review Report prepared
following the field review conducted by Nancy 9ratrud of the Assisted
Housing Management staff on June 1-4, 1982.
In the report we have noted several areae where the program is
not being administered in accordance with regulations including the
following two areas which are of particular concerns
1. HAP Contracts are not being ,renewed concurrent with lease
renewals.
2. Annual Contribution requested is in excess of the maximum
authorised due to past lease approvals in excess of Fdtr
Market Rent limitations.
The report also contains several reco=endatioss and suggestions
for correction of procedural errors or omissions.
Please inform our office within 30 days in writing of the correr-
tive actions taken. If there are any items which you censider to be
Incorrect or with which you disagrw, °9le-sas advise us by letter.
Sincerely,
cc:
5.6HMA Mgmt. Review File
5.6HMA Reader
5.6HMA Schmolze Robert B. Gerber
Executive Director Acting Area Manager
Enclosure
5.6HMA:SRATRDD:r1e:6/30/82
HMA:SRATROD HMA:WASON H";SCHKOLZE
1
731:. ri ,
ASSISfAlt6s, TATMM Pmt
MD AVIMIM Of POOM
PU3 Plywarh HBA
Leeationt Ply oalb. rota
Ppoiect NO&wi N"6- 170-002
Nowber of Odtas 72
l ettriet prMbait 0-4070
Period WWW by lbls 2etiei3 hatch 119 1980 to Jame 4. 1982
Period amend by Pta+rlmw Bowies: September 1. 1979 to atartb U, 1984
A .... Mast Bawiw of do abevo seotiem 8 Project was conflated
by lt®ay snemd. Aniseed Hoveft Nanagaammt Bscmas staff. lt apolls/
Bt. Peal Asea Offiaas, to accordmaee with the Intructloes eontalaad is
6beptos S, BOOMMU 7470.1.
SSCaIP Mon of Mug
as Pawlrn we conducted during the firm web of June 19x10 mod
aossisted of a owls rNiar of filas comparison, of paitiorlp=t fil"
frits the AAF Btglstsro meiaetieo of the operating psLtey statement,
the lease tomato a proposed •onosoment contract, and odw. fiaamcial
and sanageasnt seaords0 Bis section 8 zZlsting renal ®its Were
inspected few coepllmmcs witb Rowl" Quality Standards tad don
pesslble, oeavpentm wee intero1wrd to eseoh tics accuseoy of fila
tefoaatioo tegardieg not family coatrlbutlaw, utility auawmces,
contract rants, and sees p=orlded by owneme and the PB staff.
MWO OF PBB MB 1G;FlSNS
Prodrugs malting from the pewiow Ni nagonout Bevies hove not
boon clearer. On the basic of our foller"p during this ROWI r of the
PBA's Certification of coweatiw actleos., the foiloriag Findinvo are
bs"67 elsareda O1. 40 6, 7. and 9.
Finding to is also Cleared based neon, me Fiscal Audit for the tae
you period ended June 30. 1991 conducted by tae Office of to Begional
IasPector General for Amdit. Ito rNisn of fiscal msosgermt mos
Carried out at tbie flat. All fiscal audit Findings saga been abated.
All outer Nrm-Boma Bsviwr Fladiege "we" ovtstaadiag.
LMUG STAM
The follaaiog twirls veto forth cornet prsgesn utilisatioot
w
S i
Wfa AY mm vats H!W am W"s Ams
6
2 8 52 SO 2 57
r » 3 4 0.
i
Tom 72 Wo -r
the aus"tim is adowtolp stuis" Y Am. NO "Ramtly
GOi03atw sonte we asthosind.
I== 4!
A put ftm a Seethe 8 wAstft smataato is lsawd to a
pwtleipent o Is ngrirad to dins the pwtieipint a. pedlost O let tlaeel
mewlels w preserlbad In 24 CR $82.=(b). esedboot 7420.7.
C6aptw 442 prorldas ldstfsr 0
It was Doted that the lolleoln8 uatoslau are not iadvAed is do
Pipsooth Brlaflep tadisto
I. Omm srsps DlUtiY codas do Law..
2. eeosisp QYlitp Standard lasp@AUM toss or 000parabls
lOtO!'atlapa
3. Deaa!lptli0n of bar the psopm opentes (OTC. 8A*v
lneltdio6 scot roasaeblasYs asplanatisoJ .
4. Cortiflaate of Pwtieipattlaa
s. A eaopLts otllity Allaraoae SdodoL
6. agwl Oppo"Mitp Co olalat toes
7. Lase addas"
S. sego t for Lw Appnval
CYplato do amtanto of do erWUS Taatat to toltill the
prograo s+agais+ss its and to vnvlda adagssto iistonatlos to I I p lalmas
at so oduatlm and initial dsttflaato issw.
C66tITICM ISSOB
Issas a Yrtitieata with do eorseet acnes Ta ily Gmtrlbstlas.
Tait Sulot esote. aad to the eerMt I - 0 a a - Mn Yah yen to all
paseiaww". $man& I plw*w in" nVemad lamv"t ®artifi-
eatr elm --ore ewrw ~ ftm yew to yaw ba ft encs dmo the
fasdly Yepoeitlaa bed dmsW o. do !BA had pot lured 00 aatlllaato
r .s+r9 Bef em tin aettratUm w we sods at mW Otter
ter. lbs fMdU dwold be glade suave of the vww HOWLeto aamd
eta an" yii ay Coststbuttao as wll at be Imtadd of rho tear of
ter sestlfiaat +ea of Tistlelpttlm so& year.
He Cdl1lgAe{T RENEWALS
so PBA to not nootles Its Be entaw" wltb own" at sr-
gialostloe. !be Lots, flab to the aastraoiest betress the --Dlolmt
and the 0 e 9 in oppumay bolos erased oa lh year. A fore poevUM
by do !8A to rtod, bot ores dWoo do PHA staff pastes olsst do
colo, It fon oet lata the w aaotraat. no emelt Is l"t the lits
dost on bm o aossrat sest*aat dtb wsw oleo sot neeirtos UP
pwmto. !to MA my shoeoa to teaser flee BAP sostsoatt weft as moo&
rat for or do ow -mob law wetral toss mW be oedtftod to aasa¢plU b
belt lm s ad IIAP swane3o. The paettslpaat, do *want sed rho PBA
neat all ossa to do novel fetor u aor toss to und. !be nA obnU
sot at" a laaaa tragal foss bassets tet IAA L sot a party to the Lane.
A login t for Lona AMM" to to be wod oaeh year. !bo BsquM
eotabltohas the tetot do omm Is ahls$ foe the coal" yeas sad to the
bntt for the Loa and ftmUy rho BAT aoatraet. !be rotstds do sot
star is saab am bar the ennut trot woe fto ily mftvd at oast
Tw•
The Aettbtrtty eatstatas as tsoeatoep of natal berets ff"l&lo
to the jotrltdiattas std often tasudet thio lest is 00 toatat fele.
we loventoey lint by It mu door eft 000ttly leo aratearmlasort of a
paa'tteslar unit opp oved fee M atatroat. PLan WON asato to
Badbmk 7420.7, Otos 6-5 for dttratloa. M ddbtt 6-3 psreldn a
Masi emitle tlos foteat. sbe noes is do ittltdiattoa an blab to
srlattao to flee am Pleat ltasbat Lott. :its riot eraeoas6lown
emlftaatle oIeaisily erittoal to do Autberlty't d tststrsttas
of the fists.
to base srsotvrd Mr. DaL•o ,mee 8, 1982 Uum sad an otadylat
the looms be boo appsopstately sated:
1. Wirt foo 1002 of allmatim at 1202 of falx ljettrot
Lott.
2. Adstft sad drsrstlm resasdtos probab:,e deplettoa of fads
Won rdtrs date of ACC contract is October 1983.
4 431e qO
we trill No Dad mealy to as" issues as sees w+r we hw
datcsodnad the =rums actually weadved by the FHA tbo M.
the Isnw we lateweLsted and "solation will depend an do psagect
aeaowst balsam at this etre
US= gwM Room
savel" quality staodavda we betas end es the bmis los fateful
me weamal taapaatimse !baso Wave nsm welt films now our ample
that did not contain evldws of vm wal inspections. ;F—A unit under
BW Is to be Impacted wpeh year and a "post of the lerpestlsa
vetained. !ba 32 quality omtrol impeetime m aunlaised by 9andbeok
7420.1, Chapter 3-126 (9.5-27) as cot buss carried out by the Andiatlty.
Flaw advise is reply to this tapett hoe quality coat"I tespeeelose
will be does.
Of tba oft units impeeted, only caw Nousiag quality standard
vielatioa, a aisle via" look, was found to " dve aonestive
action withle 30 dM. All aha emits Impacted wn to need eonditles.
bloc of tea of part le i pants' wins a files ware warded 408110ad to
bawd their mittospaatad awarders to suit. The following units
atawimpact" imp 3, IMS
2685 Modsalne kedge Road
Shu Laasotor -use pore", 0!-219
9610 sloe place North, 0103
3301 North Chanty Rood 19, 0439
3301 pert" Cor ty Road 199 0332
1903 R1~ 101, 0221
UTILM ALLM ANCs REVISION
rogoires bodnow window loaf
The utility allowswe abeuld be mdaod each yet and ravieed if
necessary to meesdmge with Cbaptr 11-6 of tea plogna Amdaietvation
bandbesk, and section 982.214 of oho naulatteas. Is response to this
upset, plean sdvise Ubm a review of oho allowsw a is plamed and if
a revision results, furoisb a aapy of do sdw dole adopted.
AlgaI ..-dLZ!
tba policy ptatemat twaidied at the etws of oe field visit
contains nereral parts der in envision se follows
loom Ltsdts past i
shitty alarm" saheduse *art !Zi
ftte lomat costa Fast z=
be Shopplog Iacantive Credit portion awn be hall d. So Andkosity
Is wonestly administering Sboppl a iaaaativa eoatrasy to oho ineo fmt
pelta! statement.
s :11:. I av
SMURS col Acr
A contrast tornst proposed for management services to be betwen
the HU ands the City of Upwath was tutnlabed dolog the reviev for
our eommint. The.proposed Contrast does not Clearly detiae just Wbst
fuastioas will be performed regarding the 8estion 8 Zdsting propan
an What the services will Cast An.dollate aseb year. The required
period of notice prior to telminatien by either pasty is not clear.
we euggast at Least bo days but require that the contract include that
WD be iotified When either pasty gives notice to the other. We
also require that the termination date of be effective until and uoless
BOD is ratistied that alternate asropoots have been ode for program
administratIon. The contract provide* a brief position description
of the $sysrol city state positions Whish will route to BRA duties
as required by the an"tive Director/City Nagger. The section 8
Bsietlag BAP prsgro contract between the and a PHA provides
for a limited fee for Adsinietratism. It the BRA Contracts to spend
all it earns for adNdnistration of the psopam, we have no objection
provided the progro is cdministere8 in accordance with all requisr-
mots. Yon are probably aware moat IMAs an able to amdnloter the
program properly chile retaining a margio sash year over expenses tot
their nun housing related porpeseso Atter a-anagamot eares t has
bees agreed to by both parties with the required statements, please
furaisb a copy of the executed contrast for our approval.
AnUcAn MD PABTICOMT mom
Pre -application forms are used Who people indicate an interest in
bolas Considered for pastisipatien in tba progso. Tlase pre -
applications are Rept in a file folder by data of application.. 8o
list is attached to this srs+eagemot nor are program participation
selection preferences consistently dooked or verified. A Jos 1, 1981
applisent appears to be do not applicant to be called rho a two
bedroen certificate become evalUble. The last application was oa
Nash 30, 1982 in the too bedroom category. sac of the applisantn
revised belong in the one badveom category. One applicant was not
eligible as a single pregnant feasts and would not be eligible for
consideration until the child is born and is in the household.
The applicant pool was renarod and purged by the PU In May on year-
old applicants mating the applicant pool ante depandable so a measure
of continuing interest. A sufficient ou6ar of applicants an available
to mistain continuing program utilisation. The waiting list procedure
down not corently provide the Authority with a cleat, detendAble tract
to justify its participant selection AktCUiOnn• Phase "far to
Chaptex 4-9 (p. 4-6) for directions regarding waiting list preparation
end furnish in your response a ropy of the revised waiting list
forest.
Ssveral tiles of past pmgro participants were reviewed during
pas field visit for evidence of proper totaduation groasdnre. The
raviaw raised sone question rogn4log specifie .participants as tollovez
1. On Wan the sesolalso of 8. truism's termination
getice (i mssy 23, 1962)? uplaia.
2. Mat sis+smtanars pravaild to do taIuatisn of
assistant for M. U nbee,t (chart Tdbfuary 26. 1962)?
asplaio:
fleas did jams Walter saw beft a pr@dy s partlelpaom
Oby Ut 1"210
mase ravlar thr tsetrrsttmo is Chapter 10 "Prdtag testdea-
tica of BA9 costrrsts sd tersisatlms bearings. You till gate that
Who !wily is astitld to as lstermal boost" by a l" awl"" or
otbes publle official set disaotly involved is do da-ts4q a&"-
strattas of the pe+sperw. tae pastislpmt is tlymastb to of tesed a
Private Conten+ n vita the staff pcsreo somigad to fir file (the
portae pnomu&iy with Ub m do psstisipmt br a aestiist) of it
that to dealissd or resatleta-I! the partisipast m4 appear botela
the satig m UA Coadplms With do anoft"w Dlmtm m dhditft.
the lousy seg to hats tbst a hoarlas offices of the beating
NOW till deride it the Must is frivolous or till be heard. We
sttesgly recemrd that the pstsedrra be ahmgd to eesfo,m With the
Bandbeot r+w+Crie@rs o. W baliaoe tae vivo" Mfesrses Is eoaetaasy
and, sterid voids as ss available I aeamsvarrm. so, this doss got
frlf ill a dealeppostvsltp ter the pestisipa W o n $glo e&" to be
mandeved, by a gastral pasty. soft regair"t as as altorsative of
second stop. to appear bete,@ as sense ceouissim titb the Incentive
Director as Cbatrmss seer as rosece - - Lly intimidating alternative.
In the tatesrst of a tai, beasiog. it World be mors apprapriate to
simply prrvlde for appeistsest of sso bosxft officer agsdle to
both parties to lists and rels as Who grievanceo
plesss advise is s@epssse to this ,@pert Aar pr+sedts@s are
going to be follor@d by do Arehority.
The Astbofity has on its ars teitiative begm to carry out three
bidhly commes"le psecee aew:
1. Pr@parattos and tatue of bovel" lateraction for people
Wbo mgWAt help in soivtag SMW$@ cy housing pr*1 ms.
2. A aeuolatter Ublob is sent to partioipmv cod 0-norI
periodically. the newsletter tornat to attractive end
the contest ietorsativto eorrratee end pertinent.
2. A dbsstltet ter pttetsipme fila tmtmts. the daddist
io attadod an the left aide of pastieipmt folders end Asa
tensede pstvldas at a glass the prep prtesdarts
completedv pendiege or yet to be dose.
a
to a mmy, do feller ft iter 41"Weed to do we"" t"01"
eerie eatim aad vidds 30 dey+e s
1. -Ream Obat intenatias is to be "ovum !e do
ftlef " Pad at.
I. 2a a Caaetifsaeta of Parttetpattee each yeas to
sub peettaipest.
5o afft ewmt an Im centnaa to eetnam vub the
too of leases to effect.
6. 1:a uft all =Its rsder up aevtreaa as nest reaoeeble.
S. Oaflde b w do AWAmity gill fund the peeSre in mese
of its usxftm /YE to the esd of WC tett to Oatdber MS.
Or w"id iyeertt Comm the p mvm to aoet6eo j aiaaiattost
6. Raquise a wisdew iseti to be 1setm1W at 5611 Moncaster
Lase Memoo 02-219.
9. Oerraat Parts I. Ills sed SIIi * Statcerat of Ada a"ft
asd Oaoopasaf Poll". Idedt for appr*vM with yeas
leeposse.
8. Debet hew the 52 owlity eo Uel 8"Oft Qralttp Stanched
Lupectie" will be done.
Is addttlos, the tellowind asawtloas asd met,
Pea seapaoea wlthla 50 dayet
i. Smolt the revised vttllty dli Sshad"S er Fmj"tad
date for left".
2. Prowl" @went" ww" mt 8mviera coarmet with ragdired
lsciwtaae for 8M appreml.
valt"S list tam* sovialm to pmwue for prefaresae
factoro.
6. Otlewaaae gree -fin dha sm
3r. ia.
HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
Pursuant to due call and notice thereof,a meeting of
the Housing and Redevelopment Authority of the City of Plymouth, Minnesota
was held on the day of . 19 The following
members were present:
The following members were absent:
moved Its adoption:
introduced the following Resolution and
HRA Resolution No.
AMENDING THE REGULATIONS ESTABLISHING ADMISSION AND OCCUPANCY FOR THE
PLYMOUTH SECTION 8 RENT ASSISTANCE PROGRAM
WHEREAS, the Plymouth HRA wishes to amend its present Admissions and Occu ancy
Policy to update Parts 1 (Income Limits), XII (Utility Allowance Schedule and
XIII (Fair Market Rents) to conform to current dollar amounts for these items
and also to amend Part XIV (Grievance Procedures) to clarify how a Section 8
tenant with a grievance might seek redress;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE PLYMOUTH HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
that the attached Admission and Occupancy Policies as amended be approved for
Plymouth's_ Section 8 Rent Assistance Program as of the date of this resolution.
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing Resolution was duly seconded by
and upon vote being taken thereon, the
fol lowing voted n favor thereof:
ti —
e following voted against or abstained:
Whereupon the Resolution was declared duly passed and adopted.
Mousing
Section 8
PLYMOUTH HOUSING S REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
REGULATIONS ESTABLISHING ADMISSION 3 OCCUPANCY POLICIES
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Part I Determination of Eligibility Pages 1-4
Part II Selection of Families Pages 4-5
Part III Schedule of Gross Family Contributions Pvges 5-6
Part IV Finders4eepers" Policy Page 6
Part V Lease Approval Page 6
Part VI Re-examination Page 7
Part VII Ineligible and Over -Income Families Page 8
Part VIII Verification of Applicants' .Statement and
Income Page 8
Part IX Occupancy Standards Pages 8-9
Part X Misrepresentations Page 9
Part XI Review and Amendment of Policies Page 9
Part XII Utility Allowance Schedule Page 9
Part XIII Fair Market Rents for Plymouth Page 9
Part XIV Termination of Family Eligibility for
Housing Assistance Payments and Grievance
Procedures Pages 9-13
March 19, 1980
Al,
1. DETERMINATION OF ELIGIBILITY. To be eligible for admission .an applicant must ' S a
meet the following requirements:
A. The applicent.must qualify as a family. A family consists of:
1. two or more persons who have a family -type relationship, or
2. a single person who is:
e. eligible, by age, to receive an old age benefit under Title 11
cf the Social Security Act, or
b. tandicapped within the meaning of Section 202 of the Housing
Act of 1959, or
c. displaced by urban renewal or other governmental action, or
d. disabled within the meaning of Section 223 of the Social
Security Act.
A handicapped person is one who has a physical impairment which:
a. is expected to be of long -continued and indefinite duration,
b. is of such a nature that such ability could be improved by
more suitable housing conditions.
c. substantially impedes his (her) ability to live independently.
A disabled person is one that has an inability to engage in any substantial
gainful activity by reason of any medically determinable physical or mental
Impairment which can be expected to result in death or which has lasted or
which can be expected to last for a continuous period of not less than
twelve months.
B. Income Requirements. To be financially eligible. the applicant family
must provide adequate evidence showing that their income for the twelve
month period following occupancy is not anticipated to exceed the income
limits for eligibility. Anticipated income will be derived by reviewing
reported income for the previous twelve months and estimated income for
the next twelve months, and by making adjustments for unusual or temporary
income which will not be forthcoming during the next twelve month period.
This income requirement does not apply, however, to applicants who have
been making a direct transfer.) In addition, the family's gross rent, as
computed according to Section III of this policy, must be less than the
Fair Market Rent for the unit established for the PHA's jurisdiction by
HUD to be eligible for assistance (See Section XIII for the applicable
Fair Market Rents.)
Low Income Family. A family whose income does not exceed $0% of the
median income for the area determined by HUD.
Very Low Income Family. A family whose income does not exceed 50% of
the median income for the area as determined by HUD.
For purposes of determining whether a family is a lower income family
or a very low income family. income shall be determined in accordance
with the °Computation of Annual Income." except where a family has net
assets in excess of $5.000. income shall include the actual amount of
income, if any, derived from all of the next family assets or 10% of the
value of all such assets, whichever is greater.
No. of Lower .income Very Low
Person Famiiy Income.Family
INCOME LIMITS One E 15,250 E 10.000
Two 17,400 11,450
Three 19,550 12,850
Four 21,750 14,300
Five 23,100 15,450
Six 24,450 161600
Computation of Annual Income.
1. Except as provided in paragraph 2 of this section, all payments from
all sources received by the family head (even if temporarily absent)
and each additional member of the family household Who is not a minor
shall be included in the annual income of a family. A minor is
defined as a member of the household (excluding foster children),
other than the family head or spouse, who is under 18 years of age or
is a full-time student. Income shall include but not be limited to:
a. the gross amount, before any payroll deductions, of wages
and salaries, overtime pay, commissions, fees, tips and
bonuses;
b. the net income from operation of a business or profession
or from rental of real or personal property (for this
purpose, expenditures for business expansion or amortization
of capital indebtedness shall not be deducted to determine
the net income from a business);
c. interest and dividends;
d. the full amount of periodic payments received from Social
Security, annuities, insurance policies, retirement funds,
pensions, disability or death benefits and other similar
types of periodic receipts;
e. payments in lieu of earnings. such as unemployment and disability
compensation. Worker's Compensation and severance pay (refer to
2c);
f. public assistance. if the public assistance payment includes
an amount specifically designated for shelter and utilities
which is subject to adjustment by the public assistance agency
in accordance with the actual cost of shelter and utilities.
the amount of public assistance income•to be included as
income shall consist of:
1) the amount of the allowance or grant exclusive of the
amount specifically designated for shelter and utilities,
plus
2) the maximum amount which the public assistance agency
could in fact allow for the family for shelter and
utilities;
g. periodic and determinable allowances, such as alimony and child
support payments, and regular contributions or gifts received
from persons not residing in the dwelling;
h. all regular pay, special pay and allowances of a member of the
Armed Forces (whether or not living in the dwelling) who is
head of the family or spouse (refer to 2e of this section).
2.
9EVI . E D
0
The following items shall not be considered as income:
a. casual, sporadic or irttgular gifts;
b. amounts which are specifically for or in reimbursement of
the cost of medical expenses;
c. lump -sun additions to family assets, such as Inheritances,
insurance payments (including payments under health and
accident insurance and Wirker's Compensation), capital gains
and settlement for personal or property losses (refer to
section regarding assets over $5,000);
d. amounts of educational scholarships paid directly to the
student or to the educational institution and amount paid
by the Goverment to a veteran for use in meeting the costs
of tuition, books, fees and equipment. Any amounts of such
scholarships, or payments to veterans, not used for the
above purposes of which are available for subsistence are
to be included in income;
e. the special pay to a serviceman head of a family away from
home and exposed to hostile fire;
f. relocation payments made pursuant to Title II of the Uniform
Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies
Act of 1970;
g. foster child care payments;
h. the value of coupon allotments for the purpose of food
pursuant to the Food Stamp Act of 1964 which is in excess
of the amount actually charged the eligible household;
I. payments received pursuant to participation in the following
volunteer programs under the ACTION Agency:
1) National Volunteer Anti -poverty Programs which include
VISTA, Service Learning Programs and Special Volunteer
Programs;
2) National Older American Volunteer Programs for persons
aged 60 years and over which include Retired Senior
Volunteer Programs. Foster Grandparent Program. Older
American Community Services Program and National Volunteer
Program to Assist Small Business Experience. Service Corps
of Retired Executive (SCORE) and Active Corps of
Executives (ACE).
3. If the circumstances are such that it is not feasible to reasonably
anticipate a level of income over a 12 -month period, a shorter period
may be used subject to a redetermination at the end of such period.
C. Assets. The only asset limitation is in conjunction with the determination
of whether a family is a lower income family or a very low income family in
relation to income as outlined in section B above. Net family asset mean
value of equity in real property, savings, stocks, bonds and other forms
of capital investment. The value of necessary items such as furniture.
automobiles and clothing shall be excluded. Any applicant who assigned.
conveyed, transferred or otherwise disposed of property within the pest
two years without fair consideration in order to meet the assets limitation
as regards income shall be ineligible.
3-
Families determined to be ineligible shall be notified by letter immediately j
of the determination and the reasons) therefore. The letter shall states f.8
that the applicant has the right within -a reasonable time (specified in the
letter) to request an informal hearing. If, after conducting such an
informal hearing it is determined that the applicant is still ineligible,
it shall so notify the applicant in writing.
An applicant may be ineligible for participation in the City of Plymouth's
MRA Section 8 Existing Housing Program if, under a previous Plymouth NRA
Assistance Payment Contract and lease:
1. The applicant was evicted for nonpayment of his/her share of the
rent and Plymouth HRA approved the eviction;
2. The owner is or was entitled to payment from the Plymouth MRA
for vacancy loss or damage in excess of the security deposit
pursuant tr Sections 1.4 and 1.5 of the Housing Assistance
Payments Contract; or
3. The applicant engaged in conduct at the leased premises which:
a. resulted in physical injury to other tenants or other
tenants' guests,
b. endangered the life, safety and welfare of other tenants
or other tenants' guests, or
c. caused substantial and extraordinary damage to the leased
premises or the property of other tenants or other tenants'
guests on the leased premises.
II. SELECTION OF FAMILIES
A. Each applicant shall be assigned his/her appropriate place in sequence
based upon date and time his application is received, suitable type or
size of certificate available and factors affecting prefereme 8i'
priority established by the Authority's regulations.
The Authority shall make its selections from this waiting list so that:
1) it wilt be able to honor all outstanding certificates of family
participation within its Annual Contributions Contract authorization;
2) at least 30% of the families for whom leases are approved by the HRA
are very low income families.
8. Certificates of Family Participation shall be made without regard to race,
color., religion, sex or national origin. A family must continue to occupy
its approved unit to remain eligible for participation in the Housing
Assistance Payments Program except under the following conditions. If a
family wishes to vacate its unit at the end of the lease term (or prior
thereto but is required to move for reasons other than violations of the
lease on the part of the family as determined by the HRA), the family
shall be given a new Certificate of Family Participation providing for
housing assistance payments for occupancy of another approvable unit,
If:
1. the family provides reasonable notice (at least 30 days) to the
HRA of its iitention to vacate;
4-
2. the HRA determines that the family is in compliance with the a '9•
provisions of the lease, including provisions requiring notice
to the owner, if applicable;
3. the HRA determines that the family continues to be eligible for
such assistance;
4. the HRA has sufficient funds under its Annual Contributions
Contract.
D. Preference in the Selection of Persons to Receive a Certificate. Within
the provisions of Section 11, A above, in selecting eligible applicants
to be issued a Certificate, the Authority will give consideration to the
following factors in the order shown:
1. whether the applicant is a displaced family or about to be displaced
by urban renewal or other governmental action;
2. handicapped persons (as defined under Section I of this policy);
3. families with income that qualifies them as very low Income according
to Section 8 income limit computation for Hennepin County.
4. Those battered women and their children wh9 er8 referred by a battered
women's shelter who are residents of the City of Plymouth.
iII. Schedule of Gross Family Contributions
A. ..If a family qualifies for any of these categories, they are charged 15%
of their monthly gross income for the monthly Gross Family Contribution:
1. Very large lower income family. A lower income family which
includes eight or more minors (a member of the family household
except for foster children other than the family head or spouse
who is under 18 years of age or is a full-time student).
2. Large very low income family. A very low income family which
Includes six or more minors.
3. A family which has exceptional medical or other expenses. Medical
expenses and/or unusual expenses*, respectively which exceed 25%
of the Annual Income.
B. Other than families in the special category in A above. In the case of
other eligible families, the monthly Gross Family Contribution shall be
25% of the family's monthly income after allowances but in no event less
than 15% of the family's monthly gross income.
Unusual Expenses. Amounts paid by the family for the care of minors under 13 years
or for the care of disabled or handicapped family household members, but only where
such care is necessary to enable a family member to be gainfully employed and the
amount allowable as unusual expenses shall not exceed the amount of income from
such employment.
Annual Income After Allowances. The annual income less:
1. $300 for each minor; and
2. Medical expenses which exceed 3% of the annual income; and
3. Unusual expenses.
5-
Tnahfiyei' Fah^iItj
C_ redly.
velf*A a5 per cha"66
ih HUD M5018+0% -
IV. Finders -Keepers" Policy
A holder of a Certificate of Family Participation shall be responsible for
finding an existing housing unit suitable to the holder's needs and desires
in any area within the PHA's jurisdiction and within the applicable fair
market rent. A holder of a certificate may select the dwelling unit which
the holder already occupies if the unit qualifies as existing housing. By
no action, either direct or indirect. may the PHA reduce the family's opportunity
to choose among the available units in the housing market within its jurisdiction.
A holder of a Certificate of Family Participation from one HRA in the Minneapolls-
St. Paul Metro area who wishes to locate within the jurisdiction of another HRA,
may receive a transfer certificate in accordance with the procedures for Inter -
jurisdiction Mobility as contained in Appendix A of this document.
V. Lease Approval
A. The family shall submit to the HRA a Request for Lease Aproval, the family's
inspection report, the owner's inspection report and a copy of the proposed
lease.
B. The lease may be approved if:
1. The HRA determines that the unit 1s in decent, safe and sanitary
condition;
2. The rent is reasonable;
3. The proposed lease complies with the requirements of HUD.
C. If the HRA determines that the lease cannot be approved for any reason
listed above. the HRA shall so notify the owner and the family.
6-
VI. .Re-.examinatlon , ' •
A. Re-examination of the famiiy intone, composition and the extent of
medical or other unusual expenses incurred by the family shall be made
by the HRA each year (Note: The PHA may elect to re-examine elderly
every two years). At that time, appropriate redeterminations shall be
made by the HAA of the amount of family contribution and the amount of
the housing assistance payment, all in accordance with schedules and
criteria established by HUD.
B. In connection with periodic re-examination of family income, the NRA shall
ascertain whether at least 30% of all the assisted families are very low
income families; and where the percentage is lower than 305, the HRA shall
Issue Certificates of Family Participation only to very low income families
on the waiting list until the 305 level is again achieved.
C. Once rent is established, such rental rate shall remain in effect until
the next annual re-examination or until circumstances occur that warrant
a special rent and income review. Anytime any of the following circum.
stances occur rent and income shall be reviewed and rent adjusted in
accordance with the approved schedule of .ruts.
1. When the tenant requests an adjustment in the amount of gross
family contribution due to a change in family circumstances (such
as a change in family composition, decrease in incise or an
increase in medical or other unusual circumstances).
2. When the gross family contribution is decreased in accordance
with item number 1, above, the tenant must report all changes in
family circumstances which would result in an increased gross family
contribution which occur prior to his/her regular re-examinatica in
which case the contributions will be appropriately adjusted.
3. When required by changes in HUD regulations.
D. Tenants are to be notified in writing of any change in rent resulting
from a rent review.
E. If tenant m':riftesenMIons at the time of admission, annual re-examination.
or rent eevtrw r•«i*d P. amily to pay a lower rent than called for, such
tenant will w sor,,:o pay the difference between the rent paid and
what should have been paid. Any attempt by the tenant to willfully defraud
the agency or the United States -Government will result in the agency referring
the case to the Investigator General's Office of the U.S. Government for
their investigation and disposition.
F. Increases in rent resulting from rent reviews are to be effective the first
of the second month following the change.
G. Decreases in rent resulting from rent reviews are to be effective the first
of the first month following the change.
7-
Vit. Ineligible and Over -Income Families
1f, at the time of re-examination or a s0ecial income and rent review. the
amount payable by the family toward the gross rent equals the gross rent for
the unit it occupies, their eligibility for assistance shall be terminated.
This termination shall not affect the family's other rights under its lease nor
shall such termination preclude resumption of payments as a result of subsequent
changes in income of rents or other relevant circumstances during the term of
the Contract.
Vill. Verification of Applicants' Statements and income
A. Applicants shall be required to furnish proof of their statements when
required by the HRA to reasonably assure accuracy.
B. Certification by applicants wilt normally be considered sufficient
verification of family composition and residence. Certification is
provided by the applicant's signature an the appiication fv a dwelling.
Certification by signing the application for continued occupancy will be
considered sufficient verification of family composition at re-examination.
C. All earned income shall be verified at the time of admission or annual
re-examination through employers, N-2 forms, check stubs or other means
to assure accuracy. Assets shall be verified by savings account passbooks
and other photostatic or carbon copies of documents in the applicant's
possession which substantiate his statements.
D. Unearned incomes shalt be verified by viewing checks, certificates of
award or other means te, assure accuracy.
E. All determinations shall be fully documented in the files.
F. A signed statement from the Relocation Officer of the displacing govern-
mental agency will be requited as proof that an applicant has been, if
claimed, displaced or is to be displaced by public action.
Ix. Occupancy Sta Wards
A. In issuing the Certificate of Family Participation, the PHA will determine
the appropr'ate unit of size by applying the following criteria.
1. The bedroom size assigned should not require more than two persons
to occupy the same bedroom.
2. The bedroom size assigned should not require persons of the opposite
sex, other than husband and wife, to occupy the same bedroom other
than infants or very young children.
These principles result in the following standards:
No. oT BR. Minimum Maximum
1 1 2
2 2 4
3 4 6
8-
The foregoing guidelines are set forth solely for determining the
bedroom sizf to be- designated on the certificate of eligibility.
The regulatlons provide that the family may rent a larger dwelling
provided the rent to owner plus any allowances for utilities and
other services does not exceed the fair market rent for bedrom
size designated on the certificate of eligibility. The family May
rent a smaller bedroom size unit provided the unit meets the standards
of acceptability, i.e. ",..at least one sleeping room or living/sleeping
room of appropriate size for each two persons."
X. Misrepresentation
The applicants are to be notified in writing of any misrepresentations or
lease violations revealed through the a.rmival re-examination or other occurrences
and any other corrective action required by the Authority.
X1. Review and Amendment of Policies
The foregoing policies are subject to review and amendment by the Commissioners
of the Plymouth !busing and Redevelopment Authority from time to time.
X11. Utility Allowance Schedule
Where the family pays directly for one or more utilities or services, the
following emunts will be deducted from the gross rent in determining the
contract rent and is included in the gross family contribution:
UTILITY SCNF.OULE
Cooking + Lights Total
I OR $
2 OR 5 + 11 16 KEY
3 OR 6 + 12 18
X1I1. Fair Market Rents for Plymouth
Unit Size Unit Type Rents
I OR Existing 349
p
2 OR Existing 409
3 OR Existing 412
XIV. Termination of Family Eligibility for Housing Assistance Payments and
Grievance Procedures
Every family receiving housing assistance payments under this Program agrees
to perform all of its obligations under the Program and is responsible as
well for fulfilling all its obligations under its Certificate of Family
Participation and under its Lease with the Owner. The HRA may determine
9.
Oat a family is ineligible for further housing assistance payments because
of --failure to comply with the. family's obligations under the Certificate of
Family Participation, which include the foregoing. and terminate payments to
the owner under the Housing Assistance Payments Contract.
A. Such determination may not be made until the HRA has given the family
notice and an opportunity to respond in accordance with the provisions
of this section.
B. Such determination may be made only for cause including, but not
necessarily limited too the following:
1. Failure of the family to comply with the 'Conditions" stated
in the Certificate .of Family Participation. Including the
obligations to:
a) provide such family income information and records as
may be required in the administration of the program,
b) permit Inspection of its dwelling unit at reasonable
times after reasonable notice, and
c) give at least 30 days notice to the agency of the
family's intention to vacate the unit in accordance
with these policies.
2. Failure 1 the family to remain within the -family income and
composition criteria for the HAP Program upon re-examination
in accordance with these policies and 24 CFR Part 882.
3. Failure of the family to reimburse the HkA or to satisfy the
liability for payment to an owner pursuant to 24 CFR §882.112.
This includes the failure of the family to perform any agreement
made with the HRA for extended payment -of amounts owed pursuant
to Part i. 0.1 and 2.
4. Failure of the family to comply with its obligations under the
lease with the owner lit such a way as to constitute material
noncompliar.:e with the rental agreement. (See Part 1, 0.3 of
the policies.)
C. The notice to be given by the HRA to the family pursuant to this section:
1. Shall be in writing, given personally to a member of the family or
as a letter sent by cert!°:ed mail, properly stamped and addressed,
to the family at its last address contsined in the HRA file. with a
proper return address and request for forwarding if the family has
changed its pott offi:e address and not infermed the HRA:
2. Shall state that on certain grounds and for factual reasons set
mrth with enough -rpecificiby so as to enable the family to prepare
obj.ccions tna% the family's eligibility for further housing
assistance payments, along with payments to the owner under the HAP
Contract, will terminate as of a date specified in the notice; but
that the family may request a hearing to the matter to present its
objections to the proposed terminations.; and that its eligibility
and the payments will not be terminated pending any decision
subsequent to the hearing.
10-
dzoq•
S. Shall i nfoim the family of the procedures necessary to obtain
2-50shearsng. a
D. A request for a hearing must be made in writing to the HRA, or in person
by the family at the HFA offices, with n 10 days of the earlier of the date
of receipt of the notice of proposed termination or 13 days titer date of
mailing. -receipt being presumed. 'If the family does not request a hearing
in accordance with this paragraph, then the proposed termination shall
become final as of the date specified in the notice.
E. if the family requests a twrirg. it shall be entitled to a hearing on
the Issues at the offices of the HRA at a date and time reasonably con-
venient to the family - no more than 14 days after the request if possible.
I. The family shall also be offered a private conference with a staff
AMM person nwj assigned to the file preceding the hearing. This conference
shall be for the purpose of ddscussing the proposed termination
informally and to foster settlement without a hearing. it shall be
held within 3 working days after the date of request.
a. The HRA will file a written record of the private conference
conclusions and thali deliver or mail to the family its
conclusions. the reasons therefor and further procedures
to be followed if desired by the family.
b. If -the family accepts the conclusions. the matter as
determined at the informal conference shall became final.
2. If the family declines such private conference or does not accept
the proposed disposition of the matter. a hearing in accordance
with the following procedures shall be held as scheduled.
F. The Hearing
1. The parties shall be entitled to a fair hearing before the Commissioners
of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority of the City of Plymouth in
accordance with the rules herein. These Commissioners shall act as
the hearing board. Acting as the hearing officer will be the HRA's
Executive Director except in those cases where he has been directly
involved with the family in which event the HRA Commissioners shall
appoint a hearing officer from the Authority.
2. The parties may be .represented at the hearing by legal counsel or
another person chosen as a representative.
3. The hearing shall be private unless the family requests otherwise
and the hearing officer agrees to a public hearing. This shall not
be construed to limit the attendance of persons who are witnesses for
or representatives of either party, or those who have a valid interest
in 1:1- proceedings. Whether a party has a valid interest in the
proceedings will be determined by the hearing officer.
4. The family representative may examine before the hear0.9 and, at his
expense. copy all nonprivileged documents and records and all regulations
of the Authority that are relevant to the issues to be raised at the
hearing. One copy of records in the family's file will be provided
without cost. Any document not made available, after request therefor
by the family. may not be used as evidence by the HRA at the hearing.
The family may request, in advance and at its expense, a transcrt,nt of
the hearing. Either party may record the hearing.
11-
5. If a family representative fails to appear at a hedring. the officer
may postpone the hearing for five (5) working days or may make a
s
a
determination that the family -has waived its right to the hearing.
b. At the hearing the family and HRA staff may Oresent evidence and
arguments in support of their positions, controvert evidence relied
on by the other party and confront and cross-examine all witnesses
whose testimony, or information is relied on. Hearings ceeducted
by the hearing officer shall be informal and any issues raised by
the parties may be received by the hearing officer without regard
to whether that evidence would be admissable under rules of evidence
employed in judicial proceedings.
7. The fjmily and the HRA staff shall be afforded the right to examine,
upon request, at a reasonable time prior to the hearing, a list of
all witnesses who r!ay testify on either party's behalf. The identity
of any persons disclosing information to the HRA need not be disclosed
unless the HRA intends to rely on such information at the hearing.
G. Decision of the Hearing Board
I. The decision of the hearing board shall be based solely and exclusively
upon facts presented at the hearing and upon applicable HRA and Department
of Housing Urban Development regulations. To the extent that the
decision is not inconsistent with State law. United States Housing
Act of 1931 as amendeo, HUD regulations and requirements promulgated
thereunder or the annual contributions contract, and to the extent
provided in Subsection 5, below, the decision of the hearing board
shall be binding on the HRA.
2. The hearing officer shall prepare a written decision. including a
statement of the reasons for his determination and indicating the
evidence the board relied on. This shall be done within 15 days after
the date of the hearing. Copies thereof shall be mailed or delivered
to the parties or their legal representatives.
3. The written decision of the hearing board, with all names and
identifying references deleted, shall be maintained on file by the
HRA and mace available for inspection by a subsequently contesting
family or its representative.
4. Any judicial decision or related settlement pertaining to the decision
of the hearing board shall also be maintained on file by the HRA and
made available for inspection by a subsequently contesting family or
Its representative.
5. If the decision is in favor of the family, the HRA shall promptly take
all actions necessary to carry out such decision or refrain from any
action prohibited by such decision.
H. Appeals From The Hearing Board's Decision
A decision by the hearing board which is in favor of the HRA or denies
the family its requested relief in whole or in part. shall not constitute
a waiver of or affect in any manner whatever rights the family may have
to a trial de novo in judicial proceedings which may thereafter be brought
in the matter.
12-
MvAAMM r%
r.Olr.J/
I. Notices
Any notice required in this procedure will be sufficient if delivered
to the family in person or to a person of suitable age and discretion
residing in the family's dwelling unit, or if sent by certified mail,
properly addressed to the family, postage prepaid. Any notices to the HRA
will be sufficient if delivered to an employee of the NRA at its office
during normal working hours or sent to the office by certified moil,
properly addressed, postage prepaid.
J. Grievance Procedure
3027.
In the event a participating family disputes an action of the HRA or failure
to act involving interpretation or application of the HRA's regulations,
policies or procedures under the HAP Program other than with regard to
approval of a proposed eviction, the family may invoke the foregoi
private conference and hearing procedures to resolve the dispute. A :hea]
rIngofficershallbeappointedwhoisaCityemployee, agreeable to both
and not involved pre=viously with the aggrieved party. Normally this
officer would be the Executive Director. Such procedures Fey be invoked by
filing a written request with the HRA specifying the grounds upon which the
dispute is based and the action requested. Employees of the HRA will assist
any family in preparing such a written request. Once scheduled, the hearing
officer may determine that a matter appears to be so frivolous or `nsubstantial
that it does not merit a hearing in which instance the famil,, shall be
entitled only to a private conference intended to seek - solution to the
problem.
13-
0 it
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
3400 PLYMOUTH BLVD., PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447
TELEPHONE (612) 559-2800
MEMO
DATE: July 29, 1982
TO: HRA Commissioners and City Council
FROM: Milt Dale, Associate Planner
SUBJECT: Final Funding Allocation for Year VIII CD8G Program
Staff was informed in May that the City of Plymouth would be receiving
additional CD8G funds over its earlier announced allocation of $114,806.
The final funding amount will be $10,611 more or a total of $125,417
for Year VIII. The Plymouth HRA earlier recommended the following
project activity allocation:
1. Site acquisition for assisted housing $80,806
2. Housing rehabilitation giant program 34,000
Hennepin County has placed the additional $10,611 in a contingency fund
account which will allow th* City to use the funds for whatever eligible
activity it deems appropviate.
Staff was informed by Hennepin County that Plymouth was in receipt of more
CDBG monies due to a recalculation of the City's population based on the
most recent 1980 census results. Attached is a resolution approving the
year VIII CDBG Program application.
Attachment:
Resolution
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
M . 2.
Pursuant to due call and notice -thereof, a meeting of the City
Council of the City of Plymouth, Minnesota, wase eloa" n th day of
1 The following members were present:
The following members were absent:
Introduced the following Resolution and moved
Its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 82-
AUINORIZING SUBMISSION OF CITY OF PLYMOUTH GRANT APPLICATION TO HENNEPIN COUNTY
FOR INCLUSION IN THE URBAN HENNEPIN COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT
APPL!CpTION IN ACCORD WITH THE HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ACT OF 1974
WHEREAS, the City of Plymouth has executed a joint powers agreement with Hennepin
County thereby agreeing to participate in a Grant Application under the Urban
County designation provided for in the Housing and Community Development Act of
1974; and,
WHEREAS, a grant application has been prepared requesting funds to undertake a
community development program, including appropriate citizen participation, goal
establishment and implementation plans and procedures; and,
WHEREAS, the Housing and Redevelopment Authority held a public hearing on March 1,
1982, regarding the expenditure of the Year VIII funds for the City of Plymouth
and has recommended several projects for expenditure of said funds; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed the recommendations of the Housing and
Redevelopment Authority and of the City Staff regarding the proposed activities
and program amounts for Year VIII; and,
WHEREAS, the proposed activities and grant amounts were referred to the designated
Planning Area Citizen Advisory Group established by Hennepin County for review and
comment; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Area 2 Citizen Advisory Committee has recommended approval
of the program, subject to final planning allocation by Hennepin County;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PLYMOUTH,
MINNESOTA, that it should and hereby does direct the administrative staff to
prepare and submit the necessary application for the City of Plymouth's Year VIII
participation in the Housing and Community Development Plans and Programs for
expenditure on the follwoing projects in the respective proposed dollar amounts;
o
Resolution No.
Page 2
ACTIVITY PROGRAM AMOUNT
i
1. Direct Benefit Program for Low/Moderate $ 80,806
Income Housing Assistance and Land Write-
down
2. Housing Rehabilitation Prr,,,*am $ 34,000
3. Contingency $ 10,611
TOTAL $ 125,417
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing Resolution was duly seconded
byand upon vote being taken thereon, the
following voted in favor t ereof:
The following voted against or abstained:
Whereupon the Resolution was declared duly passed and adopted.
THE REPORT OF THE PRESIDENT'S COMMISSION ON HOUSING:
FINDINGS AND OBSERVATIONS
Prepared by Mary K. Nenno, Associate Director of NAHRO for Policy Development
ORIGIN AND ORGANIZATION
COMMISSION REPORT: The Commission on Housing was es-
tablished b
s-
te s e y xecutive Order on June 16, 1981, and was
composed of 30 commissioners appointed by President
Reagan. The chairperson was William F. McKenna, an
attorney from los Angeles; the vice -chairperson was
Carla A. Hills, a Washington. D.C., attorney and former
Secretary of HUD. A small staff of 25 professional
persons was assembled to work with the commission, in-
cluding support staff provided by six federal depart-
ments and agencies. Staff director was Dr. rent W.
Colton, formerly professor of public management.
Brigham Young University. The commission was organized
into six standing committees, as well as special task
forces. An interim report was released on October 31.
1981, and the final report on April 29, 1982.
The Executive Order charged the commission to: (1)
analyze the relationship of homeownership to political.
social, and economic stability within the nation; (2)
review all existing federal housing policies and pro-
grams; (3) assess those factors which contribute to
the cost of housing, as well as the current housin
finance structure and practices in the country; (4)
sez:k to develop housing and mortgage finance options
which strengthen the ability of the private sector to
maximize opportunities for homeownership and provide
adequate shelter for all Americans; and (5) detail
program options for basic reform of federally sub-
sidized housing.
OBSERVATIONS: As -presidential study groups on hous-
ng got _. s was a comparatively short-range effort,
encompassing a period of less than 11 months. Closest
to it in composition was the "President's Committee
on Urban Housing." a business -oriented group headed
by Edgar F. Kaiser (chairman of the Board of Kaiser
Industries). appointed by President Johnson in June
1967, and completing its work in about 19 months. The
National Commission on Urban Problems." a joint com-
mission of the President and the Congress, a diverse
group of 16 headed by former Senator Paul H. Douglas,
undertook a more comprehensive agenda with housing as
only one component, and completed its work in Decem-
ber 1968 after 24 months. The degree to which re-
ports of presidential commissions influence federal
policy is always a question. Much depends on the
political climate and the timing under which the
report is released. The Kaiser and Douglas reports
undoubtedly influenced the content and passage of the
comprehensive Housing and Urban Development Act of
1968. At the least. commission reports add to the
body of information and opinion about a subject area,
are referred to as issues arise. and became part of
the record to be debated.
PERFECTIVE OF THE COMMISSION
COMMISSION FINDINGS: In the proface and overview of
e final report. a commission states as its objec-
tive "to seek to create a housing sector that functions
In an open environment --with minimal government partic-
ipation." It advocates the following principles for
a national policy: (1) achieve fiscal responsibility
and monetary stability in the economy; (2) encourage
free and deregulated housing markets; (3) rely on the
private sector; (4) promote an enlightened federalism
with minimal government intervention; (5) recognize a
continuing role of government to address the housing
needs of the poor; (6) direct programs toward people
rather than toward structures; and, (7) insure maxi-
mum freedom of housing choice.
The specific recommendations of the commission sup-
port these principles. The overriding view of the com-
mission is that the basic solution to housing problems
lies in reducing inflation and strengthening the na-
tional economy. Further. the commission rejects any
immediate. short-term relief measures for the housing
industry or for housing finance institutions: "To
take reflationary action apparently in support of
housing would be to sow the seeds of another crop of
disasters. The commission judged suggestions for
cures to the current crisis by measures of whether
they would ease or block the passage to a more effi-
cient system of housing supply and a more effective
system of housing demand in the years to cam ... fue-
damental, long term reforms must be made."
OBSERVATIONS: Many housing professionals and interest
groups do not read past history, current needs. or
necessary remedial actions in the same way as the
housing commission. The commission approach would
be. in effect. a reversal of much of the national
government's interest in housing since the 1930s
and a return to a "laissez-faire" approach. These
interests would argue that the initial reasons for
government involvement were precisely that unfet-
tered private interests could not do the job atone.
They would also contend that unless some short-term
remedial actions are taken for the homebuilding in-
dustry, there may be little left to transfer to a
reformed system. In addition. the commission's
report cannot be divorced from the prevailing cli-
mate surrounding the federal budget: Proposed ad-
ministration cut-backs in existing housing support
reflect this agenda; many programs are being curb tiled
not because they do not work. but because they re-
present significant federal budget commitments. An
important, unwritten influence behind the commission's
report was undoubtedly the Reagan Administration's
drive to curtail feder4l government financial obliga-
tions in the housing area.
CONTENT OF FINAL REPORT
COMMISSION FINDINGS: The final commission report of
287 printed pages Ts divided into four major sections:
I - Housing for Lower -Income People; li - Housing Op-
portunities in the Private Sector; III - Financing
America's Housing; and IV - Government Regulation and
the Cost of Housing. These sections are further
divided into chapters covering sub -areas. Over 100
recommendations and options are proposed for the future
direction of housing. They do not deal with specific
issues of budget or program administration. but focus
on establishing the foundations for a revitalized
system of housing delivery for the long term. The
essence of the commission proposals is to "provide
the legal and economic rules for an efficient and
stable system of housing finance, place scarce sub-
sidy dollars where they will increase effective de-
mand, and eliminate regulations that distort both
demand and supply to active governmental purposes
without budgeting governmental costs."
OBSERVATIONS: The strength of the commission's re-
port is the complete integration of major aspects of
housing concern under one cohesive concept, i.e. a
new delivery system for housing. The test of success
is how completely it has identified the essential
co6Vonents. how accurately it has read current needs
and likely trends. and how workable the proposed
new system can be. In the view of this observer.
two essential components are either missing or very
weak in the commission's long-range housing reform
package: (1) The relationship between housing.
national economic policy, and economic revitaliza-
tion. and (2) the recognition of housing in the con-
text of physical development requirements for the
1980s. Despite the commission's strong view that
the basic solution for housing problems lies in a
restoration of the total national economy. there are
no mechanisms proposed to link housing to federal
government decisions on economic or fiscal policy
except in the tax structgre; or to facilitate the
linkage of housing to expanded economic development.
Also. the commission report does not address housing
In the context of critical development issues immedi-
ately ahead; there is no reference to the important
report on "Development Choices for the 1980s" com-
pleted by a bi-partisan council of private and public
participants in early 1981. The commission's hous-
sing reform system would leave these matters largely
in the hands of the private marketplace. or in the
hands of local and state government.
CHANGES IN HOUSING NEED
COMMISSION FINDINGS (Chapter 1): The commission anal-
yzes
tWei
c angTiesinthequalityandaffordabilityof
housing since the 1940s. and concludes that the
physical condition of American housing has improved to
such an extent that it is no longer the predominant
housing problem: the portion of the housing stock
classified as inadequate (or needing rehabilitation)
was 7.5 percent in 1977, or 5.6 million household
units. The predominant housing problem now. is not
housing adequacy, but housing affordability for the
X111
5
very lowest incomes group: 10.5 million very low-income
less than 50 percent of arpa median ingce) renters
in 1977 paid more than 30 percent of their incomes for
rent. of which 2 Pillion lived in inadequate housing.
Chapter 1 also finds that the subsidy costs of "pro-
ducer -oriented" assistance programs (Section 8 new
construction and substantial rehabilitation) are al-
most twice as much as those assisting families to oc-
cupy existing housing (Section 8 existing housing).
Further. because of their high costs, new construction
programs serve half as many households as would be
served wish the same funds in a program using the
existing housing stock. The long-term subsidies at-
tached to new construction programs over 20 to 40
years, and the indirect subsidies through the tax
structure and secondary mortgage market assistance.
place too high a cost burden on the federal govern-
ment. The report does not record that new construc-
tion programs produce physical assets used for public
purposes over lung periods of time. Their findings
lead the commission to the recommendations to convert
federal housing assistance to a consumer -oriented
payment program: "Given the predominance of the af-
fordability problem, the heavy emphasis on production -
oriented programs appears to be a solution to the
wrong problem."
OBSERVATIONS: The findings of the commission on hous-
ing adequacy and affordability are based on certain
key criteria. Housing adequacy is related to decen-
nial census factors of housing dilapidation, over-
crowding, and presence or absence of plumbing facil-
ities; and to data from the Annual Housing Survey on
the condition of housing structures. The commission
found 7.5 percent of all units inadequate using these
criteria; other housing analysts, using similar data.
have reached higher proportions (9.7 percent).
Notably absent are any crite-1 a related to neighbor-
hood facilities and environment; yet the 1977 Annual
Housing Survey found substantial proportions (20 to 30
percent) of households reporting undesirable neighbor-
hood conditions services." A key question is whether
measure of "housing adequacy" can really separate the
condition of individual housing structure from its
surroundings; and whether including neighborhood cri-
teria would produce a different picture than the one
the commission records based on structure data only.
The basic criteria used to assess "housing affordabili-
ty" are the rent -to -intone ratio, a national based
rule -of -thumb" that any household that pays more than
30 percent of its income for rent is paying too much
for housing; and a conclusion that the households most
in need of assistance are those with the lowest dollar
income.
A more valid criterion for assessing housing afford-
ability might well be the rent which a household can
afford to pay and still meet its other household needs.
The "lower -level" budgets compiled by the Bureau of
Labor Statistics for retired couples and four -person
worker families document that the proportion of income
that a household can pay for rent and still meet other
needs varies widely by geographic location and by
type of household. The net result of using a single
J
I W1 I in
national rent -to -income criterion is to understate
the housing needs of lour -paid family -type households
with relatively higher dollar incomes but also higher
needs to meet lower level living standards. In short,
the criteria used to determine "housing adequacy" and
housing affordability" need further examination.
HOUSING PAYMENTS PROGRAM
COMMISSION FINDINGS (Chaeter, 2): Based on its
TRdings that 'housingaffordability" is the predomi-
nant housing problem, the housing commission proposes
that the long-range reform required in federal housing
assistance is to move away from reliance on housing
production programs to a primary use of a housing
payments program that provides cash assistance to in-
dividual households to assist them in paying for
existing housing on the private market. Housing pay-
ments are not tied to a housing unit, but are paid
directly either to a program participant or to the
landlord of the housing unit selected for the renter.
The proposed new program leans heavily on the ex-
perience of the experimental housing allowance pro-
gram (EHAP) and the Section 8 existing housing pro-
gram, but with some differences. The basic differ-
ences between the housing payment program and the
Section 8 existing program is that. under the new
program, payments could be made directly to tenants;
and the amount of assistance is determined according to
a fixed dollar amount for a given level of household
income and size, rather than the actual rent. Under
this payment system, households would be free to pay
more than an established fair market rent (FMR), but
would be encouraged to shop for a unit with a cost less
than the payment they would receive under the housing
payment standard. The commission would restrict eligi-
bility to families with incomes of no more than 50 per-
cent of median area income in the case of a family of
four, with adjustments for various family sizes. The
new program is not proposed as an "entitlement" pro-
gram where every household meeting income criteria
would receive assistance since this could not be
achieved with available federal resources. Instead.
the commission proposes that criteria for assistance
also include current residence in inadequate housing,
payment of housing costs in excess of SO percent of
income. or involuntary displacement, thus reducing
the pool of eligible families.
OBSERVATIONS: A neglected area of analysis related to
the commission's proposal for a housing payment program
is the finding in the housing allowance program that
households used most of their housing allowance for
non -housing items --the basic benefit was to the indi-
vidual family as an ercome supplement., not to improve
its housing situation. An additional factor. given
only passing reference in the commission report, is the
substan'ial ovee-lap in families to be served by the new
payment program and those receiving welfare assistance.
In fact, the annual housing expenditure under the wel-
fare program is a far larger effort (S.% billion a year)
than that anticipated under the new patents program.
Also, it is estimated that at least one-neIf of these
welfare families live in housing that is deteriorating,
dilapidated, unsafe. or overcrowded.
The commission's report calls for "coordination" with
intone transfer programs. particularly with aid for
families with dependent children (AFDC). But what
does this mean? Will the new housing payments re-
place the housing component in welfare budgets? if
so. will not the net result be a transfer of this
intone support" burden from welfare to housing?
Any long-term system should of necessity involve a
basic reform which links "income support" programs
under welfare with "housing assistance" programs in
a far more equitable and effective way. Most de-
sirable would be a reform of welfare shelter allow-
ances --to separate them from other family expenses.
fund them at more adequate levels in terms of local
housing costs, and link them with housing assistance
programs focused on rehabilitating deficient housing in
a context of neighborhood improvement and conservation.
In terms of program design, experience would dictate
caution in terms of separating assistance from the
housing unit. and giving it to the family to fend for
itself in the local market. Also. a housing assis-
tance payment unrelated to the cost of the houi,ing unit
could prove to be unworkable in terms of assuring land-
lord participation. Restricting intone eligibility to
households with incomes SO percent or less of the area
median would deny assistance to low -paid working house-
holds with higher dollar incomes, but also heavier house-
hold obligations and severe housing needs.
CDBG HOUSING COMPONENT
COMMISSION FINDINGS (Chaeter 21: The commission rec-
ognizes tat consumer -oriented assistance
payments fall short of what is required to produce new
housing units in local markets with a housing short-
age. or to rehabilitate housing that requires more
than minimal repairs. Its answer is to make housing
construction an eligible activity under the community
development block grant program (CDBG). and to add a
housing component weighted to local housing needs.
Housing component grant funds would be allocated on a
system similar to HUD's housing fair share formula.
Whether housing component funds could be used for other
CDBG purposes. or whether CDBG funds could be used for
mousing construction is an unresolved issue in the
final report.
OBSERVATIONS: The basic concept of providing housing
grant fundi—to be used in a flexible way by locali-
ties for new housing construction and substantial re-
habilitation, in conjunction with private financing
resources, has proved to be a useful one in the urban
development action grant program (UDAG). Often. how-
ever. additional federal assistance in the forms of
tax-exempt mortgage revenue bonds and secondary market
assistance (GNMA) have also been required. A basic
question is whether such a housing grant program
should be linked to CDBG on a general formula basis,
or whether it should be more closely targeted to be
used in conjunction with community development or
economic development initiatives. and a related com-
mitment of private investment resources. Another
basic point is that while one-time. front-end housing
construction grants can serve an important and useful
purpose, there will continue to be a need for longer
term housing assistance commitments related to hous-
ing construction for special housing needs, where a
longer-term obligation is required of investors and
sponsors. A critical but unanswered question is
whether a new housing component of CON would in-
volve a significant commitment of new grant funds.
PUBLIC HOUSING
COMMISSION FINDINGS (Chapter 31: The commission's
Tindin on publichousings that its basic problems
are twofold: increasing federal operating assistance
and undue federal control. The solution proposed by
the commission is to approach public housing on a proj-
ect -by -project basis. A determination would be made
on the future status of each project based on joint
assessments by the local public housing agency and the
federal government. Over a specified period of years,
public housing would be restored to local management
and control. pasiing to local governments and their
PHAs responsibility and choice in the use and dis-
position of projects. within stated objectives. The
federal government would continue to set standards
for income eligibility and rent payments, but federal
regulations in other areas would be reduced. Five
options for future use of a public housing develop-
ment are set forth: (1) retain the project under public
ownership with federal debt service payments and an
agreed-upon level of operating assistance continuing;
2) sell the project or convert it to homeownership,
with net proceeds after any sale dedicated to low in-
come housing purposes; (3) "deprogram" the project.
that is. sell or demolish any project that cannot be
maintained at reasonable cost; (4) free up project
rents, allowing the PHA to charge rents to cover
operating costs and continue only debt service sub-
sidy; and (5) develop an alternative tailored to the
unique circumstances of the project.
OBSERVATIONS: Approaching the public housing program
on a proect-by-project basis in the way suggested by
the commission could have advantages. However,
the end result for the total program in taking this
approach is at this point unknown and unclear. At
the local level under the consolidated annual contri-
butions contract, stronger projects can sustain
weaker ones. much like a balanced investment port-
folio. This would not be possible under the commis-
sion approach --each project would be required to
stand ion its own. Much depends on the soundness of
the methodology in assessing projects (as yet unde-
veloped), and the equity of the policies related to
administering such a system (as yet unformulated).
The project approach, also being discussed at HUD.
is worth exploration, but should be approached in a
truly objective manner. and not with a single objec-
tive of reducing federal costs.
SPECIALIZED HOUSING FOR ELDERLY AND HANDICAPPED
COMMISSION FINDINGS (Chapter 4): The commission
recognizes tat the increasing numbers of elderly
persons in the population, es well as the frailties
7
of old age require a special program, beyond those
advocated under housing payments and the housing con-
structior. component of COBG. Special program require-
ments also apply to handicapped persons. The objective
should be to avoid institutionalization if accessible
housing and adequate supportive services are available.
The commission also advocates home -sharing ,by elderly
homeowners, and the conversion of home equity into in-
come. In general, commission recommendations in this
area are much more tentative than in other areas. It
recommends the establishment of a White House task
force to develop a policy framework for the housing
needs of the frail elderly and the handicapped.
OBSERVATIONS: The recognition by the commission that
elderly, particularly the frail elderly. and handicapped
persons require special housing programs is welcomed.
and is beyond dispute. Assisted housing developments
serve elderly, and an increasing number of handicapped
persons, including public housing (46 percent elderly
occupancy). Section 8 new construction (79 percent
elderly), and the Section 202 programs. They have been
very successful. However, an increasing problem is how
to enable the "frail elderly" to maintain independent
living in these developments. HUD and FmHA congregate
housing service demonstrations now being evaluated can
provide important new evidence as to how to bring sup-
port services to these residents. Despite the concern
expresse4 by the commission about the costs of new con-
Uruction for these specialized needs, the construc-
tion of assisted housing. with appropriate supportive
services. should continue as an important component of
any future commitment; the cost is far less than in-
stitutional care. A final note of regret: in any
discussion of "special" housing needs. a major cate-
gory continues to be neglected --that of single -parent
households with children. Yet. these households com-
prise a large proportion of the very lowest income
population and of current assisted housing occupancy.
Special programs should also be developed for this
group.
As a service to members. copies of The Report
of the President's Commission on Housing are
available from NAHRO for $10.00. including
postage. Make checks payable to NAHRO. Post
Office Boz 2841, Washington, D.C. 20013.)
FNYX**'N 89
Alternate housing offers
elderly a new security.
By Neal R. Peirce
Washington -
Granny flats, shared housinngg,, group
homes. accessory apartment3'— the
new lingo is confusing, but the force
behind It quite simple. America's
ranks of the elderly, up 25 percent In
the 1970s; alone, continue to rise rap -
Idly. So do their housing needs.
Ise good news is that a new genera-
tion of housing solutions for older
Americans — experimental ideas,
many quite promising — Is cropping
up across the land. All are based on
local Witlall%e, not national policy.
The last national policy for housing
elderly Americans — coaxing them
out of their bornes and nelghbor-
boods and Into sterile. government -
subsidized, high-rise structures — :q
doubly discredited. First, federal.
subsidy money is drying up, perhaps
never to return. Second, surveys
show that the elderly, In overwhelm -
Ing numbers, don't want to move.
They'd prefer to "age in place" — It
not Iq their own homes, then at least
li their old neighborhoods.
Shared housing and group homes are
two of the most popular Ideas. In
shared housing, as older person In-
vites -one or more other persons —
sometimes other elderly, sometimes
younger people, and often both - to
share his or her house. Group homes
Involve several elderly people living
together In a house none of them
owns, often with a salaried resident
professional.
For elderly people buffeted by high
rentals and Inflatiob. Such arrange -
meats can be an economic godsend.
For communities with shortages of
affordable rentals, the housing sup-
ply is Increased.
Matching services, which link people
offering space In their homes with
those seeking shelter, are springing
up across the country. Some clients
pay rent. younger people sometimes
barter their help In the horse for
free room, and occasionally free
board.
Making compatible snatches Isn't al-
ways ersy, says Leao Dobkin of Ho-
mesharing for Seniors in Seattle.
Among the factors are desired loca-
tion, costs, space requirements.
kitchen arrangements, sex, smoking,
drinking, pets. "and above all attJ-
tudes, values. Interests and po,,rsonal-
ity fectors." Still, the benefits can be
very real. "It's worth an awful lot to
get a good night's sleep because
there's another person In the house,"
says one "matched" elderly person
In Duluth.
Short of actual shared housing,
there's the accessory apartment. or,
as many call them, "family conver-
sions," "mother-in-law apartments,"
mother -daughter homes." In Den-
mark they're called "kangaroo
apartments." All the terms refer to
an Independent unit — converted
garage or rec room, back wing, up-
per floor or whatever — added onto
or carved out pf a single-family
house.
The potential benefits for everybody
are impressive, notes housing consul-
tant Patrick Hare: Older homeown-
ers receive rental income and often
are enabled to stay in homes they'd
otherwise have to leave; both young
and old apartment -seekers can find
Inexpensive rentals, and the elderly
have less fear of criminal Intrusion
or personal accidents.
The rub Is toning: Accessory apart-
ments are Illegal In most single-tam-
Ily home neighborhoods. Proposals
to legalize them raise fears about
changing the character of our
neighborhood." There's an economic
lssur, too, since ownership usually
has paid off beyond homeowners'
fondest expectations. "Tinkering
with single-family zoning means tin-
kering with the underpinnings of the
good life' many people worked so
hard to achieve," says Hare. But le-
gal or not, the accessory apartments
are coming. In city and suburb alike.
Long Island has an estimated 15,000,
and they're appearing Increasingly
throughout the country.
Then there's the "granny flat" — an
Idea born In Australia and first publi-
cized here by the Council on Interna-
tional Urban Lialson. The Idea Is to
put a small, removable cottage in a
back or side yard to let one's elderly
parent live more Independently, but
still close to son or daughter. The
first U.S. prototype Is In Lancaster,
Pa., where the local Amish seek to
preserve extended family living.
The alternative to new housing op-
portunities for the elderly are grim:
driving more Into nussing homes,
where many quickly become frail
and dependent, at a huge cost to
them and to the government through
Medicare and Medicaid. How much
better it seems to permit older peo-
ple to "age In place," in familiar
surroundings.
A Conservation Foundation survey
turned up a range of ways that elder-
ly homeowners — 60 percent of
whom are women — can be helped
to keep their homes. local govern-
ments, sometimes using federal com-
munity block grants, often heip the
elderly poor overcome seemingly In-
surmountable barriers In financing
home repairs or wealherization to
reduce energy costs.
Now being Introduced, though at a
painfully slow pace, are ways elderly
people can stay in their homes but
benefit from the equity locked up in
their houses. One Idea is a "reverse -
annuity mortgage," In which a bank
gains eventual title to the house but
gives the homeowner monthly pay-
ments to cover living expenses.
Whether In cities, which have dispro-
portionate numbers of older people,
or in the suburbs, where most people
now approaching 65 live, helping the
elderly continue active, Independent
lives In their own neighborhoods
should be everyone's goal. The elder-
ly are us.
IIC. G.
Minneapolis Star and Tribune
EatabYahad 1987. Cbartes w. SMI Editor
Frank WMenspinp ESWINsws
TIM J. • Manapdq Editor/F@@Wn
ftwt d. white Edtortei Editor
Daum N. 00101 P10"
14A• Thwedaye dtdy 1, 1982
A housing strategy for the '809
Momentum continues to build for using accessory
apartments and other "add-on" units to relieve the
Twin atles area's rental4ousing shortage. The
Ida dominated Gov. Al Wes recent Forum on
Housing. Now a new Citizens 1Rague report mates
a compelling case that the answer• to much of the
area's boustng-6upply problem can and should be
found in its present stock of singledamity boom
and apartment buddloW
The .-epolt. "Better Use of Existing Housing, a
Housing Strategy for the '803," fleshes out argu-
ments made at the governor's forum that adding
small rental units to "Wag bouses would help
elderly borne -owners pay their bills and maintain
their properties, would reduce th<a housing costa of
young people and would offset economic Whibi-
tions on new apartment eonstntcti m.
But as we report points out removing people of
their individual housing problems Isn't the only
reason to break down the barriers — 10801 and
attitudinal — against more efficient use of existing
housing. Broad social policy Issues are at stake as
well.
Greater reliance on existing structures would re-
duce the meed for new construction. slowing the
rate of urban expansion acd saving valuable rural
Ind for agricultural and opengpace uses it would
also save energy because new units would be creat-
ed to buildings already served by utilities. And it
would save money because the public would not
have to Invest In the expansion of road, sewer and
water networks 00 new construction often makes
Such savings are particularly important because
IN rising demand for rental bouslag appears to be
a temporary phenomenon that will wane rapidly
after 1990. Thars when the present demographic
bulge of 20- to 80 -year-olds (the age group most
likely to rent) will advance to home -buying age. To
accommodate that bulge with a major public in-
vestment in new apartment construction, says the
report, may be both unnecessary and ill-advised.
That doesn't mean the area can meet Its estimated
need for 178,000 additional housing units dueng the
19803 without some new apartment construction.
But Me report estimates that adding a rental unit to
jug 'two dogle-family houses on each suburban
block would produce 80,000 additional units and
Mal 3,800 more could be added to existing apart-
ment buildings in Minneapolis and St. Paul.
Also, the area may have as many as 140,000 empty
bedrooms that could be rented — enough to house
more than a third of all the people who turn 20
during the 1980L Still more units could be provided
by making vacant houses habitable and by allowing
pre4anuMctured modular housing units to be tem-
porarily erected in back yards for elderly family
membem
Such uses of existing housing need to be carefully
regulated to avoid negative Impacts on neighbor-
hoods. But the basic idea is sound and should, as
the Citizens League report recommends. become
W of state, metropolitan and community housing
strategies for Me'80s.
a Do
PAGE V
WEDNESDAY. JUNE 16, 1982
THE WALL STREET JOURNAL
0 1982 Dow Jow & QmpM, Im. .411 JR0.
Housing Vouchers Aren't Bane
Or Panacea, Tryouts Suggest
By W)Rm GueNTmrx
S70ff Reporter of TAY. WALL STAFF -T JOURNAL
OR EIGHT YEARS, low-income families in the Green Bay,
Wis., and South Bend, Ind., areas have been participating in
what Rand Corp., the Santa Monica, Calif., think tank, calls
the largest social experiment ever conducted in the U.S.
About 8,400 families in South Bend anis 4,800 in Green Bay are
getting monthly checks veraging mote than $100 from a local hous-
ing agency to help rover their housing costs.
This approach may not sound 'tke a sharp de-
parture from federal housing policy, but It is.
Elsewhere, low-income families seeking gov
ernment assistance with housing must live in
either public housing or certain apartments
where landlords are paid by the federal gov-
ernment to keep rents at affordable levels. - - —
The difference between the experimental plan, called the housing
voucher system, and the existing one, the Section 8 program, is in
who gets the cash. And that difference is stirring controversy.
The Reagan administration is cutting the Section 8 program
sharply and wants to substitute the housing voucher. The adminis-
tration argues that it's more efficient to put the money directly In
the hands of the poor than to negotiate rents with landlords.
The Presider. "s Commission on Housing supports the housing
voucher. Charles Urstadt, a commission member -and chairman of
the New York real estate firm of Pearce, Urstadt. Mayer & Greer,
says the long-term budget obligation of Section 8, which totals $250
billion, represents a "tremendous drain on the Treasury."
EVELOPERS, SYNDICATORS and others dependent on
Section 8 for their livelihood cite potential drawbacks of the
vouchers: They say the system will lead to inflated rents
and leave poor families in substandard housing.
But the $87 million, 10 -year experiment in Green Bay and South
Bend allows the debate to go beyond conjecture. A Rand Corp. eval-
uation of the experiment's initial five years indicates that vouchers
are neither the solution some hope nor the nightmare others fear.
Under the program, poor families (the typical renter in the pro-
gram had an average income of $4,100) have been paid a monthly
amount equal to the difference between the standard rent for the
area and 25% of their income. The only condition has been that their
dwellings meet certain health and safety standards.
Contrary to fears, the Rand Corp. says the housing voucher pro-
gram hasn't had ony appreciable effect on rents or property values.
When a renter enrolled in the program, his rent typically increased
by less than 2%. Ira Lowry, who headed the Rand tesearch, notes
that in the Section 8 program landlords have raised rents by an av-
erage verageof26% when they enrolled.
HE RAND STUDY also indicates that more of the money
spent on the voucher program has benefited low-income peo-
ple: 85 cents of every doilar has gone to voucher recipients.
Under the Section 8 program, only 57 cents of every dollar
has been used for rent payments.
From the landlord perspective. Rand concludes that "landlords'
accounts do not suggest that the (voucher) program enabled them to
earn extra profit." landlords' operating costs rose faster than rents;
however, net operating income rose because landlords who rented to
recipients had fewer vacancies. Total return on equity, including ap•
preciation in property values, gave Green Bay landlords a 12% annu-
ai return and South Bend landlords a 7% return.
On the other hand, the housing voucher program has done little to
improve the physical appearance or encourage the racial integration
of neighborhoods, two arguments favoring the Section 8 program.
And only one-third of eligible families have participated in the
voucher program. Though the neediest people participated, those in
the worst housing have been more likely tc drop out of the program
than move to acceptable dwellings.
On average, most recipients have spent the extra income from
the program on items other than housing. Rand concludes, "Budget-
ary relief is probably a higher priority for low-income households
than is better housing."
Enthusiasm for housing vouchers varies in the two cities, but few
people, if any. seem to be totally negative about the program.
ODNEY BEVERSTEIN, property manager of 650 Green
Bay apartments, wouldn't rent to program participants at
first because the required lease stated that the renter
couldn't -be evicted without government permission. But as
the rental market softened, he relented.
1'm not happy with the check being sent directly to the tenant.
The landlord still might not end up with the rent." says Mr. Bever -
stein. Nevertheless, he adds. "I think it's a good program."
Louis Lessem, who is in charge of litigation for the Legal Servic-
es Program of Northern Indiada Inc., has difficulty judging the
voucher program. "In terms of landlord -tenant problems, it's not a
panacea. It does help with the mechanics of getting housing. But
I've seen nothing to suggest that it has materiaily improved tenants'
bargaining ability. And it doesn't address the issue of declining
housing stock."
A major difference between the experiment and what the Reagan
administration 1s proposing Is funding. In Green Bay and South
Bend, anyone who qualities for vouchers gets the money. The admin-
istration proposal would specify a total amount that could be spent.
Critics say it is likely to be much too small. Cushing Dolbeare, presi-
dent of the Low-income Housing Coalition, says, "For every family
that gets an allowance, two units (of Section 81 will not be built or
subsidized."
fiyp6-:! a
2S Saturday Sat.. July 10,1982
CitiesareaAveragerentsforTwin
ultoes Dote. These ilgares on av
erase rents are the resott of the
quarterly survey taken by The
Apartment Guide which is based an
letormatleo gathered at the end of
May from swam of hN bulldlass.
The findings are compared with
the last Apartment Guide survey,
whieb was taken In February. This
survey is considered to be the most
accurate analysis of local rents.
However, because It looks at a
blow percentage of new buildings
and large suburban complem than
there are In the overall head"
stock, the flndlap are probWy
closer to what rents are to these
buildings than they are to reals In
older, antaller fana-city buildings.
This may also mean that -the over•
all data is sllgbN9hfgher than aero-
al market rents. • .
Al2rb
may 60)
380.00 3.45
800.00 198
352.50 193
414.17 0.00
280.00 0.00
310.00 0.00
43590 2.03
496.25 0.410
249.17 2.75
115.30 2.98
371.89 LOS
405AS 4.51
256.67 3.36 .
399.93 1.45
35023 132
473.13 1.07
211.75 0.00
351.23 0.00
303.31 1.98
339.73 LSO
42099 3 a
474.06 0.17
28236 0.80
337.38 1.04
798.31 2.16
48097 090
270.00 3.83
233.73 2.30
796.75 237
15290 0.00
255.67 090
203.25 3.95
280.00 190
31030 1.04
370JO 1.17
535.00 0.00
330.00 0.11
387.29 0.74
446.75 090
21.75 IJO
118.18 3.17
378.14 2.61
CIAO 0.48
New
a
267.50
rW
ot irz
447
gem F4WWq
Asebs
qudlo ------ D 280.00
1berm._....... 120 284.17
2 194 34591.
103779...__... J7 414.17
Apple Waller
222 430J1
Studio _ .._... 100 260.00
1 bdnn._- _- 140 310:10
2 baro..._ bo 42625
3 barn.__...... 34 496.25
sremys CAN"
37
Studio......._... 10 24330
1 bdrm..... _... 1.033 106.21
2 bares.......... 1.231 184.41
3 bdrm...._..._ 21 188.13
areetdys Pat
6aceI"
286.17 307.80
4 248.33
1 baro._.._... 2.636 285.85
2 bdrm....W_. 1.820 35138
1 bdrm.._.__ Is 41.33
awns
mms& view
2 baro._..._
1 bdrn_...._ 119 288.75
2 bis m...._..... 64 351.25
2 bdrm._..__..
182 299.41
1 bdrm...... 2313 150.76
2 bdns._...- 1739 41723
3bdrm.__..._. 313 471.44
am ovule
719 342.69
Studio_...W_.. 03 260.33
1 born....._.... 1142 32490
2 berm. ...... _ 1201 mom
3 bdrm....._. 143 490.87
Chaabasees
1019 415.05
Studio__. 6 260.00
1 bdrm.._._.. 194 328.23
2 bdrn......._.
ChseN
00 188.75
Studio _.._._. 4 153.00
11 13 254.00
3 barn.._...... 170 788.50
CMOs"
Willa ._.......
Studio ____ 9 25590
1 bdrn.......__ 711 705.80
2 bdrm...r.... 704 76330
7 bdrm.-
cry"
12 575.00
1 bdrsL.._.__ 678 729.64
2 bdrn._...._. 432 784.43
3 bdr L-.-.. 12 448.75
Fpss
2 bdrm....w_- 159
Studio _-- 37 261.75
1 bdrm __.. 913 708.41
2 barn...._._ 934 7139
3 bdrm...Y... 716 416.50
Al2rb
may 60)
380.00 3.45
800.00 198
352.50 193
414.17 0.00
280.00 0.00
310.00 0.00
43590 2.03
496.25 0.410
249.17 2.75
115.30 2.98
371.89 LOS
405AS 4.51
256.67 3.36 .
399.93 1.45
35023 132
473.13 1.07
211.75 0.00
351.23 0.00
303.31 1.98
339.73 LSO
42099 3 a
474.06 0.17
28236 0.80
337.38 1.04
798.31 2.16
48097 090
270.00 3.83
233.73 2.30
796.75 237
15290 0.00
255.67 090
203.25 3.95
280.00 190
31030 1.04
370JO 1.17
535.00 0.00
330.00 0.11
387.29 0.74
446.75 090
21.75 IJO
118.18 3.17
378.14 2.61
CIAO 0.48
Tribvnc 1 4 E4
Aqw w
no MO)
223.61' 1.24
288.50 3.21
341.07 234
421.25 2.15
333.75 0.00
396.67 7.03
502.50 1.01
551.25 0.00
370.67 2.54
422.19 1.76
5:231 1.20
644.13 0.46
251.23 296
289.17 1.76
366.07 4.27
227.50 .4.60
282.50 2.33
33750 2.02
250.00 0.00
296.92 0.91
345.19 0.73
407.00 0.49
256.63 0.32
349.r 2.77
422.2, 1.75
440.83 1.53
287.50 0.00
343.75 0.00
401.75 0.00
503.00 . 0.00
250.13 :.1
334.17 4.29
933.87 3.88
503.73 1.00
Studio........_.
New Aq.
267.50 7.00
1 barn.._.._. 447
Sam reg .r
P.m sl Pa1d
2 bdrm.......... 602 156.88
1 226.39
11011M ......... 1643 294.89
2 bdrnf........ _. 1702 34998
3 bdrn....__ 222 430J1
Fees Pry
Studio ........ k3
Studio _.._..._. 20 333.75
1 bdrm..._...... 180 315.00
2 barn _. .... t1 497.50
3 bdmL_._.... 37 551.25
Eales
Studio _ _...„ 96 381.50
1 bamL_._..., 1036 414.88
2 bdrn........... 1072 5116.23
3 bdrm.___.... am 641.21
6aceI"
286.17 307.80 2.76 ;
Studio ...._. 11 253.75
1 bdrra.._..... 94 284.17
2 bdrn.___.. 96 351.67
Fe rea LAM
mms& view
2 baro._..._
Studio _ 46 217.50
1 berm........- 120 355.83
2 bdrm._..__.. 152 37093
Fridley
310.75 317.589.28
Studio......__.. 59 WAS
1 barn._-_... 922 294.27
2 bdmL._..._.. 719 342.69
3 bdrm... .... 150 403.00
no0tdu
13 419.50
Studio._.._..... 102 255.00
I bdrm..._...... 1010 740.25
2 bdrm._.._.... 1019 415.05
3 bdrm....__... 108 434.17
laver Crave Netlhu
330.00
Studio ....... _... 31 267.55
1 bdrm..... ..... 215 743.75
a Dernr.__...... 213 408.75
3 bdrm........ 20 505.00
Little Goads
saysae
Willa ._....... 78 246.67
1 bd779 _ ,... 440 320.03
2 bens........... 475 379.29
a Ddrm._.._.... 4 491.75
Maplewood
Sbakepee
Studio__... 9
Tribvnc 1 4 E4
Aqw w
no MO)
223.61' 1.24
288.50 3.21
341.07 234
421.25 2.15
333.75 0.00
396.67 7.03
502.50 1.01
551.25 0.00
370.67 2.54
422.19 1.76
5:231 1.20
644.13 0.46
251.23 296
289.17 1.76
366.07 4.27
227.50 .4.60
282.50 2.33
33750 2.02
250.00 0.00
296.92 0.91
345.19 0.73
407.00 0.49
256.63 0.32
349.r 2.77
422.2, 1.75
440.83 1.53
287.50 0.00
343.75 0.00
401.75 0.00
503.00 . 0.00
250.13 :.1
334.17 4.29
933.87 3.88
503.73 1.00
Studio........_. 8 00 267.50 7.00
1 barn.._.._. 447 297.22 300.72 4.31
2 bdrm.......... 602 156.88 365.77 US
3 barn........... 69 43230 453.00 0.55
minaetoats
lot 397.25 307.88
Studio._..._...
Studio ........ k3 34390 145.00 0.00
1 bdrm.......... sea 345.00 343.00 0.06
2 bdro.__._.. 371 427.118 427.08 0.00
3 bdmL._._... 38 533.75 333.75 0.00
mesad
915 412.96 42334
1 berm..__._
Studio...._.W_ 31 286.17 307.80 2.76 ;
1bdrm..... ._ 449 324.06 33198 3.41
2 bdrn.....__. 336 40094 409.38 2.11
mms& view
2 baro._..._ 625 415.32
1 bdrm........_ 414 277.08 276.67 133
2 Was ......... 369 310.75 317.589.28
191
3- _. __. 465.00 525A 6.25
mlaseapdb
Studio....__.... 1671 254.57 260.53 2.34
1 bdrsL_.__.. 5035 323.11 MAO 1.64
2 bdrm....._... 2188 427.06 433.40 1.97
3 bdrm._..__.. 105 598.77 598.46 1.47
Islet. snow
1 lot 397.25 307.88
Studio._..._... 54 241.67 24197 0.00
1 bdrm.._..._.. 499 310.36 319.00 2.70
3 Win .... __... 033 35030 707.06 339
8 barn._...__ 54 371.67 792.50 5.60
New now
2 barn..._..... 915 412.96 42334
1 berm..__._ 776 31996 321.43 2.90
2 berm......._. 121 378.03 317.25 2.44
3 bdrm..._.... 41 458.75 431.75 0.90
Nenh t4. Pod
2 baro._..._ 625 415.32 417.13
Studio _.......... 46 219.25 31790 0.51
1 enol_.,_ 420 269.25 271.23 191
2 berm........... 404 33LSO 341.43 2.69
3 bdrm....._... 3a 400.00 44:30 10.63
asuale
3 bdrsl.__..._. 13 419.50 423.00
btuolo._ 30 210.00 210.00 0.00
I bdns.... -. 160 272.75 273.71 OA
2 bdrm.-.._.. 45 330.00 328.75 3.21
3 bdno..__._. A 433.00 48390 11.49
These figures on average rents for
the Twin Cities and suburbs were
compiled from landlord Interviews
by The Guide Corp.
Neel lrL A., tet.
1~
rMeeryt
ago r may 418111
Duce
Stud10._._.._. 6 259.00 258.00 0.00
1 lot 397.25 307.88 338
2 barns_....._ 115 345.38 337A 3.03
Plymwtb
Studio.._....._ 61 208.00 304.00 2.70
1 bdmL._.-._ 827 356.89 367.08 2.18
2 barn..._..... 915 412.96 42334 336 .
7 b0 _....... 48 476.25 478.75 0.52
Studio _ _ __. 5 USA 230.00 2.04
1 bdrm........:.. 509 UZZ 347.77 1.44
2 baro._..._ 625 415.32 417.13 0.44
3 barn...,,..._ 51 470.63 472.63 0.42
aebblodale
I bdrn-....._ 87 345.00 361.25 4.71
2 berm.......__ 221 41330 413.50 0.00
3 bdrsl.__..._. 13 419.50 423.00 1.31
Roseville
Slodle ..... _..... 60 274.28 280.00 2.08
1 berm......__. 1611 331.34 337.44 1.14
2 bdro.__.__ 1211 404.40 411.44 1.74
3 bdrm........._ 16 560.00 556.67 438
saysae
1 bdrm..._.-
2 bdrm....__.,
22
30
39230
333.00
392.50
333.00
0 00 '
0.00
3 bdrorn.w....... 18 455.00 453.00 0.00
Sbakepee
Studio__... 9 247.50 247.50 0.00
1 bdrm....... ... 79 26833 28133 0.00
2 bdrm....w_- 159 33230 337.00 1150
3 bdrm........... 13 400.90 417.50 4.31
shsrevles
Studio ..... ..... 56 38730 295.00 2.61
1 bdrm......... 623 306.75 325.00 5.26
A barn...._..... 414 360.00 19230 321
3 bdrm........... a 500.00 500.00 0.00
50011111 5L Pool
Stodlo....__._. 2 253.00 210.00 9.80
1 berm...._..... 59 325.00 325.00 0.00
2 bdrm........... 11 360.00 360.00 0.00
SL Anthony
Studio............ 2 190.00 190.00 0.00
I bdrm.......... 295 280.50 210:50 0.00
2 bdrm........... 315 339.38 339.38 0.00
3 bdrm......... . 9 412.50 412.50 0.00
3L Loeb Part
Studio - 157 271.79 274.96 1.17
1 bdrm.......... 1512 337.92 343.29 1.62
2 bdrm......_... 1584 401.65 411.14 2.36
a bdrm...._._.. 72 533.67 54594 2.30
1L Pan!
Studio .......... _ ITS 243.86 272.12 11.59
1 bdrm._..._... 2159 284.93 325.80 10.47
2 berm........... 1938 347.96 405.99 16.61
3 bdrm........ .. 228 460.00 764.88 66.24
Wsdssb nel8bto
I bdrm........ a 133 310.00 310.00 0.00
2 bdrm.......... 174 360.00 360.00 0.00
west 8t. Pus
Studio ..._ . 29 276.67 290.00 493
1 bdrm... ...... 1150 316.61 323.48 1.53
2 bdrm... ....... 1076 372.50 376.43 139
3 bdrm...... ..... 32 470.00 490.83 4.43
waytata
1 bdrn...._.._. 209 735.56 340.83 0.37
2 bdrs._..._.. 385 411.79 415.00 0.78
3 bdrm........... 47 521.67 518.17 4.48
While sear Late
Studio ........... 4 350.00 250.00 0.00
1 bdrm._.._... 149 297.08 302.06 198
2 earn._....... 463 345.63 351.56 1.72
3 bdrm------- 5 350.00 375.00 7.14
Wdea y
Studio ............ 6 245.00 255.00 4.06
1 bdrn......... 176 311.75 321.23 3.39
2 bdrm........... 388 373.75 318.25 2.34
3 bdrm......... 20 455.00 465.00 2.20
These figures on average rents for
the Twin Cities and suburbs were
compiled from landlord Interviews
by The Guide Corp.
PLYMOUTH APARTMENT RENTS RELATIVE TO OTHER LARGE .COMMUNITI.ES
IN HENNEPIN COUNTY
MAY 1982
AVERAGE APARTMENT RENTAL RATES FOR 1 BEDROOM UNITS
1. Edina S 422/month
2. Plymouth 367
3. Robbinsdale 361
4. Bloomington 360
5. Richfield 348
6. Minnetonka 345
7. St. Louis Park 343
8. Crystal 330
9. New Hope 329
10. Minneapolis 328
11. Brooklyn Center 315
12. Brooklyn Park 300
AVERAGE APARTMENT RENTAL RATES FOR 2 BEDROOM UNITS
1. Edina 512/month
2. Minneapolis 435
3. Bloomington 430
4. Minnetonka 427
5. Plymouth 424
6. Richfield 417
7. Robbinsdale 414
B. St. Louis Park 411
9. Crystal 387
10. New Hope 387
11. Brooklyn Center 372
12. Brooklyn Park 356
AVERAGE APARTMENT RENTAL RATES FOR 3 BEDROOM UNITS
1. Edina 644/month
2. Minneapolis 598
3. St. Louis Park 546
4. Minnetonka 534
S. Plymouth 479
6. Bloomington 474
7. Richfield 473
8. Brooklyn Park 473
9. New Hope 459
10. Crystal 449
11. Robbinsdale 425
12. Brooklyn Center 406