HomeMy WebLinkAboutHousing & Redevelopment Authority Packet 04-16-1992MEETING
OF
APRIL 16, 1992
AGE.N0A
PLYMOUTH HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
April 16, 1992 at 6:30 p.m.
1. Call to Order
2. Approval of Minutes for March 19, 1992 Meeting
3. Section 8 Program - Final Report on June 1991 Management Findings
4. Senior Housing Project - Attorney's Review of Preferences
5 Scattered Site Homeownership Program - Review of Plans 2 and 3
6. Section 8 Operating Reserve
7. Information:
a. Response to Plymouth's First Time Homebuyer Program
b. Section 8 Summary Statistics Report, 4/1/92
c. Section 8 Financial Report for Period 7/1/91 - 2/29/92 (Balance Sheet
and Operating Statement)
8. Other Business
9. Adjournment
hra/agenda.4-16)
MIR
0
2S•
MEND
CITY OF PLYMOUTH .
3400 PLYMOUTH BOULEVARD, PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447
DATE: April 7, 1992 For Housing and Redevelopment Authority Meeting of
April 16, 1992
TO: Charles E. Dillerud, Executive Director
Fall: Housing Specialist Milt Dale
SUBJECT: SECTION 8 PROGRAM - FINAL REPORT ON JUNE, 1991 MANAGEMENT
FINDINGS
ACTION REQUESTED: Information item.. Two HUD personnel will be
attending the meeting. They are Patti Hannay and Kaye Pistilli both
Housing Program Administrators with the Minneapolis -St. Paul HUD Office.
On June 26 and 27th of 1991, the Minneapolis -St. Paul HUD Office had HUD
employees Patti Hannay and Kaye Pistilli do a Section 8 Management Review to
cover the period from its last review in 1987. After the review, Ms. Hannay
and Ms. Pistilli discussed in general terms, their review findings.
In early September, a letter came from Mr. Thomas Feeney, Manager of theMinneapolis -St. Paul HUD Officeoutlining the findings and expected action
to be taken by the Plymouth Housing Authority to comply with the findings. On September 23; 1991 we provided a letter to Mr. Feeney outlining the
actions we were taking to comply with the findings.
On October 7, 1991, we sent a second letter to Mr. Fenney following up onhisletterofSeptember4, 1991 relative to four specific findings.
On October 18, 1991 we provided more detailed information to Mr. Fenney astothefilereviewsectionofthetheirfindings.
On November 14, 1991, a letter from Mr. Fenney cleared several of thefindings.
Later in November, as a result of a follow-up review conducted by Ms. Hannay
and Ms. Pistilli, a letter came to us from the HUD Office on January 29,
1992. This letter requested an additional response from us. On February
12, 1992 and again on April 4, 1992 we responded to the HUD letter of
January 29, 1992.
PRIMARY ISSUES AND ANALYSIS:
The HUD Office has found our responses to their management findings
acceptable. While some of the issues were serious, they felt the corrective
action taken was adequate to comply with their directives. One of HUD's
primary concerns was allowing over 206 of our Section 8 allocation going
over Fair Market Rent. We have corrected that deficiency and at the present
time have granted no approvals over Fair Market Rent. This situation has
been helped considerably -by the significant increase in Fair Markets Rents
on October 1, 1991. We are, with our computer program, monitoring Fair
Market Rents closely.
Another important issue related to maintaining the waiting list current and
updated. We updated the waiting last fall and are continuing to maintain
the waiting list in an orderly fashion.
On April 8, 9, and 10, 1992, Denise Hutt and myself are attending a HUD
sponsored workshop for Section 8 program administrators.. We also have
maintaimd close contact with our HUD staff liaison Patti Hannay. As well,
1 have been attending the Section 8 portability meetings held in St. Paul on
a quarterly basis.
CONCLUSIONS AND
Sinct. this is basically an information memo. I feel that Commissioners
should avail themselves of the opportunity to discuss program particulars
with the staff or the two HUD personnel at the meeting on April 16, 1992.
At this stage, it is my understanding that all findings have been cleared.
1. Letter from Thomas Feeney, 9-4-91
2. Letter from James Willis, 9-23-91
3. Letter from James Willis, 10-7-91
4. Letter from James Willis, 10-18-91
S. Letter from Thomas Feeney, 1144-91
6. Letter from Thomas Feeney, 1-29-92
7. Letter from Milt Dale, 2-12-92
B. Letter from Milt Dale, 4-3-92
hra/md/4-16.0)
SEP 41991
C. Gerald wells, Chairperson
80:6329 and Redevelopment Authority
of Plymouth
3890 Orleans Lane
Plymouth, Minnesota 55441
Dealt Mr. mallet
as o w100d w wa+e w VOM asrdW.nN
soGmM
Mplea v
lusmid Shaft
SEP 9 M
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
COWANTM I ma"..
SUBJECT; Department of Rousing and urban Development Management
Review of the Section 8 B:isti2g Program
BnclOaed is a copy of the Management Review Report covering
the subject program. The field audit wes•conducted by no. Patti
Bannay and Ms. Saye Pistilli of the Assisted Rousing Management
Branch staff on June 26 and 27. 1991.
The attached report contains ten findings with required
corrective action. Due to the seriousness of the Federal
Rsgulation and. Handbook violations contained In this report, our
office will schedule a follow-up review upon receiving your
response.
We believe it would be beneficial to both parties to arrange
a meeting between the Board of Commissioners and members of our
staff to discuss the serious issues raised In this report.
Please respond to all findings, required corrective actions
and recommendations within forty-five days of the date of this
report. is your response, advise as of the actions which have
been taken to date and if the actions will necessarily exceed 45
days, provide us with a eobedule for their completion.
2
If you have any -questions or need assistance, please contact
Ms. Patti Ramsay at (612) 370-3212.
Ne wish to thank Mr. Milton Dale for his cooperation duriagourv!sit.
ve si c p yours,
Thomas S. Feeney,
Manager
I—.
MANAGEMENT REVIEW
Public Sousing Agemcys Plymouth Rousing and
Redevelopment Authority
Project Embers P946-8170
Number of Unites 87
Period covered by this review July, 1987 through June, 1991
DEBCRIPTIOW OF REVIEW
A Management Review of the Plymouth section. a Certificate
Program was conducted by Patti Rannay and says P16till: of the
Assisted sousing Management staff, Minneapolis/Bt. Paul Office,
Is accordance with instructions contained in Randbooa 74.20.3,
Chapter S. The review consisted of an inspection of tenant
Man. A review of management and financial records. A
comparison of the operating policies and practiceu, and a
discussion of program operations with the Authority staff.
sTATUs OF PRRVIODs REVIEW AnD OCCUPANCY AUDIT
The findings from the previous review were closed based on
your agencies response.
Presently, there are two employees that administer the
Section 8 program. Between the two there is 700 of a position.
It is avident by our review that sufficient time is not spent in
the administration of your program. This is due to either staff
time charged to the program but not actually worked, or the need
for additional training. The time allocated to the program is
sufficient to administer the 87 Certificates currently nudes the
ACC if it is properly utilised and the staff is knowledgeable of
the program.
Our staff is available to provide training for new or
current employees.
LEASING Status
The following summarises the PRA's leasing status at the
time of our reviews
IBR XMM 3sR
Total units Authorised 17 67 3
units Leased 17 66 3
Certificate Outstanding 0 1 0
Waiting List Unable to Determine
Detailed findings, Corrective Actions and sea caneadatieas
It is obvious that pour authority is aware of the high rents
within the city of Plymouth since exception cents were applied
for in 1980, 1982 and 1984. Our office has not received or
approved a request since 1184.
federal regulations prohibit placing units under contract
for which the gross rest (contract rest plus utilities) exceeds
the fair market rent. (Reference 24 CPR 882.106)
An agency may: (a) exceed the fair market rest by 100 for up
to 200 of the units authorised under the Annual Contribut_oss
Contract (ACC) (b) request authority from BOD to exceed the fair
market rent up to 200 for a specific participant due to a
hardship, (e) request authority from BOD to exceed the fair
market rents up to 200 for all or a portion of the units under
the'ACC. (Reference 24 CPR 882.106)
Under no circumstance can a housing authority or BOD approve
a gross rant over 200 of the applicable fair market rent.
Corrective Action Reeuired
To clear this finding the following steps most be takens
1. Compare the initial gross rent (contract rent plus utilities)
for all participants on-tbe program with the fair market rent in
effect at the beginning'of the contract period.
2. List nay units where the gross rout (contract rent plus
utilities) exceeded the fair market rout and the percentage by
which it is exceeded.
1. going the current fair :arket rents (effective October 1,
19901 eliminate any gait from the list where the torrent gross
rant no longer exceeds the October 1, 1990 fair market rents.
The above information must be submitted to our.office.
Members of our staff will do a follow-up review and at that time
determine the extent of penalty that will be charged to your
authority's administrative foe.
At this time your Authority is prohibited from exceeding the
fair market rents on any new contracts until the number of
exceptions are within the allowable level under federal
regulations.
3
Flmdime 42
orence 24 CPR 092.209)
Our review noted the following cameos
1) One applicant was placed in the •high priority file• but
was not income eligible.
21 There were at least two applicants in the •bl9b priority•
file that did not have a preference.
3) A tenant paying 75% of their income in sent received
priority over one paying 509.
An applicant must qualify as a family and fell within the
applicable income limits in order to be placed on a waiting list.
Applicants must be given a questionnaire to determine if
they qualify for a preference. Regulations require housing
autbor=ties to give preference to applicants who are displaced by
government action or disaster, applicants living in substandard
booming, or applicants paying in excess of 500 of their annual
99069 income for rent. These preferences must be in your
Authority's Administrative Policy. Applications that weigh equal
In preferences should be placed on the waiting list according to
the date and time received. All applications upon receipt must
be stamped with the date and time.
Under no circumstances should an applicant without a
preference be issued a certificate before one with a preference.
Correetive Aetiem Beeaired
Your agency must establish sit waiting lists, one for each
bedroom also with a preference and one for each bedroom also
without a preference.
To comply with the above the following most be dose:
11 A determination of family eligibility and income eligibility
most be made for all applicants currently on file.
2.) if any applicantis determined ineligible, a letter must be
sent to the applicant stating the reason and informing them
of their right to an informal hearing. A sample ineligible
and eligible letter are included in the Board Chairman's
copy (Attacbments 1 and 2)
3) Send a letter to all current eligible applicants on band to
determine continued interest, you most include a federal
preference questionnaire to determine whether any applicants
qualify for a federal preference. A sample questionnaire is
3neluded with the Board Chairman's copy. (Attachment 3)
41 when a response is received from the interested applicants,
families most be placed on the waiting list according to
federal preference and date and time from the receipt of the
original application. A sample waiting list is included
with the Board Chairman's copy. (Attachment 4)
The above procedure will be verified by our staff on a
follow-up review.
Please submit the completed two bedroom waiting list for our
review.
Pisdisa 83
Best Rrasosabiesess data is not adhered to.
Your agency is not using Beat Reasonableness date to assure
that rents for units assisted under the Section 8 program are
reasonably related to rents charged in your jurisdiction for
comparably equipped units. [(Reference Randbook 7420.7 and 24
CPR 062.106(b))
Cho faatiWe Action Reauired
For each unit which a lease has been approved, your agency
most certify and document that the contract rest is (1)
reasonable in relation to rents currently being charged for
comparable units is the private unassisted market, and (2) not in
crews of rents currently being charged by the owner for
comparable unassisted units.
Corrective Acties Reauirod
To determine the above, a survey scat be done of the rental
market and should include each information ass unit location,
unit type, unit mise, quality, bandieap accessibility, amenities,
maintenance and gross rents. Information can also be obtained
from the city or local real estate agents.
Beat reasonableness must also be conducted aid documented
when as owner increases the contract rent over tke amount
previously charged.
4o clear this finding, please submit rent reasonableness
documentation and certification for the Bert three new units
placed under a lease. (Reference Bandbook 7420.7 Ch. 6)
Fludi s •4
Quality Centro! inspections are not conducted.
CFR 24 882.211 states, 'The FRA will inspect or cause to beinspectedeachdwellingonleasedtoaFamilyatleastanaually
and at such other times as may be necessary to assure that the
owner is meeting the obligation to maintain the unit in decent,
safe and sanitary conditions and to provide the agreed upon
utilities and other services.• (Repeat finding from 1987
Management Review)
Corrective Action Reaaireel
A procedure most be established for reviewing a sample of
completed isspectioas. Reinspection by a supervisor of a random
sample of five percent is required. (Reference 7420.7 Ch. 5)
To clear this finding please submit copies of two recently
completed quality control inspections.
Finding •S
Reasest for cease approval process is not Consistently
followed,
when a family finds a suitable unit it most submit a RDD
52517A (Request for Lease Approval) along with a copy of the
proposed lease agreement. It is the housing authority's
responsibility to review the aequest and determine if the owner
In eligible to part;.cipate in the program, if the unit is
e'i7ible, and if the lease complies with program requirements
including state and local laws). ?be information is also used
as part of the rent reasonableness process. (Reference 24 CFR
882.209)
Corrective Action Required
Identify and list all tenant files t%at do not presentlyhaveaRequestforLeaseApproval. At the %Zt reeram a Request
for Least Approval most be obtained from each tenant on the list
and placed in the tenant's file.
The above process will be verified by our staff on s follow-
up review.
Fi ds_s .
Te,@ Otility Allowaace See,edule is not reviewed and ped_tee
annually. Otility allowances Used for to ant files do net
QCrrespoad rite, latest adopted sae,eduiea
Section 882.214 of the regulation@ states that a public
Rousing Authority must at least annually, review allowances for
utilities and other services to determine whether there have been
substantial changes and to correct errors is the prior year
determinations.
6
Utility allowances must be kept currest to assure that the
gross rest (contract rest plus utilities) does not exceed the
applicable fait market rest. Most importantly, accurate utility
allowances most be used in determining the total tenant payment
portion of rest paid by tenant). The total tenant payment
cannot exceed thirty percent of the family's monthly adjusted
gross income. (Reference 24 CPR 813.107)
Cesreetive Act iaa Reeuiraa
A review of your agency's current utility and service
schedule must be done and changes incorporated into a new
schedule.
When the above is complete, a review should be done of all
tenant files and rents must be adjusted accordingly. If the
result is an increase to the tenants rent, the rest should remain
the same and the adjustment made at the next'reexam. If it In a
decrease, the change should be made effective immediately and go
retroactive to the last reexam.
The above will be verified by our staff on a follow-up
review..
Randbook 7420.7 Ch. 10)
If based on the current information received at reasam the
breakdown of rent paid by the housing authority and paid by the
tenant changes, both the owner and tenant must be notified in
writing with the effective date of the change.
Corrective Actium Raeeired
State law requires that a tenant be given a written thirty
day notice prior to a rent increase. She only exceptions are for
those given on Attachment S.
in the future, reexaminations most be scheduled far enough
In advance to allow for proper cost increase notification. A
copy of the letter sent most be kept in the Venant•fiie.
It is apparent= tpa: forty are xeroxed with the Rossing
Manager's signature, !-qB iaspaction sbeets have also been
xeroxed with check marks in the pass column. The inspectors
comments are made on the last page rather than next to the
applicable items.
Racairad Cerreetiva Ration
Although thin procedure may result in quicker processing of
applications and BOB inspections, it is not acceptable. Original
signatures substantiate that information contained on an
application/inspection form is true and .accurate.
For the proper procedure to follow when conducting BOB
inspections refer to Bandbook 7420.7 Ch S and CFR 24 882.109.)
4o clear this finding please submit two fully completed 5O8
Inspections with original check marks, comments, and signatures.
Fiadiac 6.9
ha mousing Rathesity is net eoadaetiasi tbezoach imtazwiars.
when an applicant is interviewed, the interviewer should go
over tke application line by line. Any additional Information
received should be written on the application. An applicant is
Pore likely to answer honestly when asked questions directly.
in cases where there is a single parent with children, the
question of whether or not child support is received most be
asked. At interviews, as applicant must be asked if all income
and assets are on the application.
For example, a tenant with one child wrote on her initial
application that she currently paid 0666 a mouth for rest plus
utilities. she had gross income of 0910 per mouth. After the
deductions from social security and income taxes, it is doubtful
that the net spendable Income would be sufficient to meet basic
household costs. There is so indication on the application that
she had been specifically questioned an whether child support was
not received or whether there was any additional income.
Corrective Ration Recaised:
A complete interview should be done at both the .a:t:ai
interview and at the time of seexaa. wotes•shoaid be made on
the application by the interviewer. (Examples 'Bo other income
received.•) in the event that a tenant is unable to fill out the
application due to a disability, the interviewer can fill out the
application for the applicant.
To clear this finding all required corrective action noted
on the file findings must be followed and respoaded to.
To aid in the interview process we've attached examples of
an eppliieation, verification forms, and an interim seat
adjustment form. (Attachments 6-11 of Board Chairman's copy)
Piadina 610
The bemsiaa eathority bea.mot eabaittad as aadi! !er lieeei
care endue Jame. Lies, Jmae. 1909 and Jaae. 1990 -
in accordance with Handbook 7476.1 REV -1 and 24 CPB 44, •A
PRA/IRA shall engage an iA (independent Auditor) within 90 days
following the end of the period to be audited. The PHA most
submit 12 copies to the NOD Office of inspector General within 30
working days of the completion of the audit, but so later then
one year after the and of the audit period.•
Cerreative Aetioe Reaaised
Twelve copies of tbe.eudits for fiscal years ending Jane 30,
1988, June 30, 1989, and June 30, 1991 must be submitted to the
BOD Office of inspector General we've attached Notice 91-20
which provides further informat and the address of where the
audits are to be sent. (Attacbmeat 12 of the Board Chairman's
copy)
Recommendation #1
Your Authority's admission and administrative policies have
not been updated since 1985.
Since that time, the federal preferences were mandated and
should have been incorporated into your policy. There are now
eleven income exclusions and your policy lists nine. in
addition, a number of definitions need updat:ag. Neve enclosed
an attachment of the preference definitions and a format to
follow when updating your administrative policy. (Attachments 13
and 14 of Board Cbairman's copy.)
Please submit -copies to our office for our review.
Recommendation 12
A certificate does not need to be issued at each reexam
unless the tenant is moving to a new unit.
Rleemmandatiea 63
A tenant does not have to sign a new lease each year at the
anniversary date unions it is agreed upon by the tenant and
owner, or the tenant moves to a new unit. The lease is closed
during the first twelve months. After twelve months, the lease
Is open ended and the tenant may move after giving proper notice
9 ;
i
to the owner. We've attached a sample lease and addendum to
lease/BAP contract with the ebairman's copy. (Attachments 15 and
Beasime 0selitv.etesderda 18081 Imseeetlons
A total of five dwelling units were inspected. Overall, the
rental units were in good cosditl.on.
The following unit will have to be inseeeteds (There was
noose at the unit vben our staff arrived at the scheduled time.)
Catharine Erickson, 17605 19th Avenue Borth, 0110
Please submit a completed Bps inspection form for the above
us: t .
The following unit !ailed the B08 inaoeeL:ene
Zile and Patricia Millar, 3145 Barber Lane Borth, 11-302
item -4.4 and 4.5 Window screen
Ripped screen in Children's bedroom. Window !s floor level
and is considered a health and safety risk.
Please follow-up and submit documentation to clear.
The fellewia to had no BOB violstlonaI
Carla Answorth, 12105 41st Avenue Borth, #318
Melanie Bora, 3641 Lancaster Lane, 15-212
Cordon Lincoln, 9720 37th Place North, #103
Leslie O'Day, 1803 aivay 101 North, 0214
September 23, 1991 17;
cbw coF
Mr. Thomas T. Feeney, Manger PLTI' OM
PIS—St. Paul Office, Region V
U.S. Dept. of Housing i Urban Develop. 220 -2nd Street South
Minneapolis, NN 55401-2196
SUBJECT: DEPARTMENT OF NOUSINB AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT REVIEW OF THESECTIONSEXISTINGPROGRAMFORPLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA - YOUR LETTER OFSEPTEMBER4, 1991
Dear Mr. Feeney:
1 received the executive director carbon copy of your September 4 letter onSeptemberS. 1991. Please be advised that Gerald- Nei Is As no longer the
chairperson of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority. Mr. David Crain,
13200 -38th Avenue North, Plymouth, MN 55441 is now the chairman. I have
provided Mr. Crain a comompplete copy of the 'Board Chairman's' material that hadbeenprovidedtoMr. Neils previously.
I have directed Chuck Dillerud, Acting Director of Community Development to
coordinate response and Compliance with the findings of your managementletter. Chuck Oillerud is Housing Specialist Milt Dale's supervisor. I have
advised Mr. Dillerud that I consider compliance with and responses to yourfindingstobeatoppriorityitemfortheCommunityDevelopmentDepartmentandheisdirectedtoutilizewhateverresourcesofthedepartmentare
necessary to promptly respond. Mr. Dillerud has informed we that in addition
to the several findings that are responded to by this letter, he expects to
provide responses and/or.bring our program into compliance with your findingswellbeforethe45 -day time period specified in your management letter.
Those response compliance actions that we can offer to -date are as follows:
I. Staffing Pattern - Presently there are several City employees involved intheamnsratonoftheSection8Program. The current services
contract between the Housing and Redevelopment Authority and the City ofPlymouthprovidesfor12positionswithintheDeparleentofAdministrationComrmenitrenDevelopmt, Finance. and Public Works to assist in varyingdegreesinadministeringtheSection8Program. The sem of the contractedhoursis1,882, or 90 percent of a full-time equivalent annual position. The cost to the NRA for this service has annually exceeds the
administrative fees provided by HUD for Section 8 Program administration. Through local levies the HRA has made up the difference.
I am not certain of the source of your infOmation regarding only twopersonsonourstaffbeinginvolvedinadministeringSection8andthatthisrepresents70percentofaposition. It is true that the primaryadministrationoftheourSection $ activities is handled by two personsHousingSpecialistMiltDaleandaSeniorClerk/Typist), but the services
1- '
3400 PLYMOUTH BOULEVARD. PLYMOUTH. MINNESOTA 55447. TELEPHONE (612) 550.5000
contract between the City and the HRA specifies that even these two would
constitute 78 percent of a position annually.
2. Naitino List (Finding /21 - we have completely overhauled our waiting list
procedures and formst to comply with the observations of the nnagement
letter and themost current HUD rules in that regard. Since we have not
opened our waiting list since June, 1990, we have requested confirmation
of eligibility and Federal preferences from each Tamily on our current
waiting list. Based on those responses, letters will be again be sent to
the applicants who are found to be ineligible stating the reason and
informing them of their right to an informal hearing. Also, those found
to be eligible based on Federal preferences will be placed on the
appropriatewaiting list based on the date of the receipt of the original
application together with the local preference that has been established
by the Housing and Redevelopment Authority (Plymouth residency or
employment). No time of receipt of the original application wasnoted
for applicants on our current waiting list. All future applicants for
Section Swill be marked as to the specific time (as well as date) of
receipt to establish waiting list ranking.
As Attachment A please find a copy of our waiting list format including
our current applicantsrior to confirmation of current eligibility and
Federal preferences, buas e —on eligibility and Federal preferences
claimed at the time of application (early Summer, 1990). As noted, this
list will be updated within two weeks based on new deteroinations of
eligibility and Federal preferences that have now been requested of all
of these applicants.
3. Quality Control Inspections (Finding I41 - On Thursday, September 12,
1991 and September 17, 19YI, 019Tu ng Official Joe Ryan conducted
quality control inspections on dwelling units previously inspected by Nr.
Dale. The units were selected based on a random process undertaken by
other staff members. The quality control inspection documentation is
submitted as Attachment B.
4. Utility Allowance Schedule (Finding 06) - As Attachment C please find your
letter dated July 18, 1991 where you haie approved our proposed annual
utility schedule for the Section 8 Program. You indicate that you have
reviewed the schedule for reasonableness and find it complies with the
requirements of utility allowance regulations, 882.214.
This schedule has been implemented and since it represents no change from
the previously approved utility schedule no increa:e or decrease in gross
rents will result.
S. Notification of Chance in Housine Assistance Payment and Famil
Contribution (Finding - AS AttachMan t 0 please find a phrase file
letter that we nave crested that will advise both the tenant and the
landlord of any changes in rents based on the current information received
at a reexamine. This letter will be sent to both parties early enough in
the reexamination period to assure receipt 30 days prior to the lease
renewal date.
6. Z%riainal Signatures on HOS inspections and Other Forms 1Finding 06) - Our
i:aff has discontinued use of forms that have been completet-a—nd--executed
2-
In advance. All forms now used by Plymouth Mill have original markings
and signatures. As Exhibit E please find two fully completed HQS
inspections with original checkmarks, comments, and signatures.
7. Not Conductino Thorough Interviews (Finding 0 9) - I have directed the-
ITous.ng p ai sift ecce ' Certain o con uc s interviews for both
inapplications and reexamination in such a manner that each a.3
everr __question is specifically directed to the applicant and tTia fiery
cle of information supplied byy the ap licant is included on the
application as notes. He has indicated that has been his practice is the
past.
Our followups and responses to the file findings that were made are
continuing and will be provided under separate cover.
Thank you for the examples of applications, verification fords, and
interim rent adjustment forms that were included with your "Board
Chairman's Copy'. I have directed Nr. Dale to substitute these forms for
those that we use in any case where they may differ.
S.
two separate addresses prams
respective years as follow:
Dale Mahn has advised me
years noted were sent to
ion of those audits in the
HUD Office of Inspector General, National Review Center for Non-federal
Audits, 950 North Kings Highway, Cherry Hill, New Jersey 08034-1518, and.
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. Chicago Regional Office.
Region V. 547 West Jackson. Chicago. Illinois 60606-5160.
I have directed the Finance Director to submit 12 additional copies of
these fiscal year audits to the Cherry Hill, New Jersey address that
appears in HUD Notice 91-28.
9. Housino Quality Standards 09S Inspections - Please find enclosed as
Exhibit F a letter from Housing3pecial sf Flilt Dale to the manager of the
building at 3145 Harbor Lane North regarding the torn window screen in
Unit 1-302. 'We will advise you at such time as an inspection has been
made to determine compliance Mith Mr. Dale's inspections.
Determination of the degree of noncompliance of our program with current fair
market rents and compliance of any given current contract with fair market
rents at the timeof the original contract execution requires a file -by -tile
audit that is currently underway. At the same time, as we are determining
the matter that you had requested regarding compliance with fair market rents
Finding /1), we are placing in each file.appropriate individualized
certificate of rent reasonableness (Finding i3) and determining the status of
the request for Lease Approval (Finding f5). We expect this file -by -tile
audit to be completed within one week. At that time we will provide you with
a summary of rents in comparison to FNR, both currently and at the time of
the original contract consistent with the corrective action required for
Finding /1. The survey of rental markets to establish rent reasonableness
certificates has been completed as of this date.
3-
Me are preparing amendments to our Admission and Administrative Policies
responding to the Management Letter reca. endations,for adoption by the NRA
Board of Commissioners at their regular meeting of October 17. 1991.
Mr. Feeney, let me assure you that the City of Plymouth has taken your 1991
Management Review of our Section 8 Program very seriously. Corrective action
was undertaken the day after your audit team departed (based on our verbal
understandings of program problems at that time) and parties responsible or
allowing our program procedures and process to fall short of Section 8
guidelines have been.reprimanded for their oversight. I can offer no excuses
for the problems your management audit team found, only our pledge to
overcame those problems and to maintain a Section 8 Program in Plymouth
consistent with the applicable Federal Rules.
Should you have any specific questions on these matters, please feel free to
contact me at 550-5011 or Chuck Dillerud, Acting Community Development
Director, at -550-5059.
Sincerely yours,
James G. Millis
Cit• Manager
hra/cd/feeney:jw)
4-
D
October 7, 1991 C (CX-
Thomas T. Feeney,ManagerYMOV 1:fMinneapolis/St. Paul Office, i
U.S. Dept. of (lousing 8 urbanDeDevelop m0
220 2nd St. S.
Minneapolis, IN 55401-2195
SUBJECT: DEPARTMENT OF MOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT NANAGENENT REVIEM OF iNE
SECTION 8 EXISTING PROGRAM FOR PLVIDUi1, 0 - YOUR LETTER OF
SEPTEMBER 4, 1991
Bear Mr. Feeney:
This letter is an additional response to your captioned letter of September 4,
1991, and a supplement to my letter of September 23, 1991 on the subject..
No have completed our file -by -file audit of the Section 8 Certificates
administered by the City of Plymouth. Based on that audit we offer the
following additional documentation and information in response to your
Management Letter of September 4, 1991:
1. Gross Rents Exceeding FNR (Finding 01)
We have audited our Section 8 Certificate files on a file -by -tile
basis, and we have prepared tabular summaries regarding gross rents
and FNR rents as follow:
a. Attachment 1 is a tabular summary of •initial Gross Rants,
Initial'FMR', •Initial Percent Over FMO, •Currant Gross
Rent', 'October 1, 1990 FMO, .and, 'Percent Over October 1,
1990 FMR•. Attachment 1 also provides the Initial Contract
Date and the most current lease renewal date. The attachment
documents 86 of Plymouth's 87 Section 8 certificates. The
87th certificate was Oetwmen users at the time of the
tabulation.
b. Attachment 2 is a tabulation of certificates for which the
Initial Year Gross Rant exceeded the Initial Year FMR.
certificates that had an Initial Gross Rent equal to, or less
than, the applicable FMR for that year have been deleted from
this list.
c. Attachment 3 is a tabulation of certificates where the Initial
Gross Rent exceeded the Initial FMR end the Current Rant
exceeds the FNR of October 1, 1990.
d. Attachment 4 was not reested you but is provided for your
information. Thiqus attachment s titutes the FNR for the
aeon Pwmom eouLEw= PLVMDM. SUMMMOU SW7. TELEPHONE 0148504010
THE ADJACENT DOCUMENT WAS SUPPLIED BY AGENCY NAMED BELOW. DURING THE
Metropolitan area offectlVe October 1, 1991 for the October 1,
1990 FM. and clearly displays the fact. that no Section 8
gross rents that currently exist exceed the October 1, 1991FM. indeed, many of the existino ratsts are
significantly under the October 1, 1991 Fitt.
2. Reauest For Lease Aoaroval (Finding 051
Attachment 5 states whether the Request For Lease Approval was found
In the certificate files. As you can see, the =Jerity of thecertificatefilesdidnotevidencetheRequestForLeaseApproval
form. All subsequent certifications or recertification$ will result
Ito Request For Lease Approvals being obtained, and placed in the
appropriate file.
3. Rent Reasonableness Data (Finding 03)
Following our file -by -file audit, this. wilt confirm placement. of
Rent Reasonableness docueentation and a Rent Reasonableness
Certificate in each Section 8 file.
4. Waitina List (Finding 02)
We have completed our determination of eligibility and federal
preferences for those families that were on our waiting lists as of
the time of management tem review. Based an the responses
received, all of our waiting lists have been updated. As Attachment
6 please .find the updated Two Bedroom Waiting lists as you had
requested.
We are continuing with our verifications and inquiries : .. -,-..g the filereviewsnotedinyourFinding09. As soon as those actLort. , complete,
NO will submit those under separate cover.
Should you have any questions concerning these or previously ;«trditted
responses to the management review, please feel free to contact em 550-15M or
Chuck Oillerod, Acting Camunity Development Director at 550-5030.
Sincerely yours,
J s 6. Willis
Cit Manager
Attachments
hra/cd/feeney.2sdh)
r 18, 1991
Thomas Feeney
HUD Area Office
22D South 2nd Street
Minneapolis, NN 55401
SMUECTs DEPARTMENT OF MOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPNENT NANAGOI NT REVIEW OF TNE.
SECTION 8 EXISTING PROGAM FOR PLYMOUTH, MN - YOUR LETTER. OF
SEPTMER 4, 1991
Dear Nr. Feeney:
This letter is an additional response to your captioned letter oftuber 4,
1991., and a supplement to ,Y letter of September 23, 1991 on the subject.
We have completed our file reviews as noted in the File Review summery sheets
pales 1-4 as part of the Section 8 Certificates administered by the City ofPlymouth. Based on that audit we offer the following additional documentation
and information in response to your Management Letter of September 4, 1991:
I. File Review Summery Sheets, pages 1-4
We have completed the column PRA Response. Letters with verification
forms have all been wiled to app ropr a e persons. All verification
forms have not been returned at this time.
2. Attachments to File Review Summary Sheets
a. Erik and Patricia Miller
III
Rent Reasonableness Documentation
2 Utility Allowance Schedule
3 Cop of ilorksheet 8 6/27/91 Notification
4 lA/14/91 Letter to Nillers
b. Catherine Eckerson
1 10/14/91 Letter to Eckerson
2 Rent Reasonableness Documentation
31 Copy of Norksheet
c. Leslie O'Day
1311 CopyofWorks=
2 RentReasonableness Documentation
Utility Allowance Schedule
d. Gordon Lincoln
1 Rent Reasonableness Documentation
2 Coopp r of Norksheet
3 Utility Anasarca Schedule
340 PLYMOtiTM BOULEVARD. PLYMOM MONFA fA 15W. TELEPHONE (612) MIN=
e. Melanie Norn
1 10/14/91 Letter to Norn
2 Rent Reasonableness Documentation
3 Copy of Morksheet
f. Carla Ainsworth
1 Rent Ih:asonableness Docusaotation
2 .10/14/91 Letter to Ainsworth
3 Copy of Worksheet
It is our belief with your receipt of these items, our response to the
No 91.1 t findings have been completed.
1: is our intention to continue close contact with Patti Nannay to Improve. the
quality of our magesent of the Section 8 Program. Me also wish to avail
ourselves of training sessions sponsored by the MUD office. Plaase keep usWormedofsuchtrainingopportunities.
Should sroteumttilsng lereootatiis IMIPOnsetohsareview,peae feel free tcntactetS5SOI1
or Chuck Dillerud, Acting Community Development Director at SSD-SOSg.
Sincerely.
L
J s 6. Millis
Executive Director/City Manager
osures
hra/md/feensysdh)
Wert9 v
t Nov 14 1911
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
oo1(w.m+1(t oe r.
Hr. David Craia, Chairperson
nousims and Redevelopment Authority
of Plymouth
132'00 Uth Aveaje .worth
Flymeutb, Minnesota S5441
Pear lira. Craiae
Sub4cate Status of Beetles 8 Managausat Review
Thank YOU fat Four lettere dated deptember 23. 1991, October
7, 1991, and October 18, 1991, is which you responded to the
Beetles 8 Hanageaest Review report.. We appreciate your tlmeiiveaa
An respondiag. in addition, we appreciate the excellent job your
agency has dome is impieaeatlag the seQuired corrective actions
outlined is out report.
Daaed oa the responses we received to the above letters, we
have cleared Fiadaags 1S, 18, 010 and the RQB inspection.
Clearance of Finding It is pend ag until our Follow-up review.
At that tine be assessment of the penalty can be determined.
Hb have reviewed Fair response to Finding 19. We will be so -
reviewing this ase& at our tallow -up visit and a determination will
be male .at that tine.
e ase aware that updating an Administrative plea takes a
substantial sanest of time, we will review the policy when it is
subr.itted and respond to it separate Crew the review glad -ago.
110 have also cleared Fiadings 12, 11, 14, 14, and 47 with the
following oerrents- and/or recommeadatiesse
liadiae •2
In addition to the applicant iaformation esrrently listed ea
your waiting list, a number of ether Items must be tracked. We've
ettacbed & sample Section 8 waitieg list for Your refereace.
Attachment A)
2
A Column should be 44604 to allow for an applicant's sane aad'
ethaioity. This gives your authority and our.agency a quick system
for verifying that all applicants are selected equitably.-
Ton oust also track, either on your surrest waiting list or
on another list. the date and season why an applicant bas been
withdrawn, datermised ineligible, or Moved ter or down eo the
waiting list$. When applicants are issued a Certificate, a date
should be entered.
adiag •!
As was recently discussed with Ns. Niit Dale, the only
comparable matte are those buildings that currently hoose Booties
0 participants. The mower omits to plymoutb have seats which
exceed the Mae. when gathering rest reasonableness date, be mase
that it is for unassisted malts in the buildings.
nadisg f4
Tess agency most maintain a file of ongoing 4gality central
Inspections in aeeor4anee with the section B !misting NodsLeg
Inspection Manna&, page 41, and Nandboek 7420.1, Chapter S.
risOise /6
Toss revised utility allowance sobedule was received and -
approved shortly after ear.on-site review. No were also Concerned .
that tenant files did not contain a eery of the utility schedule
and a number of files did not use 1o. the
latest adopted sobodulep
Finding of
we strongly recommend the Goo' of our sample Lease/Contract
addendum form to notify families and owners of the change is rest
distribution. (Attachment of
The staffing •data used to ;determine 701 of, a•full .time
position administering the Bentsen 0 . program, was . A.41sed'' -os
Information given to us at the time of our review•:.
Noosing• ipeoiai:at: .: %550
Br. .Click Typist, - al
700.
The September 23. 19910 resposse letter.we received rased a
concern by your agency that the administrative ties provided -by
a00 did not meet the actual. Booties 4 adnislstrative seats Cos 'year
agency. .. •• •.. • .
a
IN reviewing your sear sad sea,UNests for lens ao, 19916 asOperatingReservebalasc• •E 196,169 to above. theOperatingReserve &vacant is the account that is Gr•dited •itb Gass•¢ adsieistrat loos that Osgood ssP•sditure• fes Fragra a4aleistsatiesea. •,%
Fos4e09 .Tose 30, 1991, Else&& year ssd, less' agency Sassed943,251 to oagolag admiaiatratl.ve goes, of that, g2a.a94',wasactuallyspent. :a summary, year agency was .abletoyouroperatiagreserve.. foe Nasal •!ead 112,470add
80, 2990., 013.790 was a4de4.to yoos •peratln¢
yeas nd:ng
reserve asset&%•
Our records ladivate that administrative less.Provided bt Rhasectionaprogramhaveexceededactualwents••i"a fiscal year024189Sun* 20..190l.
a feller-tp rOvicv has base scheduled Eos. soadiy, November 1d, 1991.. Ms. Patti !assay and Os- Bays Pistilli will arrive at youreEficeapprosiateiy •goo a.. Please have allperilaestInformationavailableatthatties.
we @as be of any aa&is%gacBanner09thePublicBossingDiviles a! 37A721;etast Na. Putti
Very slaeevely years,
lhoaas !. Feeney,
sanager
S-9FR SO Mgat Re.iew File
Voweentive Director
S.9FB Reader
5-98Ma,8assay,bae.:il/14/91
BMa.IBaBBas 882L00
IAi @@Poo a ormum 8 and 18hea OaaM/swd
Yosy Ba, NWANO mal4 m
Ms. David Crain, Chairmen [
NEr ! EVED
Bossiag and Radevelopeent Authority
Of Plymouth
3400 Plymouth Boulevard SAM SS 02
Plymouth, Minnesota 55441
DeMr. Cruise OCOW mny
ITY OF Pm `manDow
Subjects section 8 Managemout Follow-up Review
This Is to summarise the follow-up review conducted by our office on
November 18, 1991, by Ma. Patti Rainey and No. Raye Pistilli, and to report the
status of the section Management Review issued on September 48 1991.
In response to our section s Management Review we received three thorough
response letters from Mr. James G. Willis, Plymouth City Manager, defining what
ectiow your agency was taking to clear the reported findings. Based on those
throe letters we were able to clear eight of the ten findings. in order for us
to clear the remaining two, we conducted a follow-up review. At the follow-up
review, our staff examined the same six tenant files from the original review,
Liles of three now certificate holders, and three recertification that were
completed after our initial review in June.
unfortunately, in carrying out our follow-up review, we noted little
Improvement in the area of tenant files. We've prepared tenant file review
sheets which summarise the file findings noted at our review follow-up.
Attachment A are the findings that remain open from the six tenant files In our
first review and some additional items that may not have been addressed in our
original report. Attachment B are findings noted on recent lease -ups.
Attachment C are the findings noted as recent recertification. Please respond
to each tenant file finding and explain all steps that will be taken to ensure
future compliance. Finding 69 will remain open until we are able to visit your
agency a third time to follow-up on the file findings above. We anticipate a
day sometime this spring.
a our letter to your agency dated November 14, 1991, w Gloated the 508
finding based on a copy of a letter sent to the apartment manager at Harbor Lase
Apartments. The unit of Eric and Patricia Miller, 2145 Barbor Lan North, 41-
302, had failed the 898 inspection due to a torn screen in the children's
bedroom. The rindw is floor level and is considered a safety risk. At the
time of oar follow-up review there was no indication in the file that the window
bad been repaired. she only letter on file was the same one seat to our of fleet
which is dated September 19, 1991, and allows a repair time of 10 days. this
finding is considered reopened until documentation Is submitted to our office
which clearly shows that the unit has been reinspected to verify the completion
of the work.
In our original report we requested that a (lousing Quality Standard (BOB)
Inspection be done at 17605 19th Avenue North, 0110. Tbis suit was to be
Inspected at the time of our original review but the tenant was not at base when
our staff arrived at the scheduled time. To date, we have not received a copy
of the Inspection.
Clore-out meetings were held following both the original swi.w and follow-
up ollowupreview. At those meetings, discussions were bold regarding the sanction that
would be assessed against your authority's administrative reserve. The basis
for the Proposed genetics was a result of your agency eontraetisg for mite with
gross rents in excess of the fair market rent in effect at the time of lease up.
Please refer to Finding 09 of your Section S Management Review report dated
September 4, 1991.) We have since decided to forgo the sanction. This is In
rest Part, due to your prompt response to our initial report, and the immediate
attention given to implementing our required actions. Nowever, should this
practice continue, we will require a reimbursement to your housing assistance
psyments account, or administrative fees for soy unit+ in excess of the twenty
percent allowable under program regulations viii be withheld.
In your September 23, 1991, response letter and at the closeout meeting held
at the follow-up review in November, our staff was tatosmed that your agenoy did
Dot have the $96,169 operating reserve that was reported on your year and
financial statements for June 30, 1991. At the folies-up closeout mus staff
was informed that the financial director would be reviewing the financial records
to determine if the year en!' statement is correct. We have not received word
as to the result of his/her findings. Please provide us with your findings in
your next response.
We were very pleased that Mr. Milt Dale and Me. Demme Nutt were able to
attend s training session with Ms. Patti Naaoay of our Public Rousing Division.
The session Mao hold .00 December 6, 1991" following out secoDd visit to your
office. We are confident that the session vas beneficial to our office as well
as your staff, and will aid in resolving the recurring problems with tenant
files. We also encourage both Mr. Dale and Ms. Nutt to attend our statewide
training sessions coming up in April. to the interim, please encourage than
to contact our office with any questions that may arise.
In summary, findings 01 and 19 Cousin open. To clear finding $i please
submit an "planation of the process that' will be used to track the twenty
percent exceptions. To clods finding 09 please respond to the tenant file
findings listed os attachments At Be and C. We are requesting that the unit
located at 3145 anchor Lane Worth, 11-305 be reinspected and unit 17605 19th
1lvonae Worth, 0110 be !aspected. In addition, we are requesting that you infosn
es on the status of your search in locating the $96,169, which should be in your
section a Operating Reserve as of June 30, 1991.
If you have any questions, planes contact Pa. Patti Sammy of the Public
Running Division at 370-3212.
Very sincerely yours,
s T. Posner,
Rsueges
February 12, 1992 r;
cnv)c)(-
Wom
Thomas T. Feeney
NUD Area Office
220 S. 2nd St.
Minneapolis, MN 55401-2195
SUBJECT: DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT REVIEW OF THE
SECTION 8 EXISTING PROGRAM FOR PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA - YOUR LETTER OF
JANUARY 29, 1992
Dear Mr. Feeney:
In response to your Section 8 Management follow-up review we have summarized
below the actions we have taken to clear findings 11 and 09. We are also
reporting on the status of the $96,169 in our Section 8 Operating Reserve;
and, the file findings as per the file review summary sheet attached.
1. Response to the Items Noted in Your Letter of January 27. 1992.
Recently, the Housing Authority purchased Nan McKay software to
generate a variety of reports and documents. This software will
allow 'us to track 20% exception rents as needed. All tenant data
should be located on the system by February 17, 1992. The Executive
Director of the Housing Authority now requires that any request for
exception rent be cleared througli'-ilis office prior to approval.
Since the date of HUD's initial Management Review in June, 1991, no
exceptich rents have been approved.
Inspection of Two Units Noted in Your Letter.
An inspection was.made of Apartment 1-305, 3145 Harbor Lahe North on
December 29, 1991. A copy of that inspection booklet is attached.
All screens were sound at the time of that inspection, An inspection
will be made at 17605 19th Avenue North 0110. We are scheduling that
inspection for February 13, 1992. A copy of that inspection report
will be mailed to you at a later date.
3. Section 8 Operatino Reserve
The City Finance Director has located the amount of $96,169 in the
City's account for the Section 8 Operating Reserve.
4. File Review Summary Sheets
We have indicated our initial response on the attachment of the File
Review Summary Sheet. We intend to follow-up on all findings and
make necessary corrections within 30 days.
3400 PLYMOUTH BOULEVARD.. PLYMOUTH. MINNESOTA 55447. TELEPHONE (612) 550-5000
Thomas Feeney
Page 2
Our new Nan. McKay Section 8 processing software has been loaded and two of our
staff have been trained on a.portion of the program. Data entry will soon be
complete. making the system operational.. ikcordkeeping•should thereafter be
more efficient.
He wish to express our apppreci•_ti"on for the assistance that has been given us
by Patti Uhnnay in providing special training and also in her willingness to
help us regarding our various questions.
Sincerely,
ba-0- Nz_
milt Dale
Housing Specialist
hra/md/hud:dh)
April b. 1992 UCIN OF .
PIYMOM
Thomas T. Feeney
NUO Area Office
220 S. 2nd St.
Minneapolis, MN 55401-2195
SUBJECT: DEPARTMENT OF MOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT REVIEW OF THE
SECTION 8 EXISTING PROGRAM FOR PLYMOUTH. MINNESOTA - YOUR LETTER OF
JANUARY 29, 1992 AND OUR FOLLOW-UP ON SEVERAL ISSUES
Obar Mr. Feeney:
In response to your Section 8 Management follow-up review we have followed-up
on our earlier actions and believe we have responded to all file findings.
Enclosed you will find a memo with attachments detailing our response.
We wish to express our appreciation for your staff's patience and help in
seeing us through this process.
Sincerely.
f 'lf-,-
Milt Dale
Housing Specialist
hra/md/hud:dh)
34M PLYMOUTH BOULEVARD. PLYMOUTH. MNNEBOTA 65447. TELEPHONE 012) MSM
4.
MEMO
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
3400 PLYMOUTH BOULEVARD, PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447
DATE: April 10, 1992
TO: HRA Board of ommissioners
FROM: Charles E. rud, Executive Director
SUBJECT: ATTORNEY OPINIONS REGARDING SENIOR HOUSING
Attached please find three opinions of the City Attorney/NRA Attorney
regarding senior housing for Plymouth, as follow:
1. Opinion dated March 20, 1992 regarding general authority of the HRAandtheCitywithregardtotheseniorsproject..
2. Opinion dated April 3, 1992 to the HRA regarding mandatory age,
Income and residency preference issues.
3. Opinion to .the NRA dated April 9, 1992 regarding public versus
private ownership of a senior project.
In addition to these attorney opinions, Dan Nelson of the MRA's law firm Best
and Flanagan will be in attendance at our meeting of April 16, 1992 to assist
the HRA with any other questions that may be raised regarding these topics.
Dan has had substantial experience in HRA housing matters.
hra/cd/board)
I.. 04-10-1992 12:47 339 5897 BESTUFLANAam P.05
MENORANDUN
TO: PLYMOUTH CITY MANAGER AND CITY COUNCIL
FROM: PLYMOUTH CITY ATTORNEY
DATE: March 20, 1992
RS: City of Plymouth/MRA: Seniors, Program
Introduction
The Plymouth Housing and Redevelopment Authority (the
HRA") is exploring the development of 8 -housing development
project for senior citizens (the "Project" or "Seniors'
Project"). Should the Project prove feasible, the HRA may
propose Project financing in the form of revenue bonds
supplemented by a property tax levy to meet the debt service
coverage requirements.
We have been askedto review the relationship between
the HRA and the Council to ascertain whether the HRA is
authorized to sell bonds and levy property taxes without Council
approval. Nothing in the Plymouth Code or the HRA bylaws
addresses these concerns.
Short Answer
i. Bond Issuance: Although the HRA has broad
authority to issue bonds without City Council approval, it must
04-10-1992 12:47 339 5897 6EMPLANAGm p,08
receive Metropolitan Council and Minnesota Housing Finance
Agency approval of the Seniors' Project before it can issue
bonds to finance the Project. Further, the HRA must consider
the negative political ramifications of issuing bonds and
implementing the Project without City Council input or approval.
2. Property Tax Levy. The HRA cannot levy property
taxes without City Council approval.
Diseusslon
The HRA receives Its powers from Minnesota Statutes
Sections 469.001 to 469.047 (the "Act"). The HRA has "all the
powers necessary or convenient to carry out the purposes of (the
Act), except that the power to levy and collect taxes or -special
assessments is limited to the power provided in sections 469.027
to 469.033." Minn. Stat. § 409.012. These sections, in part,
authorize methods by which the HRA may finance projects such as
the Seniors• Project, including bond issuance and property tax
levy. fe Minn. Stat. S 469.033, subd. 3, 6.
Bond Issuance
Before it can issue any bonds for a housing development
project, (assuming that a comprehensive housing plan already
exists in Plymouth), the HRA must prepare a "program" and submit
it to both the Metropolitan Council and the Minnesota Housing
2-
04-10-1992 12:47 339 5897 BESTC:FLANA M P.07
Finance Agency for review. See Minn. Stat. S 469.0171.
A "program" is defined as "an individual component of
the housing plan for which one or more issues of revenue bonds
or obligations is proposed." Minn. Stat. S 462C.02, subd. 2.
The Seniors' Project fits under this definition.
The manner in which the NRA must submit the program for
review by the Metropolitan Council and the Minnesota Housing
Finance Agency is described in Minnesota Statutes Sections
462C.04, subd. 2 and -462C.05. subd. 5.
The statutes do not specifically require City Council
approval for bond issuance.
ProoertX Tax Levy
The NRA isnot authorized to levy property taxes
without City Council approval. The governing statute is
self-explanatory:
All of the territory included within the area of
operation of (the HRA) -shall constitute a taxing
district for the purposes of levying and
collecting special benefit taxes as provided in
this subdivision. . . . Sub-ect to the consent
3-
04-10-1992 12:48 339 5897 SESTufLANAG M p,OB
market value to a used to eEra costs of
rovid n i f rmetional sery ce and.reloca ion
assistance as set.forth In section 469.012, subd.
1. Theamount of the tax.levv for the
following ear hell be based on that bud et and
shall be approved by the KC2,ungill.
Minn. Stat. S 469.033, subd. 6 (emphasis added).
Conclusion
Although the HAA has broad authority to develop,
finance and manage its projects, it must observe statutory
program approval guidelines prior to bond issuance and must
receive City Council approval .prior to property tax levy.
Because the Seniors' Project is a discrete program within
Plymouth's comprehensive housing plan, no City Council
approval of the program or bond issuance is required. The
HRA must, however, receive Metropolitan Council and MHFA
approval before it can issue bonds for the Project.
4-
04-10-1592 12:45 339 5897 BESTULANAMY p;O2
MEXORANDUM
TO: Plymouth HFA
FROM: City Attorney
DATE: April 3, 1992
RE: Seniors• project Ace., Income and Residency Issues
Issues
1. Can the City of Plymouth Housing and Redevelopment
Authority ("HRA') impose age, income and
durational residency requirements on admission
into its proposed senior housing project (the
Project')?
2. Would statutory limits on age, income and
residency differ if the Project were privately
owned?
Short Answers
1. Within statutory limits, the HRA may restrict
entrance into the Project based on age, income and residency
requirements; however, it may not impose durational residency
requirements.
2. Projects funded by private activity bonds are
subject to many of the same restrictions to which publicly
funded projects are subject. In addition, pursuant to various
tax and housing laws, these projects are generally considered no
longer feasible for private developers to undertake.
Discussion
Age
The Plymouth HRA may impose age restrictions upon
Project applicants. The federal Fair Housing Act and the
Minnesota Human Rights Act do not prohibit discrimination based
on age in the sale or rental of housing. Under both statutes.
housing for older persons" is defined, in relevant part, as
housing "intended for, and solely occupied by, persons 62 years
of age or older. . ." or "person[a] 55 years of age or older .
provided that [enumerated services and facilities are provided
to the residents)." 92 U.S.C. 3607; Minn. Stat. S 363.02, subd.
2.
04-10-1992 12:46 339 5897 BESTOFLANAGAN P.03
Income
The HRA may impose income limitations on Project
applicants. Minnesota Statutes provide the following guidelines
for housing development projects such as the HRAs proposed
Project:
within its area of operation, (the HRA is
authorized) to determine the level of income
constituting low or moderate family income. The
HRA) may establish various income levels for
various family sizes. In making its
determination, the (HRA) may consider income
levels that may be established by the Department
of Housing and Urban Development -or a similar or
successor federal agency for the purpose of
federal loan guarantees or subsidies for persons
of low or moderate income. The (HRA) may use that
determination as a basis for the maximum amount of
income for admissions to housing development
projects or housing projects owned or operated byit.
Minn. Stat. § 469.012, subd. S.
Alternatively, Plymouth may wish to refrain from
imposing any income limitations upon Project applicants.
This action would be appropriate pursuant to Minnesota
Statutes which impose no income limits upon elderly housingdevelopmentprojects. bee Minn. Stat. S 462C.05, subd. 4.
Residency
Although the HRA may impose a minimal residency
preference upon Project applicants, it cannot impose a
durational requirement. In other words, the NRA may give
qualified Plymouth applicants who are residents priority for
entrance into the Project, but it cannot give preference to
a tan -year resident over a one-month resident.
By analogy to laws governing "housing projects"
which, pursuant to statute, are targeted at low income
individuals), the HRA is subject to the following guidelines
in relation to its "housing development project" (which,
pursuant to statute, is targeted at moderate income
individuals):
As between applicants equally in need and eligible
for occupany of a dwelling and at the rent
involved, preference shall be given to families of
service persons who died in service and to
families of veterans. In admitting families of
2-
04-10-1992 12:46 339 5897 BEBTAFLANA6AN P.04
low ncome to dwellino accommodations in an
housing protect the HRA1 shall as!ar a is
reasons roct le iv cons der tion t
s licat ons trom . res den Elm 1 es to - whom
pubi c as iisstance_or_ouvplemental security IncoiFe
for the aged, blind d disabled is payable, when
those [amilie¢ anareotherwiseeliglible.
Minn. Stat. S 469.021 (emphasis added).
An important concern is whether ttiy residency
preference will result in a diacriminatory effect in
relation to one of the "protected" categories. For example,
if the preference resulted in racial, religious or gender
discrimination, it would run afoul of constitutional
protections. See e.g. United States. v. Housing Authogity of
the City of Chckasaw, 504 F. Supp. 716 (1980); Shapiro v.
Thomason, 394 U.S. 616. 89 S. Ct. 1322 (1969).. ?his would
be true whether the Project were publicly or privately owned.
The HRA is subject to the following statutory
guidelines:
There shall be no discrimination in the selection
of tenants because of race or religious,
political, or other affiliations, but if the
number of qualified applicants for dwelling
accommodations exceeds the dwelling units
available, cefer nca shall i -en to
inhabitants Qf the municipal ty in which the
project_ is located, and to the families who
occupied the dwellings eliminated by demolition,
condemnation, and effective closing as part of the
project, as far as is reasonably practicable
without discrimination against families living in
other substandard areas within the same
municipality.
Minn. Stat. S 469.020 (emphasis added).
Conclusion
The HRA can impose age and income requirements
within statutory guidelines. Mindful of potential problems
related to discriminatory effect, the HRA can implement
residency preferences, so long as no durational limitation
is imposed.
3-
04-10-1992 11:04 339 5897 BE5TDFLANAGAN P.03
I.
MEMORANDUM
TO: Plymouth Housing and Redevelopment Authority
FROM: City Attorney
DATE: April 9, 1992
RE: Plymouth Senior Housing Project
You have asked us to outline the various structuring
options available to the Plymouth Housing and Redevelopment
Authority (the "Authority") for the development of a proposed
senior apartment project (the "Project") in the City of Plymouth
the "City"). This memorandum is intended to outline the
various aspects, both advantageous and detrimental, of three
different structures which the Authority should consider in its
determination of the development and financing structure of this
Project. These three structures can be summarized as: 1. full
ownership by the Authority; 2. ownership by a public/private
partnership formed by the Authority and a private developer; and
3. ownership by s private developer with assistance from the
City and the Authority.
1. Full Ownership .the Authority. Under this
structure the Project would be undertaken by the
Authority as a "housing development project" under
Minn. Stat. $§ 469.002, subd. 12 and 469.017, as
described in our earlier memoranda to you dated
March 20, 1992 and April 2., 1992. The Project
would be financed by the Authority through the
issuance of tax exempt essential. function bonds,
which would require that no non-governmental
entity can have any interest in the Project. This
would not, however, prevent the Authority from
entering into service contracts with various
development and property management professionals
to do the work necessary for the development and
04-10-1992 11:05 339 5897 9ESUFLANAGM p,O4
operation of the project which is beyond the
Authority's current staffing and technical
capacity. Because of the advantages described
below this structure is likely to produce the
highest quality housing at the lowest possible
rents, but would require the greatest involvement
by the Authority over the term of the financing.
A. Advantages
Pull control of all development and
management decisions by the Authority;
ii. Tax exempt bonds are available without
an allocation of bonding authority from
the State and without two percent
limitation on costs of issuance which
can be financed from bond proceeds;
iii. Income limits and tenant eligibility
are set by Authority, not federal or
State requirements;
iv. Project makes payments in lieu of
property taxes equal to five percent of
shelter rents rather than full property
taxes;
V. Exception from public bidding
requirements under Minn. Stat.
469.015, subd. 4 would allow
Authority to fix construction costs
early in development process (see
proposed legislation, H.F. 2965);
vi. Sales tax exemption on building
materials could provide significant
cost savings (but proposed legislation
Will likely remove this exemption); and
vii. No profit motive or return on
investment is required so Authority can
keep cents as low as possible.
B. Disadvantages:
i. Authority will be fully responsible for
Project operations and bond debt
service for full term of the bonds;
ii. pledge of City levy to support debt
service on the bonds will likely be
required to successfully market the
bonds;
2-
04-10-1992 11:05 339 5097 eESTSFLANAGMI
iii. Authority will be "at risk" for
construction cost overruns, initial
lease -up of Project and potential
future operating losses; and
iv. No outside equity investments can be
raised in ezchange for an interest in
the Project.
P.05
2. QXnershig Ora Public/Privets Partnershi . As an
intermediate alternative the Authority may
consider forming a limited partnership to act as
the developer of the Project with the Authority
acting as general partner and syndicating the
limited partnership interest in ::rder to raise
additional equity for use in the Project. This
additional equity source could be used to reduce
the City's and Authority's contributions to the
Project or to keep debt service and rents as low
as possible. The Authority's participation in
this partnership is authorized by the some
statutory provisions described above, and as
general partner the Authority would have a large
degree of control over the development and
operation of the Project. However, the
involvement of non-governmental limited partners
would eliminate the availability of essential
function bonds and private activity bond financing
is not generally available for senior projects.
This structure would protect the Authority by
passing the development's risks onto the limited
partnership, but would force the Project into
conventional financing and operating
requirements. Even with the Project ownership
being one step removed from the Authority, you
should also consider the practical and political
question of whether the Authority would still be
called upon to cure any problems with the Project
in order to satisfy residents and avoid a
potential loss of the Project in an event of
default, even though the Authority would have.no
legal obligation to.do so.
A. Advantages'
I, Authority can retain a large measure of
control over the development and
management. of the Project, subject to
terms of the partnership agreement;
ii. Equity raised from limited partners is
an additional source of funds;
3-
04-10-1992 11:06 339 5697 eE5TUFLANAGAN p.06
lit. Partnership structure would remove
Authority [rom direct responsibility
for consttuction, lease -up and
operating risks; and _
iv. Bidding laws do not apply.
B. Disadvantages:
I. Tax exempt financing not available
without on allocation of State bonding
authority, which is not generally
available for senior projects without
change in State law !see Minn. Stat.
474A.07);
it. TE bonds are used, federal income
limits would apply;
iii. Project pays full property taxes
although tax increment financing may
be available to return some of those
taxes to the Project);
iv. Project would likely still require some
form of City pledge to make bonds
marketable; and
V. Limited partners would require market
rate return on their investment, which
would raise rents.
Private Ownership with Authority Assistance. The
Authority would have the least risk in the
development of this Project if it could find a
private developer to construct and operate the
Project for the purposes desired by the Authority
in exchange for an initial contribution from the
City and the Authority of the land for the Project
and an ongoing contribution through tax -increment
financing. We understand, however, that this
option hes been pursued by the Authority for some
time without a satisfactory response from the
private development community. without going into
a more detailed list of the advantages and
disadvantages which the Authority and City are
well aware of, it is sufficient to note that this
structure results in the least exposure to the
Authority and could result in a a Project meeting
all of the Authority's policy goals. However,
given the private development market and the
extent of the public subsidies which would be
required to make a privately -owned project
4-
04-20-1992.11:08 339 5897 OF5MFLANAGM P. 07
feasible, it is understandable that the Authority
would conclude that its investment in such a
development would be too large in eschang r the
limited return to the City, and that the ty's
interests would be better served by the Authority
taking a more direct and active role in the
ownership and operation development of this
Project as described above.
If you have any additional questions regarding this
Project or the structures described above, please feel free to
call us.
DRN : Mr
0019v
5-
5•
MEND
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
3400 PLYMOUTH BOULEVARD., PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447
DATE: April 1, 1992 for Housing and Redevelopment Authority Meeting ofApril16, 1992
TO: Charles E. Dillerud, Executive Director
FRQi: Housing Specialist Milt Dale *VZ—
SUBJECT: SCATTERED SITE HOMEOWNERSHIP PROGRAM - REVIEW OF PLANS 2.AND 3
ACTION REQUESTED: Information and status report on this program.
BACI06ROUH0:
In January of 1992, the City of Plymouth entered into a contract with
Thibault Associates to develop several mode', plans for a Scattered Site
Homeownership Program in Plymouth. At last month's meeting the Model Planfor1992wasdescribed. Thisplan is now in use, but likely will not befeasibleafterOctober1, 1992 due to HUD rules changes.
Part of Mr. Thibault's charge was to provide the City '•h two more
Scattered Site Homeownership plans to be used after Octobe "hese plans
have been prepared along with a comparative matrix shoe.._ .e Plymouth
Program Plan of 1991 and the three model plans.
PRIMARY ISSUES AND ANALYSIS:
For comparative purposes, refer to the matrix developed by the consultantwhichisanattachmenttothismemorandum. The primary issues to consider
relate to funding in Model Plan 2 and the method of using a "double closingvInModelPlan3. Attached are the consultant's model Plan 2 pages 1, 2, and
3 and Model Plan 3 pages 1 and 2.
In the case of Model Plan 2, the City/HRA would use either Section 8
reserves and/ora HRA tax levy to fund the activity. In future years, the
City/NRA should also be recovering monies returned when current first time
homebuyers resell their houses. According to Real Estate industry
statistics, the average first time home buyer sells his/her house within 5
to 7 years after purchase. Since the City has.a 20 year repayment agreement
with the first'10 years requiring a full repayment and the second 10 years a
decreasing percentage repayment, there is a strong likelihood of return of
significant funds. This would likely not materialize, however until 1997
and beyond.
Model Plan 3 depends on the use of a "double closing" with the City/HRA
taking title of the property for a matter of minutes and then reselling it
to an eligible participant. By utilizing this method, the use of COBS funds
Is legitimized. True, this ma sound like HUD "double -s ak" but we have
been given assurance by HUD Staff that it is within HUD guidelines.
Consultant's schedule for both Model Plan 2 and 3 would require taking
applications in January of 1993. Due to the considerable number of
applications we received during the last two weeks, those persons that are
not selected in the drawing will be informed that they are put on a "waiting
list" similar to that for Section B. Further, we will inform them that in
January of 1993 we will consider initiating the Scattered Site Home
Ownership Program again. He may need to do some modifying to either Model
Plan 2 or 3 based on our experience that we will gain in the next 3 to 4
months with Model Plan 1.
CONCLUSIONS AN RECON1101DATIONS:
It is my raccomendation that we continue on schedule with the Model Plan I
program and bring the..matter of utilization of either Plan 2 or 3 before the
Housing Authority in October of 1992. At that time, I believe we will be
better able to recommend either Plan 2 or 3 for use in 1993.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Comparative Matrix for Plymouth Scattered Site Homeownership Program.
2. General Description of Model Plans 2 and 3.
3. Booklet Containing Entire Outline of Model Plans 1, 2, and 3.
hra/md/4-16)
CITY alp PLYi00li
NCs't'i'iaiD illi IV PLs>t
POR Lam s VNRT LW Iil1ki%64M= iCi
MO= PUN s
199!
The draft of Model Plan 2, 1992 is based on the assumption that
COW monies will not be allowed to be used for the kind of plan
that is envisioned in the 1992 pian. That is, CDBG monies could
only be used for acquisition of property by the City/HRA and a
write down on a sale to the buyer.
Plan 2 differs from Pian 1 in the following respects:
1. References to the 1992 plan are deleted.
2. The funding amount is not identified.
3. The number of families to be assisted is -deleted as well as
reference to the group of 20 and the standby group.
4. The schedule is more open and does not need to be as detailed.
S. The funding source is set C monies. It is suggested that
the City/Ras consider Nestles i reserves and MR& tax levy.
The City could we Cm funding if the City acquired the
lamiles* es
CDHO ifnadiagtae osN It1h the >[ame
Am
pias begause the "coni matching lards must be from aoa-Pederai
sources.
a. Registration is deleted but the application process would
remain.
7. Preference is expanded to include very low income and date of
application, and a preference point system is proposed.
1
9. The waiting list would be designed to reflect and accommodate
an ongoing plan. opening and closing the waiting list can be
W.ased on the length of the list and funding.
9. The selection groups are eliminated.
lo. Procedures are. modified to take into account the points in
this report.
11. Lenders could remain the same or could be expanded if
appropriate.
12. The responsibilities of the buyers and City/HRA change
slightly.
1770i'"-' 7 f"fJ
The draft of Model Pian 1, 1991 is based on use of CDBG funding and
is patterned after Model Plan 1, except the homebuyer8a purchase
agreement would permit transfer of the purchase rights to the
City/BRA. if the City/BRA agree that the property meets the goals
of the plan and the lender approves the homebuyerls mortgage, then
the City/HRA can exercise its rights to purchase the property and
at up a double closing. The first closing would be between the
seller and the City/BRA and the second closing would be between the
City/BRA and the first-time homebuyer. The more significant or
relevant differences in Model Plan 1 as compared to Model Plan i
are in bold type.
a
t. OaMRRRi. DESCRIPTION
Plymouth*s Scattered site Homeownership Plan for Lower and Very Low
Income, First-time Homebuyers provides financial assistance to
selected eligible buyers to pay up to 50 percent of the
downpayment, pay closing costs, and/or to reduce the mortgage
Principal amount which will make the house more affordable.
Families desiring to participate must apply, be eligible and be
selected to participate under the provisions of this pian.
Interested families can make arrangements to apply by calling the
City at 550-5056. Funding is expected to be tram reserves fro® the
Section 8, Certificate Plan and/or fk m the HRA tax levy account.
Some preference will be given to those who work or live in
Plymouth. Prospective first-time homebuyers selected to
participate are responsible for finding an appropriate house for
sale in Plymouth, selecting a lending institution familiar with the
plan, making the arrangements for the mortgage and meeting the
provisions of this plan.
a. RLRM GOALS
Plymouth's Scattered Site Homeownership Plan has the fol:iowing four
goals:
a. assist low and moderate income families in purchasing homes on
scattered sites in Plymouth.
b. Promote home ownership.
C. Recover and recycle any funds recovered through the repayment
Process to -future scattered site homeownership programs.
d. Increase the supply of affordable, habitable dwellings in
Plymouth.
a. SC®LE
in order to meet the plan goals and other requirements in a timely
manner, the following schedule is established.
January 20, 1993 Application for first-time homebuyere opens.
January 29, 1993 Application closes.
March, 1993 Selection of prospective participants begins.
April, 1993 Orientation workshops for prospective buyers.
May -June, 1993 Pre -application for mortgage approved by this
date.
May -July, 1993 Purchase agreement executed.
May -Sept., 1993 Closing on properties.
3
CI'T'Y or PLYM OUTS
POS Lown SSD TUT Low IMCOSB, PIRs"m YSli
SODBL PLLM
1993
1. OCL DSSCRI IM
Plymouthts Scattered Site Homeownership Plan for Lower and very Low
Income, First-time Homebuyers provides financial assistance to
selected eligible buyers to pay up to SO percent of the
dowepayment, pay closing costs, and/or reduce the mortgage
principal amount which will now the house more affordable.
Families desiring to participate must be registered, complete the
application, be eligible and have been selected to participate
under the provisions of this plan. The' plan is fined :ander
Community Development Block Grant (CDBC). Preference will be given
to those who work or live in Plymouth. Prospective first-time
homebuyers selected to participate are responsible for fining an
appropriate house for sale in Plymouth, selecting a lending
Institution familiar with the plan, making the arrangements for the
mortgage an meeting the provisions of this plan.
20 PLU GOALS
Plymouth's 1993 Scattered Site Homeownership Plan has the following
four goals:
a. 1lsaist lower an very low income families in purchasing homes
on scattered sites in Plymouth.
b. Promote home ownership.
C. Recover an recycle any funs recovered through the repayment
process to future scattered site hoasownersh p programs.
d. Increase the supply of affordable, habitable dwellings in
Plymouth.
3a 8CRMDULX
In order to met the plan goals and other requirements in a timelymanner, the following schedule is established.
January 20, 1993 Application for first-time homebuyers opens.
January 29, 1993 Application closas.
March, 1993 Selection of prospective participants begins.
April, 1993 Orientation workshops for prospective buyers.
I&Y-OVERS, 1993 pre -application for mortgage approved by thisdate.
May -July, 1993 purchase agreement executed.
May -Sept., 1993 Closing on properties.
2
to.
NEND
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
3400 PLYMOUTH BOULEVARD, PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447
DATE: March 6, 1992
TO: Housing an evelopment Authority Commissioners
FROM: Chuck it , Community Development Director
SUBJECT: SECTION 8 OPERATING RESERVE
As I have reported to the HRA recently, and as you may have noticed in the
monthly financial statement previously submitted for your review, the Section
8 Balance Sheet shows (as Item 2826) an amount of $96,166.94 as a Reserve
Surplus --Operating Reserve as of January 31, 1992.
This reserve account has been growing slowly since about 1978 as the result of
expenditures from the HRA Section 8 administration account (basically payments
to the City under the management contract plus auditing/accounting fees) being
less than administration fees received by the HRA from HUD. The
administration fees received from HUD are on a formula/per unit basis paid
regardless of the actual cost of administering the program locally. Since
about 1978 the actual receipts from HUD based on that formula have exceeded
the actual expeditures by the Plymouth HRA under the management contract
resulting in annual surpluses. in addition, the account has been accruing
interest on the increasing balance.
HUD rules regarding Section 8 operating reserves are outstanding in their
brevity. 1 have inquired as to standards HUD may have with regard to
maintaining operating reserves and 1 have found there are none. HUD rules
simply state that operating reserves should be maintained to assure that
sufff-:ient funds are available to administer the Section 8 certificates for
which the HRA is responsible. I am sure there have been instances where PHA's
have overspent for whatever reason.
The combination of administrative fees due from our 87 Section 8 certificates
and the net fees received by the City for administering Section 8 portability
certificates will annually total approximately $65,000. It has been the
practice of the Cit of Plymouth (and it is the recommendation of the
Financial Task Force to maintain an operating reserve forCity purposes
equalling approximately 40 percent of the annual operating budget. While the
primary purpose of this operating reserve is to assure positive cash flow
related to tax receipts from Hennepin County, the percentage still might serve
as a 'benchmark' for the NRA to consider with respect to a permanent operating
reserve for the Section 8 program. There may be unforeseen twists in future
Section 8 program administration (such as portability has been) that will
require the NRA to expend for administration beyond what will be available
1-
from HUD --at least for a portion of a fiscal year until the HUD fee schedule
catches up°.
if we assume the standard of maintaining an operating reserve in the Section 8
fund equal to 40 percent of the annual operating budget an amount of $25,000
would be appropriate at this time. If that amount is properly invested, the
Interest earnings should increase the operating reserve at a pace close to the
need to increase that reserve to match increases in the operating budgets.
If we, therefore, assume $25,000 to be the amount of the operating reserve
that is retained as a"rainy day account", approximately $75,000 will remain
in that account by the end of this Section 8 budget year (June 30, 1992). We
have now revised the management agreement to °track° with the Section 8 budget
and increase the amount of labor and materials attributable to Section 8
Ministration as a result. Additional surplus shouldggenerated in the
Section 8 fund during this program year (July 1, 1991 -June 30, 1992) because
these adjustments did not take place until January/February 1992.
Chapter 8 of the HUD Section 8 program rules discusses expenditures of Section
8 operating reserve funds found by the PHA Board of Commissioners to be in
excess of amounts necessary to assure the continued administration of the
program. Other than specifying that direct expenditures must be made out of
the operating reserve account --as authorized by the PHA Board of
Commissioners --no specific guidance is provided by HUD with regard to how
these funds are expended except that they must be expended for mother housing
purposes consistent with the PHA's authority under State and ;.kcal Law,
provided that the amounts used for other housing purposes are not required for
projected administrative expense through the remaining ACC terms".
The HRA Board of Commissioners may wish to, at this time, begin consideration
of potential areas of expenditure for these excess Section 8 operating reserve
amounts (approximately $75,000 if a 40 percent true reserve is considered
appropriate). It should be understood that I do not now anticipate continued
annual surpluses as have developed in the past. I believe that in creating
those surpluses we °shorted" our administration of the Section 8 program and
the extensive management findings of 1991 are ample proof that there is a
direct relationship between funds received for administrative purposes and use
of those funds for those administrative purposes. i have heard that some
other PHA's may have deliberately created Section 8 operating fund surpluses
to "free up" money orf otTier housing purposes. I do not advocate that
approach.
Some other °housing purposes° that have been mentioned, from time -to -time, as
potential uses for the excess Section 8 operating reserve include the
following:
1. A locally designed rental subsidy program similar to Section 8 but,
perhaps more flexible in terns of rules to better meet locally perceived
needs. An example I have heard about is the St. Louis Park "Max 200"
program. Here the HRA has used Section 8 operating reserve funds for a
local Federal assistance program. They have limited the amount of
assrstance however to no more than $200 per month per unit and have
developed other local rules governing the program. For comparison, the
average assistance per unit per month now provided through our Federal
2-
Section 8 program is well over $300. Approximately 30 "unit years° of
rental assistance could be provided under a local program adopting the
Max 200" concept to the amount of subsidy rovided. This could be 15
additional units over a 2 year period or 6 additional units over a 5 year
period or some other combination totally 30 unit years.
2. Perhaps in a similar manner to No. 1 above, but more focused, would be
the application of the available Section 8 operating reserve funds as
additional local subsidyto the senior housing project. Unlike applying
CDB6 funds to that proect it does not appear that Federal low/moderate
income constrictions and occupancy rules would necessarily be tied to the
use of the funds for these purposes. If it were the desire of the HRA to
pursue this evidence a mcre specific finding would be necessary regarding
any °strings° that would be tied to these funds.
3. There has been a suggestion that the HRA could expend some of the
operating reserve funds for capital items -=such as an enhanced or new
computer system for HRA purposes. While this could be an eligible
expenditure, we generally have been hesitant to purchase capital items
with Federal funds due to the rather complex accounting procedures
required for such transactions. Our usual approach in this instance is
to allow respective City capital equipment cost center to acquire the
nece3sary eeqquipment and charge back the HRA over an extended time period.
This type of accounting arrangement would work here as well.
4. There have been suggestions that City/HRA retain additional staff in the
administration of the Section 8 program and other housing related
activities. While this may be a desirable activity in the future, i do
not believe it to be an immediate need. Perhaps any decision regarding
expenditrre of the operating reserve funds should be delayed until such
time as I have completed my review of the Community Development
Department organizational structure and manpower needs. I have not as
yet made a determination as to whether our current staffing related to
HRA activities is or .is not adequate in comparison to the other Community
Development manpower requirements.
sr:hra/cd/2-19:jw)
3-
I.
EMD
CITY OF PLY"DUTH
3400 PLYMOUTH BOULEVARD, PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA SS447
DATE: April 8, 1992
TO: Charles E. Dillerud, Executive Director
FROM: Milt Dale, Housing Specialist Nt_
SWECT: INFORMATION ITEMS
The following are information items that would be of interest to NRACommissioners:
a. Response to Plymouth's First Time-Homebu er Pro ram. The deadline for
receiving applications for UO FirSt-Tin Homebuyer Program was 4:30 p.m. on Monday, April 6, 1992. Denise has since tabulated the number of
applications received and determined that we have a total of 140
applications. This compares with a total of 183 families or in4ividuals
that registered. Applicants with a preference out number those in the
non -preference category over 2::, i.e., 96 with a preference and 41 non -
preference applicants. A drawing will be held on Thursday, April 9, 1992at6:00 p.m. to select the top 20 applicants who will be given first
opportunity to receive financial assistance. Orientation meetings will
be held on Saturday, April 11, 1992 at 0:00 a.m., and again on Tuesday, April 14, 1992 at 7:00 p.m. I will provide Commissioners will more
detailed information on the process at their May Housing Authoritymeeting.
b. Section 8 Summary Statistics Report, 4/1/92.
c. Section 8 Financial Report for Period 1/1/91 Through 2/29/92. (Balance
Sheet and Operating Statement.
sr:hra/info.4-16)
SUMMARY STATISTICS REPORT
m=--------- 140DATES04/01/92
SELECTION CRITERIA• ALL TENANTS WERE INCLUDED
I. HEAD .C.- 146USEHOLD COMPOSITION. (Y. OF ALL HEADS IS IN PARENTHESES)
A. THEPE ARE 126 HEADS OF HOUSEHOLD. MAY BE MORE THAN 1 IN A UNIT.)
THERk" ARE 126 HOUSEHOLDS.
0.0 0.0
G. RACE/ETHNICITY•
B. AGES UNDER 30 30-39 40-49 50-59 60-69 70-79 80(+)
NOs 44 Z4 13 0, 3 7 5
PCTs 34.9 42.9 10.3 0..0 2.4 5.6 4.0
AVERAGE AGE$ 36.6
HISPANICS 0 ( 0.0) NON -HISPANIC: 126 100.0)
H. MISCELLANEOUS:
C. SEX• MALES 17 ( 13.5) FEMALES 109 ( 86.5)
D. SINGLE PARENT HEAD -OF -HOUSEHOLD FAMILIES ASSISTEDs
MALE: 1 ( 0.8) FEMALE$ 93 ( 73.8)
E. ELDERLY HEAD -OF -HOUSEHOLD FAMILIES ASSISTED:
OBR 1BR 2BR 3BR 4BR 5+BR
NOs 0 19 11 0 0 0
PCTs 0.0 15.1 8.7 0.0 0.0 0.0
F. NON -ELDERLY HEAD -OF -HOUSEHOLD FAMILIEE ASSISTED•
OBR IBR 2BR :ifR 4BR 5+BF.
NOS 0 0 86 10 0 0
PCTs 0.0 0.0 68.3 7.9 0.0 0.0
G. RACE/ETHNICITY•
WHITES 107 ( 84.9)
BLACK: 14 ( 11.1)
AMER IND/ALASKAN NATIVE: 3 ( 2.4)
ASIAN/PACIF ISLANDERS 1 ( 0.8)
OTHERs 1 ( 0.8)
HISPANICS 0 ( 0.0) NON -HISPANIC: 126 100.0)
H. MISCELLANEOUS:
62 YRS OR OLDER• 15 ( 11.9)
HANDICAPPEDs 14 ( 11.0
DISABLEDs 1 ( 0.8)
FULL-TIME STUDENT (18 +)$ 1 ( 0.8)
NONE OF THE ABOVE• 96 ( 76.2)
PHA Manager 3.40 (c)86-91 * CITY OF PLYMOUTH
SUMMARY STATISTICS REPORT (cont): Dates 04/01/92 Paged .
II. ALL MEMBERS COMPOSITION: (PCT IS PGT OF ALL MEMBERS)
A. -THERE ARE 308 MEMBERS.
B. AGE:
0-12 13-17 18-29 30-39 40-49 50-59 60-69 70-79 80(+) 148 16 54 60 13 0 3 8 648.1 5.2 17.5 19.5 4.2 0.0 1.0 2.6 1...9AVERAGEAGE: 20.6
C. SEX: ALL - MALE: 107 ( 34.7)
ADULTS - MALE: 29 ( 9..4)
Is +)
D. RACE/ETHNICITY:
WHITE:
BLACK:
AMER IND/ALASKAN NATIVE:
ASIAN/PACIF ISLANDER:
OTHER.
HISPANIC: 0 ( 0.0)
E. MISCELLANEOUS.:
62 YRS OR OLDER.:
HANDICAPPED:
DISABLED:
FULL-TI.ME STUDENT (18 +)1
MONE OF THE ABOVE:
F. FAMILY SIZE:
FEMALE: .201 ( 65.3)
FEMALE: 115 ( 37.3)
248 ( 80.5)
43 ( 14.0)
11 ( 3.6)
3 ( 1.0)
3 ( 1.0)
NON -HISPANIC: 30B (100.0)
17 ( 5.5)
14 ( 4.5)
1 ( 0.3)
1 ( 0.3)
276 ( 89.6)
N0:
1 2 3
21 50 38
4 5
12 5
6
0
7 8
0 0
9 10 11(+)
PCT: 16.7 39.7 30.2 9.5 4.0 0.•., 0.0 0.0
0
0.0
0 0
0.0 0.0AVERAGEFAMILYSIZE: 2.4
G. RELATIONSHIP CODE: (AVG I.S AVG PER HOUSEHOLD)
HEAD SPOUSE ADULT DEPEN FOSTER LIVE-IN OTHERNO: 126 8 10 163 0 1 0AVG: 1.00 0.06 0.08 1.213 0.00 0.01 0.00
PHA Manager 3.40 (c)86 -9E * _ITY OF PLYMOUTH
SUMMARY STATISTICS REPORT (cont): Date: 04/01/92 Page:
III- INCOME/EXPENSES:
A. INCOME BREAKDOWN: (INCOME BEFORE ADJUSTMENTS) UNDER 2500- 5000- 7500- 10000- 12500- 1500o- 2500 4999 7499 9999 12499 14999 17499 17500(+) N0: 3 7 63 21. 10 13 5PCTs2.4 5.6 50.0 16.7 7.9 10:.3 4.0 3.2AVERAGEINCOMEe68328
AVERAGE INCOME AFTER ADJUSTMENTS: $ 7170
B- INCOME SOURCESe (AVG IS AVERAGE FOR THAT ITEM)
PUBLIC WELFWAGESASSISTPENSIONASSETSOTHERRENTHSLDSWITHe31742619180PERCENT: 24.6 58.7 20.6 15.1 14.3 0.0AVGAMOUNT: 11440 5847 7110 197 4072 0
C..INCOME CATEGORIES AT MOVE-INe INCOME CATEGORIES AT REEXAM: VERY LOW INCOME: 48 ( 38.1) VERY LOW INCOME: 80 ( 63.5) LOWER INCOME: 0 ( 0.0) LOWER INCOME: 3 ( 2.4) OVER INCOME: 0 ( 0.0) OVER INCOME: 0' ( 0.0)
EXCEPTIONS: LOWER INC FAMILIES REQUIRING LI EXCEPTIONS: 0
D. RENTS (Averages per Household, except for URP) TOTAL TENENT PAYMENT: 180.1TENANTRENT: 155.7
HOUSING ASSISTANCE PAYMENT: 374.2
UTILITY REIMBURSEMENT PAYMENT:********* (Avg for only Hshlds with URP) SECURITY DEPOSIT: 98.3
E. EXPENSES: (AVG IS AVG PER HOUSEHOLD WITH THAT ITEM)
MEDICL
HSLDS WITH:
CH CARE OTHER ASSIST DEDUC
ELDERLY
15
PERCENT: 11.9
16
1.2.7
0 0
0.0 0.0
97
77.0
30
AVG AMOUNT: 1037 2623 0
23.8
0 787 400
PHA Manager 3.40 (c)86-91 * CITY OF PLYMOUTH
SUMMARY STATISTICS REPORT (cont); Datee 04/01/92 Pagee
IV. UNITS/CERTIFICATES/VOUCHERS (PCT is from units on file except Where
A. UNIT REPORTS (Calculated only if report includes a single project) -
UNITS ON FILE: 0
OBR 1BR 2BR 3BR 4BR 5+BR
1. UNITS IN ACC: 0 0 0 0 0 0
0.0) < 0.0) ( 0.0) ( 0.0) ( 0.0) ( 0.0)
2. LEASED: O 0 0 0 0 0
0.0) ( 0.0) ( 0.0) ( 0.0) ( 0.0) ( 0.0)
3. OUTSTANDING 0 0 0 0 0 0
OR EXTENDED; ( 0.0) ( 0.0) ( 0.0) ( 0.0) ( 0.0) ( 0.0)
4. BALANCE (OVER 0 0 0 0 0 0
UNDER ACC: ( 0.0) ( 0.0) ( 0.0) ( 0.0) ( 0.0.) ( 0.0)
B. PROGRAM UTILIZATION: Includes ALL units. Use. Rpt #13 for more detail.)
PCT OF NUMBER PERCENT
UNITS TOTAL ISSUED/ UTILI-
AVAIL. AVAIL. LEASED ZATION
SECTION 8 CERIc 4 100.0 123 96.9'
SECTION 8 MR: 0 0.0 0 0.0
VOUCHERe 0 0.0 3 100.0
PUBLIC HOUSING 0 0.0 0 0.0
TOTAL: 4 100.0 126 96.9
C. GROSS RENT
UNDER 200 200-299 300-399 400-499 500-599 600-699 700+
NOS 2 0 0 10 99 8 7
PCTs 1.6 0.011. 0.0 7.9 78.6 6.3 5.6
AVERAGE GROSS RENTS 554.3
D. CONTRACT RENT
UNDER 200 200-299 300-399 400-499 500-599 600-699 700+
NO: 2 0 0 18 97 4 5
PCT: 1.6 0.0 0.0 14.3 77.0 3.2 4.0
AVERAGE CONTRACT RENT: 529.8
E. UTILITY ALLOWANCE -
UNDER 25 25-49 50-74 75-99 100-124 • 125-149 150;
NO a 74 50 0 2 0 0 0
PCTs 58.7 39.7 0.0 1.6 0.0 0.0 0.0
AVERAGE UTILITY ALLOWANCEe 24.4
PHA Manager 3.40 (c)86-91 s CITY OF PLYMOUTH
SUMMARY STATISTICS REPORT (tont):
V. LEASING. INFORMATION:
TOTAL
A. LEASE -IN-PLACE FAMILIES: 1
Dates 04/01/92 Page:
ELDERLY NON -ELDERLY
1 (100.0) 0'( 0.0)
B. CERTIFICATE/VOUCHER SIZE VS ACTUAL UNIT SIZE: ACTUAL SIZE:
OBR 1BR 2BR 3BR 4BR 5+BR
OBR: 0 0 0 0 0` 0
CERTIF/ IBR: 0 19 0 0 0 0
VOUCHER 2BR: 0 0 97 0 0 0
SIZE: 3BR: 0 0 0 10 0 0
4BR: 0 0 0 0 0 0
5+BR: 0 0 0 0 0 0
C. EXCEPTION RENTS FOR CERTIFICATES:
F. NUMBER OF ASSISTED FAMILIES WHO, BECAUSE THEIR GROSS RENT IS LESS
THAN PAYMENT STANDARD, RECEIVE A SAVINGS:
OBR IBR 2BR 3BR 4BR 5+BR.
VOUCHER: 0 0 0 0 0 0
AVERAGE SAVINGS: 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
NUMBER OF ASSISTED FAMILIES RECEIVING SAVINGSe 0
RNA Manager 3.40 (c)86-91 * CITY OF PLYMOUTH
OBR IBR 2BR 3BR 4BR 5+BR
10% EXCEPTION AUTHORIZEDc 0 0 0 0 0 0
20% EXCEPTION AUTHORIZED: 0 0 0 0 0 0
ANNUAL ADJ. FACTOR APPLIED: 0 0 2 1 0 a
CURRENT GR OVER FMR: 0 0 0 0 0 0
1-10% OVER FMR: 0 0 0 0 0 0
10-207. OVER FMR: 0 0 0 O 0 0
MORE THAN 20% OVER FMR: 0 0 0 0 0 0
D. COMPARISON OF GROSS RENT TO FMRSe
OBR 1.BR 2BR 3BR 4BR 5+BR
CURRENT FMRS (AVG): 0 526 612 774 0 0
GR > 1.lxFMR: 0 0 1 0 0 0
GR > FMR < 1..lxFMRs 0 0 0 0 0 0
GR = FMR: 0 9 13 3 0 0
GR > .9xFMR < FMRs 0 4 4 0 O
GR < .9xFMR: 0 5 3 0 0
TOTAL: 0 18 10 O 0
E. NUMBER OF ASSISTED FAMILIES WHOSE GROSS RENT EXCEEDS PAYMENT STD:
OBR 1BR 2BR 3BR 48R 5+BR
VOUCHER: 0 1 2 0 0 O
AVERAGE Y. OVER PS: 0.0 100.0 100.0 0.0 0'.0 0.0
NUMBER OF ASSISTED FAMILIES WHOSE GROSS RENT EXCEEDS PAYMENT STD: 3
F. NUMBER OF ASSISTED FAMILIES WHO, BECAUSE THEIR GROSS RENT IS LESS
THAN PAYMENT STANDARD, RECEIVE A SAVINGS:
OBR IBR 2BR 3BR 4BR 5+BR.
VOUCHER: 0 0 0 0 0 0
AVERAGE SAVINGS: 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
NUMBER OF ASSISTED FAMILIES RECEIVING SAVINGSe 0
RNA Manager 3.40 (c)86-91 * CITY OF PLYMOUTH
SUMMARY STATISTICS REPORT (cont): Date: 04/01/92 Paget
G. UNIT TYPES:
SINGLE FAMILYc 2
DUPLEX: 3 ( 2.4)
GARDEN: 121 ( 96.0)
HIGHRISE: O ( 0.0)
TOWNHOUSEe 0 ( 0.0)
H. HOUSING TYPESe LEASED NOT LEASED
IND GROUP RESIDENCE: 0 0
CONGREGATE: 0 0
MOBILE HOME PAD: O 0
SINGLE ROOM OCCUP: 0 0
SHARED HOUSINGe O 0
RENTAL REHAB: 0 0
PROJ SELF SUFFICe 0 0
OVERISSUED: 0 0
FLAGGED: 0 0
OTHER: 0 0
I. TURNOVER: CERT MOD REH VOUCHER PUB HOUSAVGTIMESUSED/LEASEDe 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00
J. CANCELLATIONS OF CERT/VOUCHERc
OVERINCOME: 0 ( 0.0)
HOUSING NOT LOCATED: 0 ( 0,0)
NO LONGER INTERESTEDe 6 ( 0,6)
OTHER SUBSIDY: 0 ( 0.0)
OBLIGATION UNMET: 0 ( 0.0)
TERMINATED BEFORE 60 DAYS: 0 ( 0,0)
07H'2: 0 ( 0.0)
K. HAP/LEASE CANCELLATIONS:
OWNER UNCOOPERATIVE: 0 ( 0,0)
TENANT UNDESIRABLE: 0 ( 0.0)
TENANT DECEASEDc O ( 0.0)
NO LONGER IN JURISDICTION: 0 ( 0.0)
NO LONGER INTERESTED: 0 ( 0.0)
SUBSTANDARD HOUSING: 0 ( 0.0)
NO LONGER ELIGIBLE: 0 ( 0.0)
SALE OF PROPERTY: 0 ( 0.0)
PHA INITIATED: 0 ( 0,0)
OTHER: 0 ( 0.0)
L. OWNER DATA: THIS REPORT ALL OWNERSOWNERSW/CONTRACTS: 23 23FAMILIESUNDERLEASE: 126 126AVGFAMILIESPEROWNER: 5.48 5.48
WHITE: 0 0.0) 0 ( 0.0) BLACKe 0 0.0) 0 ( 0.0) AMER IND/ALASKAN NATIVE: 0 0.0) 0 ( 0,0) ASIAN/PACIF ISLANDER: 0 0.0) 0 ( 0.0) OTHER: 0 0.0) 0 ( 0.0)
PHA Manager 3.40 (086-91 * CITY OF PLYMOUTH
v
x5080 PLYMOUTH MRA S:CTION 4 EX CO INDICATES CR=_DIT AMOUNT) PAGE 1
an I Nu_ •
JISCRIPTI]N P:4IJO AAT TO DA U AMT 3UDGET ANT OVER
UND E R
3ALANCE SH3:T
ASSETS
CASH
1111.1 G:-N:RAL FUND CASH 62.248.39 135066.56 00 13 .966.56
1117 PcTTT CASH 00 00 00 00
TGTAL C4SN 2.244.3) 135.946.56 00 135.946.36
ACCOUNTS R:CeIVABLE
1115 ACCOUNTS R:C. NUC 00 3.429.92 00 39429.52
o1129 ACCOUNTS P C. OTnE R 03 00 00 0
TJTAL ACCCJaTS A:C°IVASL_ 00 3.629.92 00 3.429.41
z
31162 CiEN FUND IMV:STc9ENTS 03 00 0 0
s DEFARR20 CHARGES
e 1211 PR:P;:5 111SJRANCc. 00 00 000 0
71291) O NER JEF:RZeD CHARG 00 00 00 00
e TJTAL 31FIRRE0 i4ARGES 00 60 00 000
9
o LAND9 STRUCTUAS 6 :QUIP•
11475.1 OFFICE FU2N 6 EO. 00 39219.97 00 39219.97
z 14 AU T U P .
3 TOTAL LANG• STxUCT 6 E7. 00 3.219.91 00 3.219.97
a
s1690 UN BU c0 OEdXTS 000 000 goo 099
e
7 TOTAL ASSETS 429248.39 1429596.45 00 142.596.43
a
3
e
7
e
5080 OLTHOUT.i MRA S:CTION I EX (3 INDICATES CREDIT AMOUNT) PAGS 2
NUN wore ws-ir- 24.r - W
OESCRiPTiou PER= AMT TO OATS 4MT eU36ET ANT OVER
BALANCE SNEeT UNDER
LIABILITIES 9 SURPLUS
a ACCOUNTS PAYABLE
2311 YE400 & CONTRACTORS 00 60 00 pps2117.1 FEDERAL INC TAX Mn O0 30 00 0C92137.2 S=CZAL SeCURITT wH 00 CJ 00 0072117.3 STATE INC TAX M:1 00 00 00s2117.4 HEALTH INS MN 00 00 00
00
002117.S INSURANCE UN 00 00 00 00a2117.1 CETIRiMENT MN 00.00 00 0
112116 ACCCJNTS PAYABLE MU2 JO 00 00122119JT" ---R ACCOUNTS PAY. 00 00 00
JO
00a319.1 ACCT PAT - CITY 00 00 00 r
i. TOTAL ACCOUNTS PATA6LE OD 00 Be 00to r
in 2210 R: A:0 ANNUAL CJNTR 7: 3:69715.003 31661 -1 -5, -Go*
17
18224 i;TnE-R JE-FERREJ CRF:.. 00 00 00 0:
19
2690 UNDISTRIBUTED CREDIT fig 00 00 00
22700 INC S EXP CLEARING 299:27.51 2739537.46 430929e.00 1569790..543a
s SURPLUS
2810 UNRESERVED SURPLUS 00 396979894.44 239157.00 398749727.44 ' 72826 RES SURPLUS -OPER RES 00 969168.940 00 969168.940 a2927RESSURPLUS-PRJJ ACC 00 1609670.770 00 16d9870.7732040CUM. HUD CONTRI9. 00 397329233.640 4539455.000 392789778.640TOTALSURPLUS00999.368.910 4309296.000 3309909.09
1
TOTAL LIA8. A SURPLUS 429248.390 1429596.453 00 1429596.450 .
PQ -33F 00 00 00 00. s
f
5080 PLYMOUT4 NRA SECTION i EX (0 INOICATSS CREDIT AMOUNT) PAGE 3
DESCRIPTIOi1 --- --P ER ICO------ ---YEAR TO DATE---- -------BUDGET------
PUN AMOUNT PUN AMOUNT PUN AMOUNT
OPERATINu STATEMENT
CHAN3F
3000 ESTIMATED AONIN.FEE 47.35 4.119.75 45.37 31.580.34 000 00 31.580.34
a 3001 RENO ACCT OFFSET 47.35 49119.750 45.37 31.580.340 00 00 31.580.344
s
49761.68
OPERATING INCOME
21.254.48 42.07 439926.00 22.671.520 ' 2
94136 MAL EXPENSE 000
e 3300 INT RESERVED SURPLUS 00 J0 00 00 00 00 30
00
3301 ADMIN FEE INCOME 27.31 2.375.654 6-.50 5.913.680 0
000
91 •6 6 •
00
3610 INT GEN "ND INVEST 2.66 231.320 3.27 2.273.200 00 00 2.273.200 '
9 3690 OTHER INCOME 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
o TOTAL OPe12ATING INCOME 29.97 9636.970 11.76 8.186.880 00
00
1 6.a so
1: OPERATIN; EXPENSES
13 ADMINISTRATION
1.4110 ADMIN. SALARIES 54.73 49761.68 30.54 21.254.48 42.07 439926.00 22.671.520 ' 2
94136 MAL EXPENSE 000 00 014 99.32 00 00 99.32
76-4140 STAFF RA NIN 1-6-.00 00 0 00 000 Do
174150 TRAVEL 00 000 00 00 00 00.00
194170 ACCCUNTING 1.37 119.25 1.37 9S4.00 00 00 954.00
194171 AUDIT 00 0 00 48 500009 sca.vus-
4180 OFFICE RENT 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
14190 SUNDRY ADMIN EXPENSE 5.07 441.1E 1.25 966.65 17 180.00 656. 63
MAL Au4:41STRATION 61.1 5. 2 .11 33.30 Z39174.65_ 94 . 250
a
SeNERAL EXPeNSE
INSURANCE 00 do 00 000
x4530 TERMINAL LEAVE PAY. 00 00 00 00 00.0 00 00
74540 ENPLOYEE BEN. CONT2. 10.33 699.00 9.99 69*52.00 00 00 69952.00
4 M Y . 0 uu
4591 A4M/N P-9TABILITY 12.40 1.073.00 96 669.47 00 00 664.w7
TOTAL ZENERAL EXPENSE 2:.74 1.97d.00 10.95 7.621.47 00 00 7.621.47
MOUSING ASSIST. PAYMENTS
4715.1 NAP -OCCUPIED UNITS 452.15 39.337.10 446.94 312.461.12 369.44 385.692.00 T3.230.880
4715.1 NAP-SMG/UNPD RENT 00 OJ 00 00 00
uu
00 00
4115.4 UTILITY ALLOWANCE 03 00 00 00 000 00 00
70115*5 MAP -PORTABILITY 170.15 1403OZ0639 90035 6998839790 SOO egg
TOTAL MOUSING ASSIST. PAT282.01 249534.47 356.59 249.577.42 369.44 3AS9692.00 136.114.580
cXPiNSK 365.91 319334.59 4 z.a• zsuv3T3eJ4 419s&6. b.560
5039 PLYMOJTM 4 Ra Sk TiDii o EX CO iNDICATEi CREDIT AMOUNT) PAGE s
KUM 0916 Y
DESCkIPTION
CURF.I.Solow
P:RIOD------
Kcrualf
YEAR
r. -Y
TO SATE ---- BUDGET------ CHANGE
PUN AMOUNT pum AMOUNT PUN AMOUNT
OPERATING STATEMENT
2 SURPLUS ADJUSTMENTS
2 6010 PRIOR TEAR AOJ-ARR 00 00 1.90 1 321.00 00 0 19321.00
6120 GAIW LOSS NCNEXP EQ 00 00 00 00 00 00. 00
TOTAL SURPLUS ADJUSTMENTS 00 00 1.90 19321.00 00 00 1931.00
6
PROVISION FOR RESERVES
s 7016 PR2V FOR OPER RESERV 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
917027 PROV FOR P93J ACCT 00 GO 00 00 22.18 239157.00 2391S7.000 i
to TOTAL PROP. FOR RESERVES 00 00 00 00 22.18 239157.00 23s15T.006
12 CAPITAL EXPEN21TURES
137520 REPLACE NONEXP EQUIP 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
47330 RECEIPT NON-exP EQUIP 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 ,
157540 PROPERTY SET 6 ADD 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
167590 CONTRA FOR 75005 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
7 TOTAL 00 03 00 00 00 00 00
127610 VANDALISM EXPEND. 00 09 00 00 00 00 00
CONTRIBUTIONS EARNED
X3026 ANNUAL CONTR-CUR Vk 00 03 00 00 434.34 4!3.455.006 4S39435:00
28027 ANNUAL CONTR-PA IR 03 00 OA 00 00 00 00
2 TOTAL 00 0) 00 00 434.34 4539455.000 453.455.00