HomeMy WebLinkAboutHousing & Redevelopment Authority Packet 12-15-1992PLYMOUTH
HRA
REPORTS
MEETING
OF
DECEMBER 15, 1992
contains some
double -sided
documents.
Film both
sides
AGENDA
PLYMOUTH HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
DECEMBER 15, 1992 AT 6:30 p.m.
1. Call to Order
2. Approval of Minutes from November 1i, 1992
3. Public Hearing on Increased Funding for CDBG Year 19
4. Public Hearing on Financing of a Senior Housing Project for 100 Rental
Units
S. CHAS Performance Report
6. Status Report on Senior Housing
7. Information Items
a. Section 8 Statistical Report for November 30, 1992
b. Section 8 Financial Report for 7/1/92 - 10/31/92
8. Other Business
9. Adjournment
hra/dh/12.15)
WA
j•
MEND
CITY OF PLYIDUTH
3400 PLYMOUTH BOULEVARD, PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447
DATE: December 10, 1992 For Housing and Redevelopment Authority Meeting
of December 15, 1992
TO: Charles E. Dillerud, Executive Director
FROM: Housing Specialist Milt Dale /Kry
SUBJECT: YEAR 19 (1993) COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT (CDBG)
PROGRAM/INCREASE IN FUNDING
ACTION REQUESTED: The Housing and Redevelopment Authority should
conduct a public hearing and develop a recommendation for the City
Council concerning. CDBG program changes in regards to an increase in
1993 funding from $206,000 to $270,000.
BACKGROUND:
HUD staff recently informed us that the City of Plymouth can expect
approximately $270,000 for the funding period January 1, 1993 through
December 31, 1993, an increase of $64,000 over the amount earlier
anticipated.
Should a "significant change' occur in our CDBG funding, HUD requires a
public hearing be held and a revised program showing new funding amounts be
adopted. A °significant change° occurs if the change in the program is over
25,000 in funds or transfer of funds from one program to another.
The initial .public hearing for CDBG Year 19 (FY 1993) was held on October
27, 1992.
The Plymouth City Council adopted on November 20, 1992 the following funding
allocation by program for CDBG fiscal year 1993:
1. Rehabilitation of Private Dwellings
a. Administration of Activity $ 6,390
b. Grant/Loans to Homeowners 57 510
Sub -total, 0
2. Scattered Site Homeownership
a. Administration of Activity 7,590
b. Grant/Loans to First Time Homebuyers 68.310
Sub -total 75.900
3. Child Care Assistance
a. Administration of Activity 2,500
b. Sliding scale assistance 22,500
Sub -total RT.M
4. Planning and Administration of Programs 21,200
S. Senior Services Planning 20,0_00
Total 206,000
At our October public hearing, commissioners were appraised of the proposed
Head Start facility to be located in Brooklyn Park. With the additional
funds, consideration might. be given for this year to provide funding for
this use. Initial plans are to remodel the former Brooklyn Park City Hall
for Head Start use. A total of ten communities have been asked to join in
this venture. Head Start, for those not familiar, is a federally funded
program .to assist pre-kindegarten age children with "learning readiness°
skills prior to entering the more structured school environment. Presently,
the federal government provides 80% of the operational funding while the
community provides the 206 remaining balance. The formula used by the
designated Head Start grertee, Parents in Community Action, Inc. (PICA), is
still. not acceptable to Plymouth as the 11% of families below the poverty
level as per table: 1 in Jim Willis' memo, is inaccurate. This figure should
be 2.4% according to our U.S. Census information. When using that figure,
Plymouth's "share' would be considerably less or about $15,000. Staff will
provide more information on this issue at the December 15 meeting. Chairman
Crain, at the October 27 public hearing, also suggested funding an
Interfaith Outreach or Habitat for Humanity project. This may be a
consideration in the future, but as of now, neither organization has
requested funding from the City.
RECaNENDATIONS:
I recommend we increase funding for two activities, i.e. Rehabilitation of
Private Dwellings from $63,900 to $66,000 and Scattered Site Homeownership
from $75,900 to $90,000. Also, I recommend the addition of a new activity,
Head Start at $47,800. The allocations by activity, including anticipated
administrative costs, are as follows:
1. Rehabilitation Private Dwellings
a. Administration of Activity $ 6,500
b. Grants/loans to homeowners $59.500
Sub -total $66,000
2. Child Care Assistance
a. Administration of Activity $ 2,500
b. Sliding scfle assistance $22.500
3. Scattered Site Homeownership
a. Administration of Activity 91000
b. Grant/loans to First Time Homebuyers 01,000
Sub -total
4. Senior Services Planning
a. Administration of Activity 2,000
b. Consultant fee 18.000
Sub -total
S. Head Start Facility
a. Administration of Activity 4,600
b. Plymouth share 43.200
Sub -total
6. Administration of Overall CDBG Program 211200
Total 270,000
Should the Head tart program not be acceptable to the Commission. I would
recommend $30,01X. be added. to the Scattered Site Homeownership Program and
17,800 be added, to Rehabilitation of Private Dwellings with 10 percent of
each amount set asfde for program administration.
ATTACNINENTS:
I. Resolution to City Council
2. Memo from Jim Willis, 9-25-92
hra/md/cdbgl2-15)
HRA RESOLUTION 92-10
RECOMMENDING ALLOCATION OF YEAR 19 (FY 1993) COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT
FUNDS (REVISION 1)
WHEREAS, the City of Plymouth for Year 19 (FY 1993) will be in receipt of
approximately $270,000 of Comounity Development Block Grant funds to utilize
in such a way as to assist low and moderate income persons; and.
WHEREAS, on December 15, 1992, the Plymouth Housing and Redevelopment
Authority held a duly constituted public hearing to allow interested parties
to express their opnion; and,
WHEREAS, the Housing and Redevelopment Authority of the City of Plymouth
discussed ways the Community Development Block Grant funds couldbe utilized in
accordance with federal guidelines;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT.
AUTHORITY OF THE CITY OF PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA, that the Housing Authnrity
recommends the Plymouth City Council allocate the Year 19 (FY 1993) Community
Development block Grant funds as follows:
1. Rehabilitation Private Dwellings
a. Administration of Activity 6,500
b. Grants/loans to homeowners 59.500
Sub -total 555.000
2. Child Care Assistance
a. Administration of Activity 2,500
b. Sliding scale assistance S22.500
Sub -total 25.0
3. Scattered Site Homeownership
a. Administration of Activity S 9,000
b. Grant/loans to First Time Homebuyers 81.000
Sub -total 90.00
4. Senior Services Planning
a. Administration of Activity 2,000
b. Consultant fee 18.000
Sub -total ToM
5. Head Start
a. Administration of Activity f 4,600
b. Plymouth share 143,200
Sub -total TUW.
6. Administration of Overall-CDBG Program 21,200
Total $270,000
Further, that should the total CDBG allocation for Year 19 (FY 1993) exceed
270,000, the excess shall .bp allocated on a prorated basis to approved
activities, subject to CDBG limitations.
Adopted by the Housing and Redevelopment Authority on December 15, 1992.
res/cdbg/xix.l)
Nmo
CLTY OF PLYMOUTH
3400 PLYMOUTH BOULEVARD, PLYMOUTH, MN 55449
DATE: Sgftmber 25, IM
TO: Frank Boyce, Acting City Manager
FROM: James a. Willis, Tion Advisor
SURW3C : PROPOSED HEAD START FACRM RELOCATED III
BROOKLYN PARS
One of my unuddon advisor n ponsr'bi ides is m provide you with a sepoet on this
proposed project inchrdimg.'bendki teoeived by the City, financial abligadoa, and
aWquimg appmopmatimess of the p aposed method for distdbutiog costa.•
By way of ba uood, you will mall that the Read Stan Program began a a federally
funded initiative to assist young children with learning readiness education prior to
emmq idedoWnem The pognuo cunendy =xsves 80 percent of IN gwWoud
funds from the federal goveramest, with the balance, 20 pencwt, coming from local
sources.
I am informed that most often this local share is achieved through •soli march,•
generally through contributed facilities.
In Hennepin County, the federally designated Had Stan grantee for H=gft County
is Parems in Community Action. Inc. (PTCA). PICA conolly provide: Had Sunt
progamoft sandy in mbneq oils, ahhoatgh some aoa-Miooapolia
PUtdpate o the psttgmm. The Mimbapolit, the are ovestmaed, hagely as a
unit of a Iaege number of chimer diallftk as well a the Lc that both the city and
school district have made additional finds available to rapport program apmft coals.
This sesrdta in peesstrss being eoosste
1
to enmm tot moms of the spaces available and
the fhcilides located in me city an, o tack used by digbble Bead Suet ddM=
nddiog within ma City.
PICA has been seeking a second sine in the northern suburban area for more than one
year. This heft would unable me program to be mpaoded into do snI I
community which would be smote convenient for digh k Head Sun ddWren.
am OCT 2 12
PROPOSED READ START FACIIM RELOCATED IN BROOKLYN PARK
September 25, IM
Pap 2
FICA has indicated an ioteroet in aemoddtsg the farmer Bmoilyn P!m City IM for a
now Head Suet hellity. The City of Beeekbu M has b dhted a williogaes to
dedicate toe faculty for that poepose for a peiod of at haat 40 yea at an coat The
we of eemodding see estimated at craft M0,000. PICA Is aeeldsg 0 6 g for the
pscl ct team to cWa in me aas-
1 1- suburban aura, a well a no and fadend
gmots and pshma beafaatoss. The to cNes in me aostbwat aeaa see behtg asked to
coodde: collectively Somom g a sum of 5900,000 for me p v jest. ObMk A).
An wady ad vary pselbdmy !rimula that was developed comumplases Plymoum
cmtdbuting between $43,200 and $53,100 of the emimased 5300.000 total.
It is assumed that the local fm ft would coma fiom Commodity Dmfto ms Block
Ono (CDW) foods which are eaceived by each of the tem cites either a a dieect
eadde rot city such a Plymouth, or doongo Smoepio County. Thews is co mtly no
prgxxd to an property tae; dollars for this puepose. The on of Chi finds appears
In be appropsisto given the fact that do Had Sm Program taegeu preens digabis for
stcb prvgeam expendtmes. Assm ft that fwWft is the mama by wbieb cities
each as Plymouth would be abed In flmd participaaao in me proposed project. It is
appaemt that each city would have to eaview its CMG allocation ao demdoo and
priositiae the relative value of the Had Sort Pmgmm against other commoahy needs.
In addition, the question of expending CDBG hods for capital fi cftn locatad outride
me cospomte limits, in support of a pragwm bmdtiog d4 ft Plymouth children,
needs to be *.Vlomd.
In Plymouth's case. thus should be nwiawed by the Comammity Development staff and
Sousing and Redralopmmt Auuthority 000 prior to brag formally submitted to the
dry Council.
Phil Cohen of Brooklyn Curter is to can a meeting witbid me man couple of weeks m
meet with each of do 10 dates to linmar discos how hal 0 1 g should be allocated.
This issue will be. of critical inrposdooe a to F r
111
hellity in Bmoldym Pads
would dove a p m mm capacity of about I.M. Comendy thea ate a 197 drams ander
eurulled or am waitlewg Ilan for me Read Sm pmgmm Aft in the 10 cider. FICA
esim w that thee may be 1,500 dugthtb youth whin the 10 ddes Obftk a). 8 is
dear mat as apeathtg !bods become avaihble, additional heilida will be abeded. B is
impeadve tbeefare that may bridal fiutchag machadmin be designed with mo fought In
OW that the pwgmm will !obey be expanded in the !Muse and mat an agaiubie mans
of financing such Adore eeIem e I needs to be pm in place sow wbto6 will mane
mat a do dam expands, each city is rased agnmbly.
am 0a 2 W
r. s_
PROPOSI3D HBAD START FAC Zff R>LOCAM IN BROOKLYN PARS
Sq mbar 25.1992
Page 3
Of obvious inq p - au.e is die pollicy gtt@Wm of whether ur not the City Conndd ad
HRA believes that thele is a mad lar the aspwWm of a Hard Shit pwam in the
s mdm Hm q* County neo. paettaohrb hipft dipibie ahihlmn is PWwol . I
do not doubt dot time is bade spo mmt that vtamt suck u Had Sm do emve a
salol seed and as puro4b a podtive mass by which yaugg ahiM= as pelt the ady
sdmnlatim which is willsd to dmk !lame dridopmat. Haaww, the am of
fooft the poo g m wild iemaie key to ahado or set tate type of doedve as be
arbievod. So kmg as the cpomdood fimdiop it delved Brom do hdm d ®ovaamat,
and the loco match being met -1 &1 aoa- I - saw or pashapa Hmoapin Cbssty,
dds should sot pose a pasblem Por local units. 'lite longer ism oW aggest,
however, me desire on the past of some to bavo load soli begin to patddpate in the
opeaaft cats of the pmp m. 'Ilse policy implications of that, of course, an obvious
to city councils.
It is my view that so long as on egok*b capM foa ft faamola at be dmived whish
udlima CDBti fending, Pbmxm 6 would be well served to puddpate is the pami; aed
Pte•
Tito City wail have to keep in mind, boarever, that the initial funding mechanism moot
anticipate the fbom mad to cgwW the pmgcam and dheaears Its a N ddlkiea. The
fun ft mechanism deioae should be to'bred to ensue that the 10 situ aecoplas
that the WM building project will sot be the dost.
am CC[ 2 IU
ILL 1.1 '92 .l_::l 70:%.505060 FF0-i:•:IT'. OF EUL'A1 AW -1 T-112 P.O?
TWE I
STATISTICS ON CITIRS COUTRIBUTIUG 20
FAMILT RESOURCES CBNTRR IN BROORLTN PARR
TEN CITF AREA OF FAMILIES BELOM OF RIDS ALBS CONTRIBUTIONS
POVERTY LBVBL 6 AND SNUW TO HEAD START
Brooklyn Center 16.1• 9.2• 38,100
Brooklyn Park 35.2 22.7 86,700
Champlin 3.1 9.1 18,300
Crystal 7.2 7.2 21,600
Golden Valley 5.2 5.5 15,900
Maple Grove 6.4 17.4 35,700
Now Nope 10.2 6.0 20,300
Osseo 1.2 8 3,000
Plymouth 11.0 17.8 4 0
Robbinsdale 4.4 4.3 13.2RTOTAL100.0• 100.00 300,000
am W 2 %
1= '
AO1
Head Start Enrollment and Waiting Ust
Hennepin Consty. Febsnary 1991
Enrollment Waiting Inst *Est Eligible c asx T a in Ck1r%% 7
Minneapolis 884 1.033 6.643
Brookbis Park 49 74 467-1
Brooklyn Center 39 46 302/
New Hope 5 13 166
075121 3 5 151
Maple Grove 0 2 151
in 0 2 89
Robbinsdale 6 5 82
Golden Valley 1 4
TOW 1,097 1,255 9,613
Additional Head Start slots funded by the City of Minneapolis: 32
Total Head Start enrollment, all sources: 1,129
Numbers of eligible children in this table were estimated by calculating the midpoint of ranges
given by Dorton Poquette, based on unwed birth rates for each community.
The statistics for Osseds enrollment and eligibility will be available on September 24.
Percentage Statistics
Based on Above Numbers
Percent of eligible children in Minneapolis currently being served: 13.396
Percent of eligible children in suburban Hennepin Courcy currently being served: 72%
Percent of eligible children in NW Hennepin County currently being served: 6.6%
Source: Parents in Community Action and Success By 6a Northwest of Northwest Hennepin Human
Services Council
co W2 X92
H•
CITY OF PLVMDUTN
3400 PLYMOUTH BOULEVARD, PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447
DATE: December 11, 1992 For the Housing and Redevelopment Authority
Meeting of December 15, 1992
TO: Housing a R e lopment Authority Commissioners
FROM: Charles rud, Executive Director
SUBJECT: PUBLIC N 6 ON FINANCING OF A SENIOR HOUSING PROJECT
One of the senior housing financing options we are considering is the issuance
of Essential Function Housing Bonds as authorized by the state legislature. A
necessary prerequisite to the issuance of HRA bonds for housing purposes is
the preparation of a "Financing Program" which is to be addressed at a public
hearing prior to the issuance of the bonds.
On December 15, 1992 a public hearing will be held before the HRA responsive
to the State Statutory requirements with regard to review of a bond financing
plan for multifamily housing.
A copy of the public hearing notice that was published and a copy of the
Financing Program" is attached and HRA attorney Dan Nelson will be available
at the public hearing to further discuss this matter.
Attachments:
1. Notice of Public Hearing
2. Financing Program for the Acquisition and Construction of a MultifamilyRentalHousingFacilityforElderlyPersons
hra/cd/senfinl2-15)
E1OIIBIT A
PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE
NOTICE OF PUBLIC NEARING 0 THE ADOPTION OF A
FINANCING PROGRAM FOR THE ACQUISITION AND CONSTRUCTION OF A
MULTIFAMILY RENTAL HOUSING FACILITY FOR ELDERLY PERSONS
IN PLVNafiN. MINNESOTA
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing shall be conducted by the
Board of Commissioners of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for
the City of Plymouth. Minnesota (the •Authority) on a financing program (the
P ram•) for the acquisition and construction of a multifamily rental
housing facility (the •Project•) located in the City of Plymouth. which
Project will provide rental housing for elderly persons. The Project will be
undertaken by the Authority pursuant to the provisions of Minnesota Statutes.
Section 469.001 to 469.047 (the •Act•). The hearing will be held by the Board
of Commissioners of the Authority at Plymouth City Hall. 3400 Plymouth
Boulevard, Plymouth. Minnesota at 6:30 p.m. on Tuesday. December 15, 1992.
The Project proposed to be financed under the Program includes construction
and/or permanent financing for the Project as -described below:
Project Description: Plymouth Senior Apartments Project
Location: The Northeast corner of 37th Avenue North and
Units:
iPlyymouth
Boulevard. Plymouth. Minnesota
Financing Needs: $7.000.000
Rents: $600-SB00
The foregoing Project would be owned and operated by the Authority upon
being financed under the Program. Under the Program. financing may be
provided through one or more of the following: (a) the issuance of
construction notes to the Program; (b) the issuance of up to $7.000.000 in
revenue bonds of the Authority. secured by the Project financed therefrom; and
c) the making or entering into any contracts, agreements. reimbursement
agreements, mortgages. assignments. security agreements. guarantees. or
similar agreements or instruments as may be necessary in connection with
accomplishing the purposes of the Act.
At the same time and place. the Boerd of Commissioners of the Authority
will give all parties to appear an opportunity to express th5ir views with
respect to the proposal to undertake and finance the Project pursuant to the
Program.
BY ORDER OF THE BOARD OF
COMMISSIONERS OF THE HOUSING AND
REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY IN AND FOR
THE CITY OF PLYMOUTH -
By
Secretary
SOUP
EXHIBIT B
FINANCING PROGRAM FOR THE ACUSITION AND CONSTWICTIOM
OF A MULTIFAMILY RENTAL HOUSING FACILITY FOR ELDERLY PERSONS
Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.001 through 469.047 (the
Act'), the Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of
Plymouth, Minnesota (the •Authority`) is authorized to undertake housing
development proects and to issue revenue bonds to finance such projects. The
City of Plymouti (the •City`) has heretofore adopted a Housing Plan (the
Plan•) in accordance with the requirements of Minnesota Statutes, Chapter
4620, providing for the acquisition and construction of multifamily rental
housing facilities. designed for occupancy by elderly persons (as set forth in
the Plan). Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.034 provides that such programs
for multifamily housing developments may be financed by revenue bonds issued
by the Authority or by the issuance of construction notes.
The Authority has proposed a program providing for construction of
approximately 100 units of one and two bedrooms ("Housing Units") to be
located in the City as more fully described in Exhibit A attached hereto (the
Project"). The construction of'the Project is to be funded through the
issuance of up to $7.000.000 in construction notes or bonds to be issued by
the Authority, (the °Obligations'). Following construction of the Project.
the Authority wilt own and operate the Project as a multifamily residential
rental project to provide affordable housing for elderly persons in the
Plymouth area.
Minnesota Statutes. lection 469.0171. requires that housing development
projects be subject to certain requirements of Minnesota Statutes, Chapter
4620 with respect to the adoption of a housing plan and the adoption of a
housing program following public hearings as required prior to the issuance of
housing revenue bonds or other obligations under Minnesota Statutes.
Chapter 462C.
The Authority has in effect a housing plan (the 'Plan") meeting the
requirements of Minnesota Statutes. Section 4620.03. Subdivision 1 (a) -(d) and
has obtained review of the Plan in the manner provided in Minnesota Statutes.
Section 462C.04. Subdivision 1.
The Authority, in establishing this multifamily housing financing program
the "Program). has considered the information contained in the Authority's
Plan. The Project will be constructed and financed pursuant to Minnesota
Statutes. Sections 469.034 and 469.035 or Minnesota Statutes. Sections 469.174
to 469.179.
The Authority intends that financing of Project pursuant to the Plans may
be provided through the issuance of up to $7.000.000 in Obligations secured by
the Project financed therefrom. The amount of financing for the Project is
not expected to exceed the amount set forth in Exhibit A. The Project will be
held for occupancy by elderly persons. as determined by the Author ty. Rents
anticipated to be collected for the various units in the Project are
anticipated to be as set forth in Exhibit A.
The Authority. in undertaking the Project. has considered the information
contained in the Plan and has determined that undertaking of the Project is in
the best interest of the public health. safety and welfare of the people of
the City of Plymouth.
Section A. Definitions. The following terms used in this Program shall
have the following meanings. respectively:
Act" shall mean Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.001 to 469.047. as
currently in effect and as the same wy be from time to time amended.
City" shall mean the City of Plymouth. Minnesota.
Nousing Plan" %hall mean the.Authority's 462C Housing Plan, adopted
pursuant to Minnesota Statutes. Chapter 462C.
Housing Unit" shall mean any one of the apartment units. each
located in the Project, occupied by one person or family, and containing
complete living facilities.
Land" shall mean the real property upon which the Project is
situated.
Obligations" shall mean the construction notes or bonds to be
issued to finance the Program.
Program" shall mean this program for the financing of the Project
pursuant to the Act.
Project" shall mean the residential rental housing development
consisting of approximately 100 Housing Units to be constructed by the
Authority on the Land and owned and operated by the Authority.
Section B. Program for iinancino theProtectIt is proposed that the
iAuthorityestablishthisProgramtoprovidef!nancng for acquisition and
construction of the Project at a cost and upon such other terms and conditions
as are set forth herein and as may be further agreed upon in writing betwaen
the Authority and the initial purchaser of the Obligations. if any. The
Authority expects to issue the Obligations as soon as the terms of the
Obligations have been agreed upon by the Authority and the initial purchaser
of the Obligations. if any. The proceeds of the Obligations will be used by
the Authority to finance the construction of the Project, to fund required
reserves and to pay the costs of issuing the Obligations.
It is anticipated that the Obligations shall have a maturity of
approximately thirty years, subject to earlier mandatory purchase prior to
maturity, and will bear interest at a rate not in excess of 8.002 per annum.
The Authority will hire no additional staff for the administration of the
Program. Insofar as the Authority will be contracting with legal counsel and
others. all of whom will be reimbursed from proceeds of the Obligations and
revenues generated by the Project, no administrative costs will be paid from
the Authority's budget with respect to this Program. The Obligations are not
2-
expected to be general obligations of the Authority, but are to be paid
primarily from properties pledged to the payment thereof, which may include
additional security such as additional collateral, insurance. a letter of
credit or additional security provided by the City.
Section C. Local Contributions To The Proaraa. The Project has
requested and received from the City of Plymouth the approval of the
Authority's levy of its special benefits tax under Section 469.033 of the Act
for use in the Project.
the ownership and operation of the Project by the
Program:
1) Substantially all of the proceeds of the Obligations will be
applied to the acquisition and construction of the Project and to the
funding of appropriate reserves.
2) The Authority. and any subsequent owner of the Project. will
sot arbitrarily reject an application from a proposed tenant because of
race, color. creed. religion. national origin. gender. marital status. or
status with regard to public assistance or disability.
3) No Housing Unit may be constructed in violation of applicable
zoning ordinances or other applicable land use regulations. including any
urban renewal plan or development district plan. and including the state
building code as set forth under Minnesota Statutes. Section 16.83, et
seq.
4) All of the Housing Units will be held for occupancy by elderly
persons on a rental basis.
5) Pursuant to the Act and Minnesota Statutes. Section 462C.05,
Subdivision 2. the Housing Units in the Project shall be designed to be
affordable by elderly persons of moderate income as determined by the
Authority.
Section E. Issuance of Bonds. To finance the Program authorized by this
Section. the Authority may by resolution authorize. issue and sell its
Obligations in the form of bonds in an aggregate principal amount of
approximately =7.000.000. The bonds shall be issued pursuant to Sections
469.034 and 469.035 of Minnesota Statutes. and shall be payable primarily from
the revenues of the Project authorized by this Section. The total costs of
the Project are presently expected to be as follows:
Land
Construction
Construction Period Interest. Taxes
and Insurance
Design and Planning Expenses
Financing Fees
Reserve Fund
TOTAL
3-
The costs of the Project may change between the date of preparation of
this program and the date of issuance of the Obligations. The Obligations are
expected to be issued by May 1993.
Section G. Severability. The provisions of this Program are severable
and if any of its provisions. sentences, clauses or paragraphs shall be held
unconstitutional. contrary to statute. exceeding the authority of the
Authority or otherwise illegal or inoperative by any court of competent
jurisdiction. the decision of such court shall not affect or impair any of the
remaining provisions.
Section N. Amendment. The Authority shall not amend this Program. while
Obligations authorized hereby are outstanding, to the detriment of the holders
of such Obligations.
SMP
4-
OWIBIT A M FINANCING PROGRAM
Project Financing
Description Location ' Un1ts MA $EBS.
Plymouth Senior Northeast corner of 100 11.000.000 $600-800
Apartments 37th Avenue,North and
Project Plymouth Boulevard
5870P
5-
C.
Now
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
3400 PLYMOUTH BOULEVARD, PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447
DATE: December 10, 1992 For Housing and Redevelopment Authority Meeting of
December 15, 1992
TO: Charles E. Dillerud, Executive Director
FROM: Housing Specialist Milt Dale/
ml
SUBJECT: COMPREHENSIVE HOUSING AFFORDABILITY STRATEGY (CHAS) PERFORMANCE
REPORT
The Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) requires an annual
performance review of the year's previous CHAS to determine how well a
community is doing relative to its adopted goals. Plymouth, Bloomington and
Urban Hennepin County recently formed a consortium and as such will be
submitting a combined document to HUD. The deadline for submittal is December
31, 1992 with public comment period up on December 18. The Chief Executive
Officer for the County will transmit the report to HUD later this month.
In my review of the report, I feel we have performed well in most activities.
Our best performance has been in regards to the scattered site homeownership
program where we exceeded our goals. Housing rehabilitation has continued as
expected while the rental assistance goal is less than anticipated. Our
initial plan to receive 30 more Section 8 certificate did not materialize as
portability proved to bring a considerable increase of renter transfers into
the community, hence no need to request more certificates.
Developing the CHAS Performance Report has been the task of our consultant,
Bill Thibault. One "controversy" in creating the report has been the
difference in enumerating the data by the three consortium members with Urban
Hennepin County and Bloomington wanting only new funding amounts considered as
gains" while Bill has counted portability clients as additions to the
Plymouth program. In my conversations with the County, they would like all
three mefters to be consistent in their reporting HUD has not provided any
clear guidelines in this matter so it seems we have an option. Since each
jurisdiction's report basically stands alone within the overall content, I
would opt for Thibault's method of evaluating performance.
Some modification is still needed of the table on page 7 of the report. The
consultant found the HUD guidelines as to determining the number of households
and number of persons not clear. The revision will show estimated totals for
both categories. Union City Mission is not able to give definite numbers as
to persons or households served due to the very transient nature of their
clients. As example, one room at the Home Free shelter my serve 3 .or 4
persons one night for 30 days or could serve 20 different persons over the
same period.
HUD does not require action by either the HRA or City Council but we would
like an indication the report has been reviewed and found acceptable. A
resolution to this effect is attached.
Attachments:
I. CHAS Performance Report
2. Resolution
bra/md/chas12-15)
NRA RESOLUTION 92-11
RECOMMENDING ACCEPTANCE OF YEAR 18 (FISCAL YEAR 1992 ENDING SEPTEMBER 30,
1992) COMPREHENSIVE HOUSING AFFORDABILITY STRATEGY (CHAS) PERFORMANCE REPORT
WHEREAS, the City of Plymouth is required under the Department of Housing andUrbanDevelopment (HUD) regulations to prepare a performance report for
evaluating its progress at achieving established goals outlined in its
Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) for the Fiscal Year endingSeptember30, 1992; and,
WHEREAS, the Plymouth Housing and Redevelopment Authority directed staff to
engage a consultant to prepare a CHAS Performance Report; and,
WHEREAS, the consultant selected was Thibault Associates who worked with City
staff, the City of Bloomington and Urban Hennepin County staff in preparing a
performance report for the Hennepin County Housing Consortium; and,
WHEREAS, the public comment period is still open until December 18, 1992
thereby allowing public comments to be included in the report until that date;
NOW, THEREFORE, bE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT
AUTHORITY OF THE CITY OF PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA, that the Housing Authority
recommends the Plymouth City Council accept the Hennepin Housing Consortium
Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) Annual Performance Report
for Fiscal Year ended September 30, 1992.
Adopted by the Housing and Redevelopment Authority on December 15, 1992.
res/chas/12-15)
COMPREIDENSIVE HOUSING
AFFORDABILITY STRATEGY
CHAS)
ANNUAL PERFORMANCE REPORT
For Fiscal Year Ended September 30, 1992
CITY OF PLYMOLIM9 AMWMOTA
LEAD AGENCY
HOUMNG AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
MFIt Lwe
Boum S cialFa!
MW Pbnoud Bmkvmd
PbMouds, MM Ss447
Ga) sso-sOss
TABLE OF CONTENTS
COVER I.81TER.
PERFORMANCE REPORT
Part I - Annual Performance
A. . Rewmn Made Available
Within the Jurisdiction I .
B. Investment of Available Resources 2fi
C. iIwWh0ld5 and Persons Assisted 7
D. Other Actions Undertaken g
Part 11 - Assessment of Annual Perb mance
A. Assessment of Effectiveness 9
B. Future Actions or Changes 9
APPENDIX
A. Description of. Piooess for Public Review 10
B. Summary of Public Commas: Received 10
Ow OfFbonva
PART I - ANNUAL PERFORMANCE
A. RESOURCES MADE AVAUABLE w1T M TRE
jUR SDICTiON
A summary of the resources made available in Plymouth, the actual resources or funds
received, and a comparison of the resources received to the resources planned to be received
in the. CHAS - September 30, 1992 Annual Plan is summarised. below.
SOURCE RESOURCES RESOURCES RESOURCES
GRANTING AGENCY) MADE RECEIVED PLANNED
AVAH.ABIE 1992 CHAS
Federal
oCDBG 5206,000 206.000 206.000
Suction 8 Certificates 331,305 331,3050 610,000
41HOMS 0- 0- 20,000
Subtotal 737,305 737,305 836.000
Suite
911tehabilitation of
Single Family
I.anl
OHRA Mill Levy
PHvate•• 31300.000 31300.000 5.300.000
Mme spo in or SM M eom aocdm a amusorm pb. S177JW M .gym
ammree
Nmft The table above identifies the resources made available and the actual resources
received. Resources received for Section 8 Certificates were about 39% less than expected
because the City did not apply our did it receive additional Section 8 Certificates, but it did
waist a substantially greater number of families through portability. The HOME Program
was not approved and, dmrefore, no funds were received.
MYor
MEMENT OF AVAH ABLE RESOURCES
The fnveaanent of rm:ources made available to Plymouth we described below. Each activity
is separately identified.
Psioeky and Activity: Sardon 8 Cerate Program
Ston: Ms program P Pim ea pordon 4V Ae mw
by dw MU aft HUD floi tag for mob a=Xed by low
twom fmmtlta parttclpattng to du program %iso pay
abom 30prnamt a/dudr Lwawjbr rem.
Resource and Funds Used: HUD - Secdon 8 $551,305
7hla jiardimg provided mwdl aubluMe to a total iV225
MOM
Geographic District: CYry-wide
IAWWW: Nage
MSB 1Fbnds:. Abw repdred
Pattern of Attud
Invest to Punned: The wwud elerment atlmated dmf $610,000 %Hold be
readved. 71da Jtgure wnr basad on obtatmtmg ammlier 30
CeHPWw to add to dre 87 adsdgg cenpaota for a
Met of 117 cern( aver. Homvwr, braave of die
com bused lwmm U the partabtltdes into P& mom*, dre
HRA did not apply jbr more cenP area, bat the met
must b dmt dre acarol Wemdtnnrt Jr.90% tYdw
p/ann[d espen&va.
cb of rbowd
Pdai ty and Aedvlty: RdnNlltotton ies/nSkfa ily houses
Ducrilides: Ms program provides ftnimclal asstswnae to rhe owners
tydrngk fmdly houses in need 4fwdemUng
rrhaNNAIdM of rhdr un*.
Resource and F=& Used: XUD - C DRG $90.386
7W Arn ng pr ddded ndmNlitadon au/ unc a to a total
012 flmdlla. M average atrtuance ons $4.19&
Geoseaphle Dbb t: Qy-wiide
1. WNW: Alme
Matdit Fm&: Ab ne
Prttau of Achud
InvedsoeW to Pbmnd: 71M annrnl ekment esdnmted that $52,W0 world be
SPM on rdmNliradon wAsting sewn ahzing
horrreoMMers and fourjira-tune hamebgers. Vw C7tyIs
e Vendbunc iY350,386 wos 97% of dw projected
mnoum. A tmal iV12 fodba wrne assLawd w %kh Is
equd to 109% ifdw projemd monber ak&Mh an of
AM assisted wen eduft hmnevw ers.
civ efM -
Pdorfly and Activity: Scattered Site Homeowmerthlp Program
Mrat-time Homakiyer'a Program)
Desesipdon: 7h& Progrmn. av revised In 1992, providesfinancial
aaitkinc a to selected eligible buyers to pay W to 50
pamew 4V Me downpaymem, pay clatigg cows. and
rdrrce ON mortgage pdndpd amouwJiam $3.000 to
3.dW N*kh mates the hm m more 40brdabk.
Awdfiet now regluer, aomvlm dw 4ppU:otlon. be
eugible and how been selected to parNe(pmte wider du
provisions of drls plan. Homebuyers selected to
padeipwe are retpowiN- forA ding an appropdase
louse for sale In Plymowlr, sdecdng a lending budtwlon
familiar MA rhe plan, making the arramgem w for the
mortgage and mewing ON program regdranemts.
Rwom+ce aul Fun& Chad: HUD GDHG $132.7179
7hls reSONOW aslasad 11 jaNges In bwmdng Jira-dine
lmmebuyers. 71ue assistance rmngedpom a low ie
3.000 to a high iV$41,M lire median atalnow wins
11,000 Me louses pwadiused ranged in price Jiwn
48.9100, for a condo n Wien to $106,30D for a SIX&
family horse. Me median was $78,900: The fwdly
h momws rouged Jtnm $17,784 to $32,600. The medlan
wast $23,338
Geotmok Db&ld: ay -wide
Now Required
Plttern or Actual
Investment to Planned: Vie GYty's actual upetdlaw wear $132,700 comlpaad to
P tspendlture tg*$31.01010 7hit equals=%
more Alun projected. d total df li Jiro-thw lmmeboy rs
were assisted Instead Vow uroJected 3 - d* equ ok
220% more Alun projected.
CIVOMMUS
PMtarhy and AdJvBy: NOME Program
Damdipd n: Provlda more q#ordable runts/ and homeo*wrAo
howting through aa9tdslrton, ndmuiutatton. new
eoauniedon and teeanabued mmd atslstance.
Assistance can be proWdad dtrowgh loon ad maces, qW*
hwei nein, Interest suiiuldks and admr, bmw.
Resoue+ce and F=& Wed: ROD - $0
Geog qft Dhbid: 1Vf Appucabk
Leverage: Not AAugcabk - no funds proWdad
Matehkg Fkmb: Required bta not opfibabk since noAwds proWdad
InvWment to Plumed: PPOWMA poddpamd **h yenneptn Cowo and
Bkvmftt m In a eonswda for parpnses V'aA*hg*
f&"Ng wider die ROME Program. Hymoiah Is shone
and usted mnomn to the 1992 CHAS) %w udmared at
20,CW - contingent on dm program being, knM Me
program %w notfinded, thenrfore. P&mondr recalwd no
idRang•
Qq of rb A
Pstoelty and AdIwky: Mw Sentor Odwx Housing
Deaer"am: A progra n/dewelopment In Its San up phase. A 100 unit
dew kwon Is proposed udWW local Jb dlng. 71st time
Is !messed at the nonhem cancer if s Boukwa d
and 3Z* Aw A w Abash and when aommau ted the wile
would .be avdlabk to lower Insane eMedy.
Resource and Funds used: Local
Geog aphk Dbtrlet: N A.
Leterape: Abase Required
Marcelo= Funds: None Required
Fa teen of Adual
iovembum to Planned: 7fils project was AWd In the 1992 Annual Plan at one to
be caeMemd with the need and design ekmmu Jar
senior housing to be ew bared. Ab vVendttunes w re
specocolly Iistsd.
M oM, 9
C. iIOUSEHOIDS AND PERSONS ASSISTED
Plymouth's estimate of the number of households and prions assisted during the year are
summarized in the table which follows.
ESTIIBIATE OF HODS®GIDS - PERSONS ASSISTED
Comments - Properties and Types of Assistance Provided:
Coloubaud m m. boob oC 219 6awiaw ie m. iauioo t aptl0e r Raves 0oombi4 • am dI :baaur 6d6a
are am. 1I Bsomima homebuyers, ad 12 ahgb envy rebobitlmfoe unks.
l du about Tia dhi m
thain about 670 hdhitluW (o cy of sbich are In IM cum care e.6., ourft bona), and 67 Rmalea witbout AN=
6.2.. baftW comas
Mammal
Cbydilbm oa
PLYMOUTH UNION
DESCRIPTION HRA CITY OTTER TO'T'AL
MISSION
Estimate of low income households 2420 200•• 2 444
assisted
Estimate of Venoms aasisted (i.e.
homeless persons, ncn-homeless 5 537000 4 347
persons and persons with special
needs)
TOTAL 248 737 6 991
Comments - Properties and Types of Assistance Provided:
Coloubaud m m. boob oC 219 6awiaw ie m. iauioo t aptl0e r Raves 0oombi4 • am dI :baaur 6d6a
are am. 1I Bsomima homebuyers, ad 12 ahgb envy rebobitlmfoe unks.
l du about Tia dhi m
thain about 670 hdhitluW (o cy of sbich are In IM cum care e.6., ourft bona), and 67 Rmalea witbout AN=
6.2.. baftW comas
Mammal
Cbydilbm oa
D. OTBER ACTIONS UNDE11tTAKEN
Other actions mcdertalcerc by Plymouth during the iisisl year an described below:
2.
3.
4.
The following could be considered public policies or at least actions talon that at
relevant to public policies: 1) development and implementation of am procedures to
assist first-time bomebuyyers inpurchasing a home, 2) a decision not to apply for
additional Section 8 Certificates because of the substantial increase in the number of
porlabilities and the net gain. and 3) a decision to pursue dridopment of a plan and
an operational program. for a new senior citizen facility utilizing local bonding.
Plymouth's HRA has entered into an agreement with Walloer Mensgement to
provide and operate senior citizen housing on a site owned by the HRA and
construction of a 100 unit facility is expected in 1993.
The City of Plymouth, Hennepin County and Bloomington have farmed a CHAS
consortia for the purpose of securing HOME Program finds.
Plymouth has no public housing, therefore, no actions were talm.
Plymouth has no public housing. therefore, .no actions wore talaen.
6. Moduh MM
The City's housing programa including the Section 8 and the First-time
Homebuyees Program are open to all.
8 OF of fymoia
PART II -ASSESSMENT OF ANNUAL PERFORMANCE
In accodance with HUD's Annual Report Requirements, Plymouth has 1) assessed its
performance in terms of effboveness and 2) reviewed future actions or changes it might taloa
tv its five year strategy. Each is reviewed below.
I DI
The City and HRA are satisfied with the effectiveneq of its performance and programs.
During the year, 225 families were assisted in the Seem g Certificate program.
Rehabilitation consisted of 12 units. The first-time homebuyers program was substantially
revised and over 125 applications were tabun. A total of II families purchased and doled
an houses during the year compared to 2 dna previous year. The non-profit agencies also
were of ketive in their performance during the year.
Be- WE ACTIONS OR CHANGES
For the' 1993 annual year, Plymouth intends to pursue the plan set forth in the five-year
strategy and as more specifically contained in Plymouth's 1993 CHAS.
No change to Zhe five-year plan is proposed. A new five-year plan will be developed and
approved in 1993 as envisioned by the current HUD regulations.
Owarrb-Oft
A. DESCRIPTION OF PROCESS FOR PUBLIC REVIEW
The process Plymouth used to insure the public had an opportunity to review and comment
on the Annual Performance Report included distribution of a draft copy of the report to the
non-profit entities engaged in providing affordable and supportive housing in Plymouth,
distribution to the library, notice in the Plymouth Sailor, a notice on Plymouth's public
access channel (Channel 37), and by malting copies of the draft available at City Hall.
B. SUNII4IARY OF PUBLIC CONEMUMS RECEIVED
The following comments were received during the 30 day period for public examination and
comment on the annual performance report.
10 Cay of Mymou&
MEND 1P'
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
3400 PLYMOUTH BOULEVARD, PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447
DATE: December 11, 1992 For the Housing and Redevelopment Authority
Meeting of December 15, 1992
TO: HousinAR lopment Authority Commi:ioners
FROM: Charled, Executive Director
SUBJECT: STATUS OF THE SENIOR HOUSING PROJECT
With the signing of the contract with Walker Management progress has finally
reall begun on the senior project. I have enclosed a letter received from
1Management dated November 25, 1992 which addresses an issue regarding
additional Market Analysis that I had discussed briefly with the HRA at our
last meeting. I and the Chairman both agreed that the Market Analysis of the
type that Walker was proposing was not covered in the original Thibault work
and was necessary, based on the advice of our legal and financial counsel, if
a public bond sale was to be successful. The $2,000 cost for this additional
market work is certainly reasonable.
I have also enclosed a copy of the initial time line presented by Walker which
we are now operating under.
The architect RFPs have been prepared and sent out to five firms. Those firms
are Horty Elving It Associates, Inc.; Grooters, Leapaldt & Tideman; Miller
Hanson Westerbeck Bell; Arvid Elness Architects Inc.; and, Trossen Wright
Architects P.A. Since the deadline for submission of the written RFP
materials back to the HRA is December 14, 1992 I expect I will have those
materials available for distribution to the HRA at our December 15 meeting.
Denise has also contacted each of you to ascertain your availability for a
meeting beginning at 5:00 p.m. December 23, 1992. The purpose of this meeting
will be to interview each of the firms responding to the RFP for architectural
services.
Earlier that day (December 23, 1992) the marketing specialist from Walker
Management will be providing staff with a report on the market analysis
activity that is taking place responsive to the Walker proposal of earlier
this month.
Based on the market analysis work that Yalker is undertaking; review of
construction costs that Walker is undertaking; and, work by our financial
consultants, Springstead. Inc., we should have an updated project proforma
available very early in January which will enable us to drive ahead with the
financing plans.
Attachments:
1. Walker Management Letter of November 25, 1992 Regarding Market Study and
Project Time Line
2. Request For Proposal for Architect Services
RECENEDSamA. SUN"
CAiyEmutiue OlFar
swanas
00V •SO 1982
idt..MODIST.INC.
a rsyA.+ahn.an CITY OF PLYMOUTH
Emudoe Via President l.D i.DPiNT.DE 1
David A. Grant
Vice Hhesident November 25, 1992
senior corporate counsel
J1.cr eta
ent
union Raaewuaextanaa Mr. Quarks Di7kntd
Director of Community Development
Qty of Plymouth
ardReswfaid[ntViaFleai 3400 Plymouth Boulevard
3larketinq Plymouth, Minnesota SS"7
m mamska Dear Chuck:
Associate Via P"drnt
Qualib• dip ---t I am glad that we have now begun the development process for the Plymouth
Senior Housing project. We are moving forward with our preparadmis here at
Buses Yikhu Walker. Aa we discussed at our Iai meeting, we believe that it is appropriateDirector
PLhlir Relations that there be a market feasibility study conducted to better define the product.
We indicated to YOU that the coat of the feasibility study would be
approldmately S8 M Subsequently, I informed you that Walker would beDirectors.
sant.. x..wte to its t on the transaction and do notI m8 forego P charge for internal
Chair costs. We did, however, request t. et you reimburse Walker for the actual out.
First via chair Pocket expenses t0 be incurred in purchasing the eOmputerlLed demographic
NWMLWr i data neceaaary to complete the feasibility study. You agreed to do so. I am
SR -and Vice
jam Guiana
hair writing to confirm that the amount of out-of-pocket will be in an amount not
Secretary to embed $2,000. We are commencing that task immediately and hope to have
rfmmnr the results ready for you by the time of the scheduled HRA meeting in
December.
uheride Aodeem
eShianne A. I am enclosing a first draft of a Pre -Development Timeline for the project.
You well note that then is an open item with respect to the completion of the
focus Smups/maamer research. This is because we do not know to what
y.•
rte, extent, we well treed to use focus groups. Taultheanswerwillbethereof the
wWadGme
Ca.ensa corona market fes Mty study. If we need to go through a fun socia: group
Rural. Meese see implementation in order to better define the produey our beat estimate is that
awchaee process will take approximately six weeks. it it turns out, from the market
6eaa10ty study, that the product will be more of the subsidiad variety, the8
Moore Vaidep need for focus groups will be diminished and the focus group timetable can be
zhdwJoins eliminated from the tiwlina.
w
had wyaa
As you will recall, I forwarded to you some weeks ago a proposed RFp for
rMene casupw of architects. It ft now time to send that RFP to the various architectural firms
Walker Health services. W. which we discussed. At your convenience, please let me know if the RFP isWalkerllpotearsFund
Walker Residence Group
serotns s
The Walker Campenies. Inc.
Walker NLmpment.Inc.
3737 Bryant Avenue south. kxiomap" Minoesors 55409 a FAX 812/82.4458 a Telephone 812/827.8831
W9JkwEqualOpporlsoA5'er Development. Inc.ins ty Em&yer
W Charles Dillerud
November 25, 1992
Page 2
sadifam tory or if you desire changes in it As Boon as I hear fig you, I will send out theRFPsothatwecanbeginthearchitecturalselectionprocess.
In the meantime, you should know that Greg Oppegard and John Berney bane been workingwithKathyAhotohelpbuildthedevelopmentproforma. There are certain assumptions
that cannot be finalized until the market work is compleud. However, we can put the
model together now in a way that will permit alteratm as the product is ultimately defined.
Best wishes.
Yours very truly,
WALKER METHODIST, INC
by .
DfiAd A. C'sradt
Vice Presldeet
Senior Corporate Counsel
PC: Karen Struve
Ken Ward
Janet Undbo
Jane Morgan
C h* Brehm
Tim Getty
Greg Oppegard
John Earney
I
t E sus€ f f f f
E
jl 1 tltt tf 1
d
ilk
REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL
For The
PLYMOUTH SENIOR HOUSING PROJECT
The
PLYMOUTH HOUSING AND
BY
AUTHORITY
The Plymouth Housing and Redevelopment Housing Authority requests a proposal
which will provide for the services outlined below in connection with the plaanin&
development, financing and construction of a 100 unit multi k vvk4 partially subsidizedindependent/congregate senior housing project ("the Project") to be located at theintersectionofPlymouthBoulevardand37thAvenueNorthinPlymouth, Minnesota. It is
the intent of this request to secure a proposal to desiWdevelop a plan suitable for
Presentation to Plymouth Housing and Redevelopment Authority, regarding the proposedsite. You will be working with Plymouth HRA staff and walker Development, Inc, consultant to the HRA. It is expected that design/development concepts for the Project will
incorporate the desires of the HRA, based on a market research study currently beingconductedalongwiththecompletedHRAsurvey (enclosed). Your response to the RequestforProposalshouldshowflexibilityintheareasofdesignandcostbasedontheto -be - determined scope of the Project.
Your response to this Request for Proposal should encompass the preparation of a
concept and a plan to be followed by full architectural services (schematics designdevelopment, working drawings, specifications, construction administration) - guaranteedmaximumprice - exclusive of. 'reimbursables', including a minimum of weekly site visitsduringtheconstructionperiod. Structural, mechanical, electrical, civil engineering andlandscaping, architect and interior design services should be included in your response.
Please incorporate into your response the following requirements:
1. Type of organization (partnership, corporation, etc.) and ownership.
2. Brief history of the firm, statement of qualifications.
3. Name, address,phone and fax number.
4. Provide listing of all personnel who would be involved in this project,
educational background and discipline.
S. Please indicate to what extent inhouse services will be used versus outside
services and a brief description of the advantages and disadvantages of each.
6. Provide a listing of all inhouse or outside service providersiftwultants yourfirmwoulduseonthisproject. Include information from lines 2, 3 and 4.
7. Please explain how your firm will handle design errors and/or omissions, including all architect comrolled consultants.
8. Senior housing experience:
a. Provide a listing of all senior housing projects your firm is currentlyinvolvedwith. A definition. of scope of project, cost what phase project
is in to date, location of project, contact persons and telephone
numbem
b. list five of your most rcx ttly completed senior projects. Deane the
scope of project, costs, both square foot unit along with a comparison
ecet of estimated versus actual
Selection of an architectural arm will be based on your concepti, plans and response to the
above requirements as well as the following:
1. Your ability to design a project in a maturer which will mat the needs of the
community and budget restrictions.
2. Your ability to work with the HRA and its staff and board.
3. Your ability to work within specific timelines and budgets.
4. The basis for your compensation on the Project. An itemized listing ofconsultantsincludedinthefeeandtheirrespectivefees.
Three copies of proposal must be submitted no later than December 14, IM and addressedto:
David A. Grant
Walker Development, Inc.
3737 Bryant Avenue South
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55409
612)827-8498
For further information about the project contact either.
David A. Grant
612)827.8498
or
Greg Gppegard
612)827.8335
BUIMARY STATISTICS REPORT-
DATE: 11/30/92
SELECTION CRITERIA: ALL TENANTS WERE INCLUDED
I. HEAD OF HOUSEHOLD COMPOSITION. (0 OF ALL HEADS IS IN PARSLP1it88E8)
A. THERE ARE 155 HEADS OF HOUSEHOLD.. (MAY BE MORE THAN 1 IN A. UNIT.)
THERE ARE 155 HOUSEHOLDS.
a.. AGE: UNDER 30 30-39 40-49 50-•59 60-69 70-79 SOW
NO: 51 71 13 2 4 e 6
PCT: 32..9 45.6 8.4 1.3 2.6 5.2 3.9
AVERAGE AGE: 36.8
C. BEE: MALE: 18 ( 11.6) FRMALE: 137 (. 88.4)
D. SINGLE PARENT HEAD -OF -HOUSEHOLD FAMILIES ASSISTED:
MALE: 1 ( 0.6) FEMALE: 114 ( 73.5)
E. ELDERLY HEAD-OF-HOUSEROLD FAMILIES ASSISTED:
OBR ISR 2BR 3BR 4BR 5+BR
NO: 0 23 12 0 0 0
PCP: 0.0 14.8 7.7 0.0 0..0 0.0
F. NON -ELDERLY HEAD -OF -HOUSEHOLD FAMILIES ASSISTED:
ORR IBR 2BR 3BR 4BR S+BR
NO: 0 1. 99 20 0 0
PCT. 0.0 0.6 63.9 12.9 0.0 0.0
G. RACE/ETHNICITY:
WHITE: 128 ( 82.6)
BLACK: 21 ( 13.5)
AMER IND/ALASKAN NATIVE: 4 ( 2.6)
ASIAN/PACIF ISLANDER: 1 ( 0.6)
OTHER: 1 ( 0.6)
HISPANIC: 1 U 0.6) NON -HISPANIC: 154 (•99.4)
H. MISCELLANEOUS:
62 YRS OR OLDER: 18 ( 11.6)
RANDICAPPED: 12 ( 7.7)
DISABLED: 5 ( 3.2.)
FULL-TIME STUDENT (18 +):. 1 ( 0.6)
NONE OF THE ABOVE: 121 ( 78.1)
PHA Maaager 3.4a (086-92 * City of Plymouth
SUM 0RY STATISTICS REPORT (cont)s Date: 11/30/92 Dago: 2
II. ALL MEMBERS COMPOSITION: (PCT IS PCT OF ALL MEMBERS)
A. TRW ARE 390 MEMBERS.
a. AGE:
0-12 13-17 18-29 30-39 40-49
195 18 60 80 15
50.0 4.6 15.4 30.5 3.8
AVERWB AGB: 20.3
C. SEX: ALL - MALE: 134 ( 34.4)
ADULTS - MALE: 31 ( 7.9)
18 +)
D. RACE/ETHNICITY:
WHITE:
BLACK:
AM INUALA8XAN NATIVE:
ASIAN/FACIF ISLANDI3R:
OTHER:
HISPANIC: 3 ( 0.8)
E. MISCELLANEOUS:
62 YRS OR OLDER:
HANDICAPPED:
DISABLED:
FULL-TIME STUDENT (18 +):
NONE OF THE ABOVE:
50-59 60-69 70-79 80(+)
2 4 9 7'
0.5 1.0 2.3 1.8
FEMALE: 256 ( 65.6)
FEMALE: 146 ( 37.4)
303 ( 77.7)
68 ( 17.4)
13 ( 3.3)
3 ( 0.8)
3 ( 0.8)
NON -HISPANIC: 387 ( 99.2)
20 ( 5.1)
13 ( 3.3)
5 ( 1.3)•
1 ( 0.3)
353 ( 90.5)
F: FAMILY SIZE:
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
NO: 27 53 51 17 6 1 0 0
PCT: 17.4 34.2 32.9 11.0 3.9 0.6 0.0 0.0
AVERAGE FAMILY SIZE: 2.5
G. RELATIONSHIP CODE: (AVG IS AVG PER HOUSEHOLD)
HEAD SPOUSE ADULT DEPEN FOSTER
NO: 155 13 7 210 0
AVG: 1.00 0.08 0.05 1.35 0.00
9 10 it (+)
0 0 0
0.0 0.0 0.0
LIVE-IN OTHBR
1 4
0.01 0.03
PHA Manager 3.4a (086-92 * City of Plymouth ^
SUNKUY STATISTICS REPORT (coat): Date: 11/30/92 Page: 3
III-. INCOWEXPEN8E8:
A. INCODB; BREARDOWNN: (INCOME BEFORE ADJUSTMENTS)
UNDER 2500- 5000- 7500- 10000- 12500- 15000-
2500 4999 7499 9999 12499 14999 17499 17500(•) NO: 3 1 89 23 13 10 6 10
PCTs 1.9 0.6 57.4 14.8 8.4 6.5 3.9 6.5
AVERAGE INCOME: $ 8460
AVERAGE INCOME AFTER ADJUSTMENTS: $ 7336
S. INCONS SOURCES: (AVG 18 AVERAGE FOR THAT ITM)
EXCEPTIONS: LOWER INC FAMILIES REOUIRING LI EXCEPTIONS: 0
D. RENTS (Averages per Household, except for URP)
TOTAL TEGM PAYMENT: 183.5
TENANT RENTS 157.7
HOUSING ASSISTANCE PAYMENT: 367.4
UTILITY REINBURSEMENT PAYl83IPP:********* (Avg !or only Hehids with URP) BNCURITY DEPOSIT: 135.3
E. EXPENSES: AVG IS AVG PER HOUSEHOLD WITH. TEAT ITEM)
PUBLIC PELF
i01GE8 ASSIST PENSION ASSETS OTHER RENT
HOLDS WITH: 37 103 21 20 24 0
PERCENT: 23.9 66.5 13.5 12.9 15.5 0.0AVGAMOUNT: 21796 6228 7257 183 3212 0
C..MICOW CATEGORIES AT HOVE -IN: INCOMI CATBWRIEB AT R8EXA1[:
VERY LOW INCOME: 75 48.4) VERY LOW INCONS: 100 64..5)
LOWER INC=: 16 10.3) LOWER INCOME: 4 2.6)
OVER INCOME: 0 0.0) OVER INCON E : 0 0.0)
EXCEPTIONS: LOWER INC FAMILIES REOUIRING LI EXCEPTIONS: 0
D. RENTS (Averages per Household, except for URP)
TOTAL TEGM PAYMENT: 183.5
TENANT RENTS 157.7
HOUSING ASSISTANCE PAYMENT: 367.4
UTILITY REINBURSEMENT PAYl83IPP:********* (Avg !or only Hehids with URP) BNCURITY DEPOSIT: 135.3
E. EXPENSES: AVG IS AVG PER HOUSEHOLD WITH. TEAT ITEM)
HA11DCP DEPEN ELDERLY
MEDICL CH CARE OTHER ASSIST DEDUC DEDUC
HOLDS WITH: 19 19 2 0 121 35
PERCENT: 12:3 12.3 1.3 0.0 78.1 22.6
AVG AMOUNT: 1013 2162 768 0 825 400
PHA Manager 3.4a (086-92 * City of Plymouth
BU1m1ARY'STATISTICS REPORT (cont):
E
Dates 11/30/92 Pages 4
XV. UNXTS/CBRTIPiCATEB/VOUCHERS (PCT is from unite an file except where noted) .-
A. UNIT REPORT.- (Calculated only if report includes a single project)
UNITS ON BILE: 0
PERCENT
UNITS TOTAL ISSUED/ UTZLI-
AVAIL.
OSE. IBR 2BR 3BR 480 S+SR
1. UNITS It ACC: 0 0 0 0 0 0
0
0.0) 0.0) 0.0) 0.0) 0.0) 0.0)
2. LEASED: 0 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 BXTMBDt 0.0) 0.0) 0.0) 0.0) 0.0) 0.0)
4. SALANCE (OVER 0 0 0 0 0 0
UNDER ACCs 0.0) 0.0; 0.0) 0.0) 0.0) 0-0)
B. PROORM UTILIZATION:
SECTION 8 CBRT:
SECTION 8 1@:
VOUCHER:
PUBLIC HOUSING
TOTAL:
Includes ALL unite. Use Rpt 013 for more detail.)
C. GROSS RENT
UNDER 200 200-299
NO: 2 0
PCT: 1.3 0.0
AVERAGE GROSS RENTS 570.9
D. CONTRACT RENT
UNDBR 200 200-299
NO: 2 . 0
PCT: 1.3 0.0
AVERAGE CONTRACT RBST: 545.1
300-399
PCT OF NUDWER PERCENT
UNITS TOTAL ISSUED/ UTZLI-
AVAIL. AVAIL. LEASBD ZATION
11 78.6 155 93.4
0 0:0 0 0.0
3 21.4 0 0.0
0 0.0 0 0.0
14 100.0- 155 91.7
C. GROSS RENT
UNDER 200 200-299
NO: 2 0
PCT: 1.3 0.0
AVERAGE GROSS RENTS 570.9
D. CONTRACT RENT
UNDBR 200 200-299
NO: 2 . 0
PCT: 1.3 0.0
AVERAGE CONTRACT RBST: 545.1
300-399 400-499 500-599
1 9 109
0.6 5.8 70..3
300-399 400-499 500-599
1 25 108
0.6 16.1 69.7
E. UTILITY ALLONANCB
UNDER 25 25-49 50-74
not 90 60 2
PCTs 58.1 38.7 1.3
AVERAGE UTILITY ALLONANCE.- 25.7
600-699 700+
17 17
11.0 11.0
600-699 700+
5 14
3.2 9.0
I
o i
75-99 100-124 125-149 150+
1 2 0 0
0.6 1.3 0.0 0.0
u'.
PER Manager 3.4a (086-92 * City of Plymouth
SUMMY STATISTICS REPORT (cont):
V. LEMING INFORMATION:
TOTAL
A. LEASE -IN-PLACE FAMILIES: 1
Date: 11/30/92 Page: 5
ELDERLY Mw_ELDERLY
1 (100.0) .0 ( 0.0)
E. CERTIFICATE/VOUCHER SIZE VS ACTUAL UNIT SIZE: ACTUAL SIZE:
C. EXCEPTION RENTS FOR CERTIFICATES:
OBR IBR 2BR 38R 4BR S+BR
OBR: 0 0 0 0 0 0
CERTIF/ IBR: 0 24 0 0 0 0
VOUCHER 2BR: 1 0 110 0 0 0
SIZE: 3BR: 0 0 0 20 0 0
4BR: 0 0 0 0 0 0
5+BR: 0 0 0 0 0 0
C. EXCEPTION RENTS FOR CERTIFICATES:
D. COMPARISON OF GROSS RENT TO FMES:
OBR IBR 2BR 3BR 4BR S+BR
CURRENT FMRS (AVG): 0 535 630 788 0 0
GR > 1.1xPMR: 0 0 0 0 0 0
GR > FDA c 1.1xFMA: 0 0 0 0 0 0
GR - FMA: 0 12 15 1 0 0
OR > .9xPMA c PDA: 0 5 49 16 0 0
GR c .9xPMA: 0 7 47 3 0 0
TOTAL: 0 24 111 20 0 0
E. NUMBER OF ASSISTED FAMILIES WHOSE GROSS RENT EXCEEDS PAYMENT STD:
OBR IBR 2BR 3BR 4BR S+BR
VOUCHER: 0 0 0 0 0 0
AVERAGE 0 OVER PS: 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
NUMBER OF ASSISTED FAMILIES WHOSE GROSS RENT EXCEEDS PAYMENT STD: 0
P..NU1BSR OF ASSISTED FAMILIES WHO, BECAUSE THEIR GROSS RENT IS LESS
THAN PAYMENT STANDARD, RECEIVE A SAVINGS:
OBR "m 2BR 3BR 4SR 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 SAVINGS: 0
PEA Manager 3.4a (086-92 * City Of Plymouth
OBR IBR 2BR 3BR 4SR 5+BR
300 EXCEPTION AUTHORIZED: 0 0 0 0 0 0
200 EXCEPTION AUTHORIZED: 0 0 0 0 0 0
ANNUAL AW. FACTOR APPLIED: 0 0 3 1 0 0
CURRENT GR OVER FMR: 0 0 0 0 0 0
1-100 OVER PDA: 0 0 0 0 0 0
10-200 OVER FDA: 0 0 0 0 0 0
MORS THAN 200 OVER PMA: 0 0 0 0 0 0
D. COMPARISON OF GROSS RENT TO FMES:
OBR IBR 2BR 3BR 4BR S+BR
CURRENT FMRS (AVG): 0 535 630 788 0 0
GR > 1.1xPMR: 0 0 0 0 0 0
GR > FDA c 1.1xFMA: 0 0 0 0 0 0
GR - FMA: 0 12 15 1 0 0
OR > .9xPMA c PDA: 0 5 49 16 0 0
GR c .9xPMA: 0 7 47 3 0 0
TOTAL: 0 24 111 20 0 0
E. NUMBER OF ASSISTED FAMILIES WHOSE GROSS RENT EXCEEDS PAYMENT STD:
OBR IBR 2BR 3BR 4BR S+BR
VOUCHER: 0 0 0 0 0 0
AVERAGE 0 OVER PS: 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
NUMBER OF ASSISTED FAMILIES WHOSE GROSS RENT EXCEEDS PAYMENT STD: 0
P..NU1BSR OF ASSISTED FAMILIES WHO, BECAUSE THEIR GROSS RENT IS LESS
THAN PAYMENT STANDARD, RECEIVE A SAVINGS:
OBR "m 2BR 3BR 4SR 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 SAVINGS: 0
PEA Manager 3.4a (086-92 * City Of Plymouth
SUMMARY STATISTICS REPORT (cont): Date: 11/30/92 Page: 6
G.- UNIT TYPES:
SINGLE FAMILY: 5 ( 3.2)
DUPLEX: 1 ( 0.6)
GARDEN: 147 ( 94.8)
HIGHRISS: 1 f 0.6)
TWINHOUSS: 1 0.6)
H. HOUSING TYPES: LBASED NOT LWWBD
IND GROUP RBSIDSNCB: 0 0
CONGREGATE: 0 0
MOBILE MOE PAD: 0 0
SINGLE ROW! OCCUP: 0 0
SHARED HOUSING: 0 0
RENTAL REHAB: 0 0
PROD SELF SUFFIC: 0 0
OVERISSUED: 0 0
FLAGGED: 0 0
OTHER: 0 0
I. TURNOVER: CERT MOD REii VOUCHER PDE HODS
AVG TIMES USBD/LBASED: 0.10 0.00 0.00 0.00
J. CANCELLATIONS OF CERT/VOUCHBR:
OVERINCOME: 0 ( 0.0)
HOUSING NOT LOCATED: 0 ( 0.0)
NO LONGER IIiTERESTSD: 4 (100.0)
OTHER SUBSIDY: 0 ( 0.0)
OBLIGATION UNMET: 0 ( 0.0)
TERMINATED BEFORE 60 DAYS: 0 ( 0.0).
OTHER: 0 ( 0.0)
E. HAP/LEASE.CANCBLLATIONS:
01Qi8R UNCOOPERATIVE: 0 ( 0.0)
TENANT UNDESIRABLE: 0 ( 0.0)
TENANT DECEASED: 0 ( 0.0)
NO LONGER IN JURISDICTION: 0 ( 0.0)
NO LONGER INTERESTED: 2 (100.0)
SUBSTANDARD HOUSING: 0 ( 0.0)
NO LONGER ELIGIBLE `s 0 ( 0.0)
SALE OF PROPERTY: 0 ( 0.0)
PHA INITIATED: 0 ( 0.0)
OTHER: 0 ( 0.0)
L. ONNER: DATA: THIS REPORT ALL UNNBRS
ONNERS N/CONTRAC'T'S: 25 29
FAMILIES UNDER LEASE: 155 154
AVC; FAMILIES PER O11NBR: 6.20 5.31
UNITS: 2 8.0) 2 ( 6.9)
BLACK: 0 0.0) 0 ( •0.0)
AMER IND/ALASXAN NATIVE: 0 0.0) 0 ( 0.0)
ASIAN/PACIF ISLANDER: 0 0.0) 0 ( 0.0)
OTHER: 3 12.0) 3 ( 10.3)
PHA Manager 3.4a (086-92 * City of Plymouth
7 -
DESCRIPTION PERIOD AMT TO DATE ANT BUDGET ANT OYERa
UNDER
RALANCE SXFET
ASSETS
1111.1 CPENERAL FUND CASH 19348.96 9692.35 00 89692.35
1117 PETTY CASH 00 00 00 00
TOTAL CASH 19348.96 89692.35 00 89692.35
s
ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE
s 871.70 00 59878.70
1129 ACCOUNTS REG. OTHER 00 00 00 00
TOTAL ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE 00 59878.70 00 59878.70
1162' GEN FUND IN.ESTNENTS 00 00 900. Oil
1'11 PREPAID INSURANCE 00 00 00 00
1290 OTHER DEFERRED CHARG 00 00 00 00
TOTAL DEFERRED CHARGES 00 00 00 00
LAND* STRUCTURES t EQUIP.
111475 SITE ACQUISITION A7 646 87 2T 646.87 00 279646.87
1475.1 OFFICE FURN 6 EQ. 00 39219.97 00 39219.97
X1415.7 AUTOMOTIVE EQUIP. 00 00 00 00
TOTAL LAN09 STRUCT 6 EQ. 279646.87 309866.84 00 309866.84
1690 UNDISTRIBUTED DEBITS 00 00 00 00
TOTAL ASSETS 289995.83 459437.89 00 459431.89
a
n
1:
4
a
M
1)
1
1
1
1 •
A .J .1 rRTt . 9
w
DESCRIPTION PERIOD ANT TO DATE AMT BUDGET AMT OVER
UNDER
e.• .ur! c"cef
LIABILITIES i SURPLUS
ACCOUNTS PAYABLE
2111 VENDOR t CONTRACTORS 00 00 00 00
2111.1 FEDERAL INC TAX NH 00 00 00 00 7
2117.2 SOCIAL SECURITY WH 00 00 00 00
2117.3 STATE INC TAX NM 00 000 000. 00•
2117.4 HEALTH INS MH.00 00 00 00. 1O
2117.5 INSURANCE YM 00 00 00 00 a
2111.8 RETIREMENT NN 00 00 00• 00
2118 ACCOUNTS PAYABLE HUO 00 00 00.00
2119 OTHER ACCOUNTS PAY. 00 00 00 00
211 9-61 ACCf PAY - CITY 00 000 Sao STU
TOTAL ACCOUNTS PAYABLE 00 00 00 00
m
u
2210 PREPAID ANNUAL CONTR 65.853.004 134.883.000 00 1349883.000 it
9•
2290 OTHER DEFERRED GRED. 00 00 00 00
as
2690. UNDISTRIBUTED CREDIT 00 00 00 00
r
2700 INC L EXP CLEARING 369857.17 196.050.43 430.298.00 234.247.510 as
all
SURPLUS
2810 UNRESERVED SURPLUS 00 49447.147.7.7 23.157.00 494239990.77
all
2826 RES SURPLUS -OPER RES 00 103.385.350 00 103.385.350
2827 RES SURPLUS -PROD ACC 00 2989998.400 00 2989988.40* 29
2d40 CUM. HUD CONTRIB. 00 4@1519379.340 4539455.000 396979924.340 m
i TOTAL SURPLUS 00 1069605.320 4309298.004 3239692.66 e
TOTAL LIAR. L SURPLUS 289995.830 459437.890 00 459437.890
PvIOJF 00 00 0
9s
sa
N
N
7
n
rLIwuuln nan cu&Lun a CA •MULLmici bRcdai AmajoIJ rwvc j
DESCRIPTION -------PERIOD------ ---TEAR TO DATE---- -------BUDGET------ CHANGE
PUN AMOUNT PUN AMOUNT PUN AMOUNT
3000 ESTIMATED ADMIN FEE 48.20 4.192.97* 47.56 16.532.22* 00 00 16.552.220 •
3001 MEMO ACCT OFFSET. -,.48.20 4.19 7 47,56 6 552012 0 00 l0 552.22 ..
OPERATING INCOME
3300 INT RESERVED SURPLUS 77 67.370 1.27 442.14+1 00 00 442.14* i
3301 AOMIN FEE INCOME 22.83 1.986.54* 22.04 706ri.170 00 000 79671.170 •
3610 INT GEN FUND. INVEST -'. 00 .. 00 000 00 000. 00... 00
3690 OTHER INCOME 00 0 00 25.000 is
TOTAL OPERATING INCOME 23.61 2.053.91: 23.39 8.138.31* 000 00 8.138.31* Is
u
OPERATING EXPENSES
ADMINISTRATION
4110 ADMIN- SALARIE'S 33.01 2.871.85 41.52 14.448.70. 42.0T 43.926:00
n
29.471.30* •
4130 LEGAL EXPENSE 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 20
4140 STAFF TRAINING 00 00 00 00 00 000 00
4150 TRAVEL 1.44 125.00 36 125.00 00.00 125.00
4170 ACCOUNTING 2.46 214.25 1.64 572.00 00 00 572.00 .
4171 AUDIT 00 00 00 00 48 5 0.00 500.00* a
4160 OFFICE RENT 00 00 000 00 00' • 00 00
4190 SUNDRY ADMIN EXPENSE 59 51.10 9.40 3.270.34 17
1 180.00 3.090.34
TOTAL ADMINISTRATION 37.50 3.262.20 52.92 18.416.04 42.73 44.606.00 26.189.96* s,
m
GENERAL EXPENSE
4510 INSURANCE 00 000 00 00 0t:.. 00 00 +
4530 TERMINAL LEAVE PAY.. 00 00 00 00 00, 00 00 "
4540 EMPLOYEE BEN• CONTR. 18.54 1.613.00 12.39 x•310.00 000 00. 4.310.00 x
4590 OTHER GENERAL EXPcN. 17.24 1.500.00 4.31 1.500.00 00.00 1.500.00 =+
4591 AGNIN PORTwBILITY 7.20 626.48 5.50 1.914.40 00 00 1.914.40
TOTAL GENERAL EXPENSE 42.98 3.739.48 22.20 7.724.40 0.0• 00 7.724.40 .c
t
MOUSING ASSIST. PAYMENTS
14715.1 MAP -OCCUPIED UNITS 666.92 Sd 0 2.36 622.21 216,S30.08 369.44 385.692.00 169.161.920
14715.2 MAP -VACANT UNITS 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 •a
HAP-0961UNPO RENT 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 4714715.3
4715.4 UTILITY ALLOWANCE 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 ..
4715.5 HA-PORTe.BILITT 100.15 26.112.960 106.22 36o,963.140 000 0 4
TOTAL MOUSING ASSIST. PA1366.77 31.909.40 516.00 119.566.94 369.44 3859692.00 206.123.063 "
n
TOTAL OPERATING EXPENSE 447.25 36011.08 591..11 205.707.38 412.16 4309298.00 2249590.62* u
M
e
1
r`Gnaw111 Iad%A Y &A \r a1\Y.I.A IGi UALYAa Ia1'IJYI444 rawc v
i
OESCRIPT7'td-------PERIOD------ ---YEAR TO.DATE-----------BUDGET------ CHANGE
PUM AMOUNT PUM AMOUNT PUM AMOUNT
OPERATING STATEMENT
SURPLUS ADJUSTMENTS
6010 PRIOR YEAR AOJ-AitR 00 00 4.36 195180640 00 000 1.518.640 ;
6120 GAIN/LOSS NONEXP EQ 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
TOTAL SURPLUS ADJUSTMENTS 00 00 4.36 1.518.640 00 00 1951x.640 '
ROVISION FOR RESERVES'
7016 PROV FOR OPER RESERV 00 00 00 00 000 000 00 '
7027 PROV FOR PRD ACCT 000 00 00 00 22.18 239157.00 239,57.000 ;
TOTAL PROV. FOR RESERVES 00 00 00 00 22.18 239157.00 239157. 00 a
a
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES
TSZO-REPLACE N 10
go egg egg
7530 RECEIPT NONEXP EQUIP 00 00 00 000 00 000 00 '
7540 PROPERTY GET t AO •.317.7• 27 646.87 79.45 279646.87 00 00 279646.87 2
7590 CONTRA FOR 7500S 317.78 279646.870 79.45 279646.870 0 90 .d 0 9
TOTAL 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 '
a
1610 VANDALISM EX N . 000 Soo 00 W 000 egg
CONTRIBUTIONS EARNED
8026 ANNUAL CONTR-CUR YR 000 00 00 00 436.34• 4539455.000 4539455.00 '
8021 ANNUAL CONTR-PR TR 00 00 00 00 00 000
TOTAL 00 00 00 00 434.34 4539455.000 4539455.00 '
a
a
e
a
A®C!: office of the Assistant Secretary for Community Planning and
Development, HUD.
ACTIOIi: Notice of fund availability (NoFA).
SM01ARY: This Mori— announces the av401-bility of approximately 5515 million.
n funds for applications for assistance under three of :he Departmsnt•s
programs for homeless persons: (1) supporti;re Housing; (2) Shelter Plus care;
and (3) Section 8 Moderate Rehabilitation for Single Room occupancy Dwellings
for Homeless :ndividuals. The NOFA contains information concerning eligible
applicants, the funding available under each program, the application package,
and its procesainq.
DAWNS: An original completed application must be received by 5:15 p.m.
Eastern Time on the date indicated as the applicable deadline for each program
in the chart appearing in this NOFA. The application must be received in the
office of Special Needs Assistance Programs in Washington. Applications may
not be sent by facsimile (FAX). The deadline given for each program is firm
as to date and hour. In the interest of fairness to all competing applicants,
the Department will treat as ineligible for consideration any application that
is received after the applicable deadline. Applicants should take this
tractice into account and make early submission of their material to avoid any
3R of :;so of eligibility drought about by unanticipated delays or other
el.very-related proolems.
FOR A COPY OF TOM APPLICATION PACR.iGR, CON"YA"Ps Application packages are
available from the BUD field office listed ac the end of :his notice.
Additional information regarding the submission of applications is included in
the package.
ADORRSSRSs An original completed application must bw submitted to the
following address: Department of Housing and Urban Development, office of
special Needs Assistance Programs, 451 Seventh Street, SW, Room 7262,
Washington, DC 20410, Attention: Mr. James N. Forsberg. one or two copies of
the application, as indicated in the chart, must also be sent to the HUD field
office serving the area in which the applicants project is located. A list
of field offices appears at the end of this NOFA. Field office copies must be
received by the application deadline as well, but a determination that an
application was received on time will be made solely on receipt of the
application at the office of Special Needs Assistance Programs in WashLugton.
OR FURTH= 13WORMATIOR CONTACT: The HUD field office :or the area .n which
ne proposed project 4-9 located.
SUFPLMMFlARY IRFORIOITIOR: The information collection requirements contained
in this notice have been submitted to the office of Management and Budget
oMB) for review under the Paperwork Reduction Act of :960 and have been
assigned OMB control numbers 2506-0131, 2506-0112, and 2506-0118.
Introduction
This NOFA announces the availability of funds for aseiai:ance under the
following programa: (1) Supporti-to Housing; (2) shelter Plus care; and (3)
Section 8 Moderate Rehabilitation for single Room occupancy Dwellings for
Homeless Individuals (section 8 SRO). (The supportive Housing program is a
newly authorized program under Title IV of the Stewart B. McKinney Homeless
Assistance Act (McKinney act), as amended by section 1403 of the sousing and
community Development Act of 1992 (Pub. L. 102-550, approved Oct 28, 1992)
1992 Act). The amendment removed the Supportive Housing Demonstration
Proeram, while included the Transitional Housing and Permanent Housing for the
Handicapped Homeless programs, and the Supplemental Assistance for Facilities
hat Assist the Homeless program (SAFAH), and combined many of the elements of
those programs into the new Supportive Housing Program.)
In an effort -to simplify the planning process for applicants, this
combined NOTA covers all three programs. Although application deadlines,
amounts available, eligible applicants, and eligible activities differ by
program (as described later in this NOFA), HUD believes that applicants will
be better served by having a complete schedule of funding available an early
as possible for all of theme programs. Applicants will thereby have an
opportunity to coordinate resources needed for one or more program
applications early in the fiscal .rear. With the ccmah' nod NoFA, applicants can
mora easily determine which program will best serve their needs and which
requirements they will be able to meet, and plan accordingly. The Department
believes this will reduce the burden on applicants in the application process
and allow both Federal and private dollars to be coordinated more effectively.
In addition, in order to encourage applicants to focus on submitting
high-quality proposals and to save applicants who may not be funded from
having to submit at the time of application information that is not necessary
for rating, sUD is revising its application process. Conditional selections
will be made based on the criteria described in the -Application Selection
Process, section in this Nom Applicants who are conditionally selected will
be notified of the additional information needed to confirm or clarify
information provided in the application. Applicants will then have three
months to submit such information.
Allocation Amounts and Submission Deadliness Of the $515 million in funds
available under this NOFA, 5472 million were appropriated by the Department's
appropriations act for fiscal year 1993 (Pub. L. 102-389, approved Oct. 6,
1992). The balance of 543 million represents funds carried over from Fiscal
Year 1992. The approximate amount available for each competition as well as
the application deadlines and where applications must be sent are specified in
the chart below. Any unobligated funds from previous competitions or
additional funds that may become available as a result of deobligation or
recapture from previous awards may also be used to fund applications for the
same program submitted in response to this NOPA.
SCHEDULE OF COMPETITIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 1993:
SUPPOR?IVN SHHL?Ot SECTION s
ELEMEN'P HOUSING PLO18 CARR SRO
APPROSIRATZ 100 Million 5300 Million 115 MILLION
FUNDING POR
PT 1993
APPLICA=IONS May 21, 1993 July 9, 1993 Aug. 27, 1993
DUH TO HUD 5:15 PM 5:15 PM 5:15 PM
HRADp Eastern Time Eastern Time Eastern Time
IN 108EX100T N
ORIGINAL COPY ORIGINAL COPY ORIGINAL COPY
APPLICATIONs TO TO TO
To BE HEADQUARTERS HEADQUARTERS HEADQUARTERS
SEEM TO IN WASHINGTON IN WASHINGTON IN WASHINGTON
ONE COPY TWO COPIES Two COPIES
TO LOCAL TO LOCAL TO LOCAL
FIELD OFFICEFIELD OFFICE FIELD OFFICE
Progra coaly
The programs included in this NOVA have three common everall'goals.
These goals are to help homeless persona, primarily those living in places not
ordinarily meant for human habitation or in emergency shelters, to (1) achieve
residential stability; (2) increase their skill levels and/or income; and (3)
obtain greater self-determination (i.e., more influence over dec4aions that
affect their lives). These goals are reflected in the application package and
selection-n-teria for each of the programs.
Aenidentiai stability refers to access to, and length of stay in, stable
affordable housing. Achieving residential stability involves not only :he
availability of affordable, permanent housing, but also the success of the
Program In addressing the problems that led to the family or individual
becoming homeless. Those problems may involve mental illness, substance
abuse, physical disabilities, unemployment, or other factors.
Increased skill level and/or income reforn to the resources needed to
enable persons to live ae self -sufficiently as possible. For many homeless
persons this involves actions to bridge the gap between current income and the
cost of living. The gap could be closed through employment, a higher -paying
jab, or access to entitlement benefits. The likelihood of obtaining a job, or
a higher -paying job, could be enhanced through job or skills training, or
enrolling in General equivalency Diploma (GSD) or higher education courses.
8or homeless persons with mental or physical disabilities that are so severe
in :e rule out outside employment, the goal of increased skill level and/or
income :.ay involve actions to increase self-sufficiency in other ways (e.g.,
life akills training, increased income through employment within the project,
or increased income through access to entitlement benefits).
Greater self-determination refers to increases in the influence that
participants have on decisions that affect their lives. Those increases may
result :tom such actions as involvement in the development of his or her
individual housing and supportive services plan (including developing personal
goals), participating in resident advisory council meetings or other
involvement in the development of program rules and procedures, involvement in
program implementation through such activities as employment and volunteer
services, and choice in selecting service providers.
Measurable objectives
To apply these goals to their proposed programs, applicants must
establish and include in their applications measurable objectives for each of
he three goals. Applicants must also describe how their proposed programs
will help _hem achieve these goals.
tiro examplop of measurable objectives for the goal of residential
stability are: 50 percent of shelter Plus care residents remain housed in
Permanent, affordable housing one year after moving into housing; 30 percent
of transitional housing graduates will receive section 8 rental housing
assistance. An example of a measurable objective for the goal of increased
skill level and/or income is: Incomes of 70 percent of families in supportive
Housing increase by at least 20 percent within twelve months of entry into the
program. While the goal of greater self-determination is less quantifiable
than the other two, measurable objectives can still be established. An
example of such an objective is: 85 percent of residents participate °n
developing their individual housing and services plans within two months of
entering :he program.
The measurable objectives established by each applicant are expected to
vary based an the specific needs and ch-racteristics of the homeless persons
proposed :o be served as well as the specific program chosen. Where the
population proposed to be served has multiple or particularly difficult
problems that need to be addressed, objeutives should reflect realistic
expectations.
The highest ratings under the quality of project plan criterion
discussed later In this NOFA will be awarded to applicatiors containing
project plans that describe specific measurable objectives `or each of the
common goals specified above, how the proposed plan of housing and services
will help residents reach these goals, how the programs success will be
evaluated, and how program modifications will be made, if necessary, as a
result of this evaluation.
HUD will not consider the level of expectations described in the
o!•t- tives in rating r.rr "cations. That is, an application that contains
realistic objectives reflecting the very dysfunctional nature of the
population to be served will be treated the same as an application that
contains more optimistic objectives reflecting a less dysfunctional
population. BUD specifically does not want the process of establishing
measurable objectives to lead applicants away from serving hameloss persons
with the mast serious problems. BUD does want applicants for each program to
adopt the three goals, carefully consider how they can achieve them through
their proposed projects, establish measurable objectives to gauge whether they
are achieving the goals and, if funded, periodically measure project results
and, as necessary, make program adjustments.
Targeting
Because the resources available are limited, the Department is targeting
resources to projects that will principally serve persons who are sleeping in
emergency shelters (including hotels or motels used as shelter for homeless
families), or places not meant for human habitation, Such as cars, parks,
sidewalks, or abandoned buildinoe. This includes persons who ordinarily live
in such places but are in a hospital or other institution on a short-term
basis (short-term is considered to be 30 consecutive days or less.)
Applicants that target such homaloan persons and that present a workable
strategy for reaching these populations will receive the highest rating under
the targeting selection criterion.
The Department also considers as homeless: 1) persons who are graduating
from transitional housing designed for homeless persons, and 2) persons who
have been in institutions for more than 30 days and are within a week being
released from institutions or persons who are within a week being evicted from
dwelling units, And lack the resources and support networks needed to obtain
access to housing. However, to ••he extent that applicants propose to serve
such homeless persons, points will not be received under the tax etinq
selection criterion.
Program Descriptions
Each of the programs to be funded under this NOPA are described briefly.
However, to understand fully the requirements of each program, potential
applicants must read the applicable regulations. An interim rule for the
Supportive Housing Program and a final rule for the Shelter Plus Care program,
which are complete in themselves, are being published simultaneously with this
NOPA. An interim rule amending the regulations for the section 8 SRO program
at 24 CPR part 882, subpart B, is also being published simultaneously with
this NOVA; however, it must be read in conjunction with the regulations as
they appear at 24 CFR part 882, subpart H. Funds made available through this
NOTA are subject to these regulations. '
supportive sousing Program
8nrpos41r The purpose of the supportive Housing Program is to promote
the development and provision of supportive housing and/or appropriate
supportive services, including innovative approaches to assist homeless
persons in the transition from homelessness and to enable them to live as
independently as possible.
Bligible applicaater states, metropolitan cities, urban counties, other
governmental entities, Indian tribes, private nonprofit organizations, and
ccussunity mental health associations that are public nonprofit organizations.
components: supportive Housing funds may be orad to vrovidet if
transitional•nouasnq assigned to enols Homeless persons and families to
becoar as independent as possible and to move to permanent housing within a 24
month period, which may include up to 6 months of'follow-up services after
roe idents move to permanent housing; (2) community-based permanent housing for
persons with disabilities provided in conjunction with appropriate supportive
services designed to maximise the ability of such persons to live
independently; (3) innovative supportive housing that is designed to meet the
immediate and long-term needs of homeless individuals and/or families; or (4)
supportive services for homeless 4nd±7iduals not provide+ i.n conjunction with
supportive housing. Applicants who are applying for multiple components must
submit separate applications unless the applicant considers the components to
be mutually dependent, in which case they should be submitted in a single
application.
Authority: The Supportive Sousing Program is authorised by title IV,
subtitle c, of the McKinney Act, as amended by section 1403 of the 1992 Act.
An interim rule for the program in being published elsewhere in today,.
Federal Ssgistar. The funds made available under this NOFA are subject to the
requirements of those regulations.
allocation) A total of $150 million is available for supportive
Sousing. However, approximately $50 million has been set-aside for the
renewal of grants made under the former SAFAB program and Supportive Housing
Demonstration Program, including both Transitional Housing and Permanent
Housing 'or Handicapped Homeless, and for a technical assistance set-aside.
This NOFA is Dot an announcement for applications for renewal grants.
information concerning renewal grants for current grantees entering their last
year of funding under the former SAFAH program or supportive Housing
Demonstration Program, including both Transitional Housing and Permanent
Housing for the Handicapped Homeless, can be obtained from local HDD Field
offices.
In accordance with section 429 of the McKinney Act, as amended, BUD will
allocate not less than 25 percent of the tots: available funds to projects
that primarily serve homeless families with children, not lass than 25 percent
to projects that primarily serve homeless persons with disabilities and not
less than 10 percent for supportive services not provided in conjunction with
supportive housing. After applications are rated and ranked, based on the
criteria described below, BUD will determine if the conditionally selected
projects achieve these minimum percentages. if not, BUD will skip higher -
ranked applications in a category for which the minimum percent has been
achieved in order to achieve the minimum percent for this category. if there
i3 an insufficient number of conditionally selected applications in a category
to achieve its msnimum percent, the unused balance will be used for the next
highest -ranked approvable application in the competition.
Sligible activities: The funds are available for assistance in the form
of grants for: (1) acquisition; (2) rehabilitation; (3) now construction
where the applicant demonstrates that the costs associated with new
construction are substantially less than the costs associated with
rehabilitation or the applicant provides evidence of lack of available
appropriate units that could be rehabilitated at a cost less than new
construction; (4) leasing costs; (5) operating costo; and (6) supportive
services costs. Assistance for leasing, operating, and supportive services
costs will be made for a period of up to five years. Applicants may apply for
one or more than oae eligible activity.
Applicants may not receive assistance to replace funds provided by any
State or local government to assist homeless persons. A proposal for an
existing project will be considered for assistance only if it will increase
the number of homeless persons served or provide additional supportive
services. HUD will only fund the portion of the project that will expand the
program. organisation@ that are currently leasing properties through the
single Family Property Disposition program may request fundr• to purchase the
property to use for purposes eligible under this program.
Shelter Plae case
PozVMW3- The purpose of the Shelter Plus care (s+C) program is to
provide long-term rental assistance, in connection with supportive -services
funded from sources other than this program, to homeless persons with
disabilities. Assistance is targeted primarily to homeless persons who are
living in places not ordinarily intended for human habitation or in emergency
shelters and are seriously mentally ills have chronic problems with alcohol,
drugs, or bothl or have acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS) and related
diseaseal and the families of such persons. T!`- grogram is designed tz allow
applicants to provide housing in a variety of settings, such as group settings
or individual units in the community. Housing also may be provided in one
setting with intensive supportive services followed by more independent
housing with fewer supportive services, provided that eligible participants
receive rental assistance on a permanent basis. Appropriate supportive
services designed to enable participants to achieve and maintain independent
living must be made available to the proposed participants.
Rligible applicantes states, units of general local government, public
housing agencies (PHAs) and Indian tribes. Applicants other than States and
state Pne may subsdt only one s+C application. A state or State PHA may
submit applications for more than one jurisdiction but must submit a separate
application for each and may only submit one application for each
jurisdiction. Applications may include proposals for one a+C component or for
a combination of components. No one application may request more than 010
million.
Campomantss The S+c program provides long-term rental assistance
through four aamponents. The four components ares
1) Tenant -based Rental Assistance 1TRAi. which provides grants for
rental assistance over a five-year period. Participants reside in housing of
their choice, except that, where necessary to facilitate the coordination of
supportive services, grant recipients may require participants to .Live in a
specific area for their entire period of participation or in a specific
structure for the first year and in a @pacific area for the remainder of their
period of participation.
2) sooneor-based Rental Assistansce tsRAs. which provides grants for
rental assistance through contracts with sponsor organisations, over a five-
year period. A sponsor may be a private, nonprofit organisation or a
cc®unity mental health agency established as a public nonprofit organization.
Participants reside in housing owned or leased by the sponsor. Applicants
must identify in their applications the nonprofit sponsor(s) and the housing
sites) to be provided.
3) Proiact-based Rantal Assistance iPRAi, which provides grants for
rental assistance, through contracts between the grant recipient and owners of
existing structures, where the owners agree to lease the subsidized units to,
or on behalf of, participants. Rental subsidies are provided for a period of
five or ten years. To be eligible for 10 years of rental subsidies, the owner
must complete, at his or her expense, at least $3,000 of rehabilitation for
each unit (including the unites prorated share of work to be accomplished on
coe®on areas or systems), to make the structure decent, safe and sanitary.
The rehabilitation must be completed within 12 months of the date of the grant
agreement.
4) section 8 moderate Rehabilitation for single Room occuonacv
Dwellings for Homeless individuals isRof, which provides grants for rental
assistance in connection with the moderate rehabilitation of an,:, housing
units. Resources to fund the cost of rehabilitating the dwellings must be
obtained from other sources. However, the rental assistance covers operating
expenses of the rehabilitated SRO units, including debt service for
rehabilitation financing, provided the monthly rental assis•.nce per unit does
not exceed the fair market rent for a rehabilitated SRO unit. Assistance is
available for ten years. No single application may receive assistance for
more than 100 units.
or turnoses of :his competition, applicant States. units cf ?eneral
local government and"Indian tribes must subcontract with a PRA .o aaminseter
the S+C/820 assistance. At- such time as a system is in place to allow
applicants other than PSAs to administer the assistance, a subcontract will no
longer be required. unlike last years competition, Appendices 31 and 34 of
HUD Handbook 7420.3 will not be used to calculate bass and contract rents or
to determine eligible rehabilitation costs for the SRO component. This
information will be specified in the application package and technical
assistance materials.
anthoritys The Shelter Pius care program is authorized by title Zv,
subtitle P, of the McKinney Act (42 U.S.c. 114031, as amended by section 1406
of the 1.992 Act. A final rule for the Shelter Plus Care program, which
incorporates changes made by the 1992 Act, is being published elsewhere in
today•s ruderal Register. Funds made available under this NOFA are subject to
the requirements of that rule.
Allocations Approximately 5300 million is available for assistance
under the Shelter Plus Care program. Unlike the 1992 S+C funding, separate
allocations for each component have not been made. In accordance with section
459(a) of the McKinney Act, as amended by the 1992 Act, HUD will allocate at
least 10 percent of the available funds for each component. After
applications are rated and ranked, based on the criteria described below, HUD
will determine if the conditionally selected projects achieve these minimum
percentages. if necessary, HUD will skip higher -ranked applications for a
component for which the minimum percent has been achieved in order to achieve
the minimum percent !or another component. If there -a an insufficient number
of approvable applications in a component to achieve its minimum percent, the
unused balance will be used for the next highest -ranked approvable application
in the competition.
section 455(a)(2) of the McKinney Act includes geographic diversity an
one of the selection criteria. In order to achieve geographic diversity, HUD
will determine, after applications are rated and ranked, whether each of the
four Census Regions contains at least three conditionally selected
applications. :f not, HUD will substitute the highest ranked approvable
applications in the necessary Census Region for applications at the bottom of
the list of conditionally selected applications.
Eligible Activities: S+C funds may be used only for rental assistance,
including security deposits, and for costs related to administering the rental
assistance. up to eight percent of the amount awarded may be used for such
administrative costs. Recipients must make available supportive services that
are at least equal in value to the aggregate amount of rental assistance
provided by the grant.
Section 8 Moderate Rehabilitation Program for Single Ro® Occupancy Dwellings
for Homeless individuals
Purposes The purpose of the section 8 Moderate Rehabilitation Program
for single Room Occupancy (sw) Dwellings for Homeless Individuals is to
provide rental assistance on behalf of homeless individuals in connection with
the moderate rehabilitation of SRO dwellings. Resources to fund the cost of
rehabilitating the dwellings must be obtained from other sources. However,
the rental assistance covers operating expenses of the SRO housing, including
debt service for rehabilitation financing, provided the monthly rental
assistance per unit does not exceed the moderate rehabilitation fair market
rent for an SRO unit, as established by HUD.
Eligible applicants: Public housing authorities (PHA), Indian housing
authorities (IHA), and private nonprofit organizations. Applicants must
submit a separate application for each sito for which assistance is requested.
For purposes of this competition, private nonprofit organizations must
subcontract with a PHA to administer the SRO assistance. At Such time as a
system :s in place to allow nonprofit applicants to administer the assistance,
a subcontract will no longer he required.
Aetbority: This program is authorized by section 441 of the McKinney
Act (42 O.B.C. 11401), as amended by section 1405 of the 1992 Act. An interim
rule amending the program regulations (24 CPR part 882, subpart H) -is being
published simultaneously with this NOFA. Funds made available under this NOPA
are subject to the requirements of the amended regulations.
Allocations Approximately $115 million is available for assistance
under the section 8 sRo program. HOD estimates that this $115 million will
assist approximate:, 2,000 units over 10 -year funding period. The
national competition procedures established for the program by section 441 of
the MCRiuney Act apply, rather than the -fair share- allocation procedures
required for most a4sisted housing funds under section 213(d) of the Housing
and Community Development Act of 1974. However, no city cc urban county may
have projects receiving a total of more than 10 percent of the assistance to
be provided under this program. in addition, no single applicant shall
receive assistance for more than 100 units.
Eligible Actititieet SRO grants may only be used for rental assistance
and for administering the rental assistance. The grant will be for a 10 year
period.
The McKinney Act requires that first priority for occupancy of SRO
moderate rehabilitation units shall be given to homeless individuals. This
requirement, however, is not meant to eliminate the rights of current tenants
to remain in the building after it is rehabilitated. Due to limited resources
and considerations of relative need, HOD will only provide assistance for
units that are vacant or units that are occupied by individuals eligible for
section 8 assistance. However, in order to be considered for funding, at
least 50 percent of the units to be assisted must be vacant. in addition, as
the currently occupied assisted units become vacaut, eligible homeless persons
must be given first priority for such units.
Maxim and minimm cost Unites Under the McKinney Act, HOD is
required to publish the SRO per unit rehabilitation cost limit each year to
take into account changes in construction costs. For purposes of Fiscal Year
1993 funding, the coot Limitation is raised from 815,500 to $15,700 per unit
to take into account increases in construction costs during the past 12 -month
period. This increase is made in accordance with 24 CPR 882.805(g), Initial
contract rents.
Section 127 of the Department of Housing and urban Development Reform
Act of 1989 (Pub. L. 101-235, approved December 15, 1989) revised the minimum
amount of rehabilitation required. A unit to be assisted must need a minimum
expenditure of $3,000 of eligible rehabilitation, including the unit's
prorated share of work to be accomplished on common areas or systems.
unlike previous section 8 SRO program competitions, Appendices 31 and 34
of HOD Handbook 7420.3 will not be used to calculate base and contract rents
or to determine eligible rehabilitation costs. This information will be
specified in the application package and technical assistance materials.
Program smeary
The chart below summarizes key aspects of each of the programs discussed
above.
srmr
aaspose:3vs
maamsmm
s®tass
pros smo
massa subtitle C of Title 1V
of the stawart 9.
subtitle r of Title !V
of the Steven a.
section 441 of the
Msslnney Nameless MCiinOey ssmsiese stwart a. Mes:inmey
aaseless AestetaMeiAssistanceact, as Assistance Act, u Act, u ammedadamendedamended
as 24 Cfa 2dFinai 24 par! sea,
i
nte.rlmmrulesI
March 15, 1993
ValeI
March 1S, 199]
a,
an amended
March 1S 199]
late@
9 units of general
states
Waits of general
pay
privatei
APPLUM(sl
local government
public housing
ocai goverment
Tribes
nonprofit
pus) pay organisations
agencies
private nonprofit
organisations
CMaCtI :hat are
public nonprofit
or anisations
Transitional
bous•
Tenant-based sao housing
petmaeent housing prooJeect-based
for disabled a smo-based
persome
Znwwative
supportives ng
s
services not in
conjunction with
supportive
housing
cental assistance a Rental
3.ZGZ=
Rehabilitation•
New construation Assistance
aCTSVZIM Leasing
operating coats
supportive
services
8ameLose persons aomeless disabled aamsless
PONOLRTZM individuals individuals
Nameless disabled section s
individuals and eligible current
their families uVents.
9M9asas Bcrosless persons nameless persons what NIAUVMsUZAL
C"MsZOMMUM
with disabilities ace seriouslysessionsfamiliesmentallyill
with children have rhronic
problame with
alcoboi and/or
drugs
have AIDS and
relattd diseases
INIT.LAL 15 -.years
TRRJI of
ABNISTANCB
New Program Requirements
5 years: TRA, SRA, and 110 years
PRA if no rehabilitation
10 years:•SRA and PRA if
In addition to specific changes that are reflected in the above
descriptions, there are several fiscal year 1993 legislative changes which
affect the programs included in this NOFA. All programs are required to
involve at least one homeless or formerly homeless person on the board of
directors or an equivalent policymaking entity of the recipient, to the extent
that such entity considers and makes policies and decisions regarding any
project, supportive service, or assistance provided under the program. This
requirement is waived if the applicant in unable to most the requirements
under the preceding sentence and presents a plan for HUD approval to otherwise
consult with homeless or formerly homeless individuals in considering and
making such policies and decisions. In addition, to the maximum extent
practicable, recipients must involve homeless individuals and families,
through employment, volunteer services, or otherwise, in constructing,
rehabilitating, maintaining, and operating the project and in providing
supportive services. Further, supportive Housing and section 8 SRO recipients
who are terminating assistance to participants because cf a violation of
program requirements mus: provide a formal process that recognizes the rights
of individuals receiving assistance to due process of law. shelter Plus care
recipients are already required to provide such a process.
Application Requirements and Comprehensive Housing Affordability strategy
The specific application requirements will be specified in the
application package for each program. This package includes all required
forme and certifications, including those certifications required in
connection with the Comprehensive Housing Affordability strategy (CHAS), as
follows:
Applicants that are states or units of general local govermaat: The
applicant must have a HUD -approved CHAS for PY 1993 and must submit a
certification that it is following, and the application for funding is
consistent with, the HUD -approved CHAS for FY 1993. (In the case of a state
applicant for the shelter Plus Care program, the state must also submit a
certification by the unit of general local government in which the proposed
project will be located that the states application for funding is consistent
with the unit of general local government's HUD -approved CHAS for FY 1993.
This certification is o^ly required, however, if the unit of general local
government is required to have, or has, a complete CHAS, or if it is
authorized to use an abbreviated CHAS and is applying for shelter Plus Care
assistance under this NOFA [and therefore has, or will have, an abbreviated
CHAS for fiscal year 1993 for that program).)
Applicants that are not states or units of general local government:
The applicant must submit a certification by the jurisdiction in which the
proposed project will be located that the jurisdiction is following, and the
applicant's application for funding is consistent with, the jurisdiction's
HUD -approved CHAS for FY 1993. The certification must be made by the unit of
general local government if it is required to have, or has, a complete CHAS,
or if it is authorized to use an abbreviated CHAS and is applying for the same
program under this NOFA (and therefore has, or will have, an abbreviated CHAS
for fiscal year 1993 for that program). otherwise the certification may be
made by the state, or if the project will be located in a unit of general
local government authorized to use an abbreviated CHAS, by the unit of general
local government if it is willing to prepare such a CHAS.
n Samoa and the Northern Mariana islands. These entities are not
d to have a CHAS or to make CHAS certifications. An application by ah
tribe or other applicant for a project which will be located on a
10
at"tion of ao :ndiaa tribe will set .rignira-a cortiiiaatioa by the-:_ibsthe••atasr. ..aowwr; whets as =sdias tribe -is, tbo.appilamm for a proleaa
niU.mot bw-locate os -•a reservation.. the regdirosast for a
Ceraifieatioe uta r -the preeediag paragr"i will ..apply.
11
7 Q0 • A i • ~W.. AA/f •...l...w ......:.............
All CHAS cartificat:cns must be made by the public official responsible
for supmittinq the CHAS to HUD. All CHAS certifications must be submitted as
part of the application by the application submission deadline set forth in
4. this NOPA, except as provided in the next paragraph. THE REQUIRED CHAS MUST
THEREFORE HAVE BEEN SUBMITTED MORE THAN 60 DAYS BEFORE THE APPLICATION
SUBMISSION DEADLINE, SINCE HUD HAS 60 DAYS TO REVIEW AND APPROVE THE CHAS.
WHERE THE CERTIFICATION OF CONSISTENCY IS PERMITTED TO BE SUBMITTED AFTER THE
APPLICATION SUBMISSION DEADLINE, AS DESCRIBED IN THE NEXT PARAGRAPH, THE CHAS
MUST BE SUBMITTED FOR APPROVAL IN TIME FOR THE CERTIFICATION TO BE MADE BY THE
LATER DATE. IN NO EVENT WILL. AN APO"eATION BE CONSIDER" IF THE CHAS HAS NOT
BEEN SUBMITTED FOR APPROVAL BY THE APPLICATION SUBMISSION DEADLINE.
Due to the relatively short lead time for the supportive Housing
competition, if the required CHAS has been submitted by the application
submission deadline but has not yet been approved by BUD, the deadline will
not be applied to the certification of consistency. Instead, the application
must include a written statement from the public official responsible for
submitting the CHAS that the jurisdiction has submitted a CHAS for FY 1993 for
BUD approval and that the application for funding is consistent with the CHAS.
if BUD approves the CHAS, the required certification that the jurisdiction is
following, and the application is consistent with, a HUD -approved CHAS for FY
1993 can be submitted at that time, if within the three month deadline for
submission of additional project information. (See the section in this MOFA
on Grant Award Process.) The grant will not be awarded unless the CHAS is
approved and the required certification is made. if the grant is not awarded,
the funds will be made available in the next competition for the applicable
program. The CHAS regulations are published in 24 CFR part 91.
Application Selection Process
The Department will use the following review, rating, and ranking
process for each of the four competitions to be conducted under this NOTA.
1. Review, Applications will be reviewed to ensure that they most the
following:
a) Form, time and adequacy. Applications must be filed in the form
prescribed by HUD in the application process and within the time established
in this NOPA.
b) Applicant eligibility. The applicant and project sponsor, if
relevant, must be eligible to apply for the specific program.
c) Eligible population to be served. The population proposed to be
served must be homeless (or in the case of section 8 SRO, either homeless or
Section 8 eligible) and meet other eligibility requirements of the specific
program.
d) Eligible activities.^ activities for which assistance is
requested must be eligible underspecific program.
e) Outstanding audit fine No organization that receives
assistance may have an outstanding oL igation to HUD that is in arrears or for
which a payment schedule has not been agreed to, or whose response to an audit
is overdue or unsatisfactory.
f) Fair housing and equal opportunity. organizations that receive
assistance through the application must be in compliance with applicable civil
rights laws and Executive orders.
g) vacancy rate. For the Section 8 SRO program, at least 50 percent
of the units to be assisted at any one site must be vacant at the time of
application.
2. Rating and Ranking. Applications will be rated and ranked, with a
maximum of 1,000 points, based on the criteria listed in paragraphs 3 through
6 below. The five core selection criteria described in paragraph 3 apply to
each of the programs covered by this NOPA and account for 850 of the 1000
points -n each competition. The remaining 150 points in each competition will
be awarded under criteria that are specific to each of the programs, as
described in paragraphs 4-6.
To be eligible for award, applicants must receive at least 500 points
and must receive points under each of the core selection criteria except for
criterion. 3e, -Coordination with Other Programs.~ Shelter Plus Care
applicants also must receive points under the two criteria specified in
12
oaragranb S. -services to ?argeted Disaniriti'es- and "supportive service
cc unntsr•..• supportive Housinq applicants must also receive points under
the^ -Coat Effsetivenese- criterion specified in paragraph 4, and those
supportive Housing applicants that are applying as innovative supportive
housing projects also must achieve points under the *Innovative quality of
proposal* criterion specified in paragraph 4. Supportive Housing applicants
do not have to receive points under the Leveraging- criterion specified in
paragraph 4 to be eligible for an award. section a SRA applicants do not have
to receive points under the program specific criteria specified in paragraph 6
to be eligible f-- an award. whether or not an ap;lication is selectow ill
depend on its overall ranking when compared to other applications for funding
under that program.
For Shelter Plus Care and Supportive Housing, in cases where the
applicant requests assistance for more than one project within one
application, the projects will not to rated separately. Rather, the
application will be rated as a whole. (For Section S SRA, only one project is
allowed per application.) For all programs, in the event of a tie between
applicants, the applicant with the highest total points for criterion 3(a),
need, will be selected. in the event of a procedural error that, when
corrected, would result in selection of an otherwise eligible applicant during
the funding round under this NOVA, HUD may select that applicant when
sufficient funds become available.
3. are selection criteria.
al Nae". HUD will award up to 100 pointe based on the extent of need
or the project in the community and the applicant's demonstrated
understanding of the needs of the specific hameless populations) proposed to
be served. Ratings will be made based on the extent to which applicants
demonstrate:
1) Substantial unmet needs, particularly among the target population
who are living in places not ordinarily meant for human habitation (e.g.,
streets) and in emergency shelters, based on reliable data from surveys of
homeless populations, the Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS),
or other reports or data -gathering mechanisms that directly support claims
made;
2) An understanding of the homeless population to be served and its
unmet housing and supportive service needs.
b) Tarantino to Perions Living on the streets and in Lmeraencv
rsheltes. HUD will award up to 200 pointe based on:
1) The extent to which the project will serve homeless families and/or
individuals living in places not ordinarily scant for human habitation
streets, parks, abandoned buildings, automobiles, under bridges, :n
ransportation facilities) and those who reside in emergency shelters: and
2) The likelihood that proposed plans for outreach and selection of
participants will result in these populations being served.
c) duality of Proiect Plan. HUD will award up to 300 points based on
the extent to which the application presents a clear, well -conceived and
thorough plan for assisting homeless persons achieve residential stability,
increased skills and/or income, and more influence over decisions that affect
their lives. Higher ratings will be assigned to those applications that
clearly describe:
1) How program participants will achieve residential stability,
including how available supportive services will help participants reach this
goal;
2) How program participants will increase their skill level and/or
income, including how available supportive services will help participants
reach this goal;
3) now program participants will be involved in making project
decisions that affect their lives, including how they will be involved in
selecting supportive services, establishing individual goals and developing
Plans to achieve these goals;
13
4) For supportive Housing applicants proposing to provide transitional
houping, how permanent affordable housing will be identified and made
available -to participants upon leaving the transitional housing, and how
participants will be provided necessary follow-up services to help -them
achieve stability in the permanent housing;
5) How the service needs of participants will be assessed on an ongoing
basis;
6) Sow the proposed housing, if any, will be managed and operated;
17) now participants will be assisted in assimilating into the community
through -tenons to neighborb-4 facilities, activities and services;
8) How and when the progress of participants toward meeting their
individual goals will be monitored and evaluated;
9) now and when the effectiveness of the overall project in achieving
its goals will be evaluated; and
10) now the proposed project will be implemented in a timely fashion.
d) capacity. HDD will award up to 200 points based on the extent to
which those who will be involved in carrying out the project have experience
in activities similar to those proposed in the application. Ratings will be
assigned based on the applicants prior performance with any HDD McKinney Act
grants and the extent to which the application demonst=ates experience in the
followi;.g areas:
1) Engaging the participation of homeless persons living in places not
ordinarily meant for human habitation and in emergency shelters;
2) Assessing the housing and supportive service needs of homeless
persons;
3) Accessing housing and relevant supportive service resources;
4) If applicable, contracting for and overseeing the rehabilitation or
construeion of housing;
5) If applicable, operating housing for homeless persons;
6) If applicable, administering a rental assistance program (including
supportive Housing applicants proposing to lease individual units;)
7) If applicable, providing supportive services for homeless persons;
8) Monitoring and evaluating the progress of persons toward meeting
their individual goals; and
9) Evaluating the overall effectiveness of a program and using•
evaluation results to make program improvements.
e) Coordination with other Proarams. HDD will award up to 50 points
based on the extent to which applicants demonstrate that they have coordinated
with Federal, state, local, private and other entities serving homeless
persons in the planning and operation of the project. such entities may
include shelter, transitional housing, health care, or social service
providers; providers funded through Federal initiatives (such as the PATH and
ACCESS programs administered by the D.S. Department of Health and Human
services); local planning coalitions or provider association@; or other
programs relevant to the local community. Higher points will ba given to
those applicants that can demonstrate that:
1) They are part of an ongoing community -wide planning process which is
designed to share information on available resources and reduce duplication
among programs that serve homeless persons; and
2) They have consulted directly with other providers regarding
coor"nation of services for project participants.
4. supportive Housina additional selection criteria.
f) leveraging. HDD will award up to 50 points based on the extent to
which resources from other public and private sources, including cash and the
value of third party contributions, have been committed to support the project
at the time of application. (NOTE; Any applicant who wishes to receive points
under this criterion must submit documentation of leveraged resources which
meets the requirements stated in the application. This is optional;
applicants who cannot, or choose not to, provide firm documentation of
recourcea an part of the application will forego any points for leveraging.)
g Cost Effectiveneee. HDD will award up to 50 points for cost
effectiveness. supportive housing projects will be rated based on the number
of new supportive housing beds made available in relation to the amount of HDD
14
undinq requested !or housing costs, when compared to other -ransiticnal :r
permanent acuaLng-projecrs. as applicaple, and when adjusted for high cost
areas'..- - Projects-ebat, an. their sole activity, are providing supportive
r.. services to homeless persons will be rated based on the amount requested from
HUD for supportive services in relation to the project•@ total budget for
supportive services.
h) Innovative quality of Proposal. HUD will award up to 50 points
based on the innovative quality of the proposal, when compared to other
applications and projects that have been ..:..ad in the past, '^ terms U.I.
11) Helping the hameless population to be served to reach residential
stability, increase their skill level and/or income and increase the influence
they have over decisions that affect their lives;
had (
2) A clear link between the innovation(@) and its proposed effect(@);
3) Its ability to be used as a model for other similar projects.
Applicants who have indicated is their applications that they are
applying under the innovative supportive housing component must receive points
under this criterion to be eligible for award.
5. shelter Plus Care additional selection criteria.
f) service to Targeted Disabilities. HUD will award up to 100 points
based on the number of individuals to be served who are seriously mentally
ill, have chronic alcohol and/or drug abuse problems, or have AIDS and related
diseases in relation to the total number of people that will be served.
9) Supportive Service Commitments. HUD will award up to 50 points
based on the extent to which commitments to provide supportive services are
available at the time of application. (ROTE: Applicants who are selected for
funding will be required to provide supportive services at least equal in
value to the aggregate amount of rental assistance over the term of the
grant.)
Applicants must receive points under both of these criteria to be
eligible for award.
6. Section 8 nouarate Rehabilitation Program !or single Room Ocgupanev
Dwellings for Homeless Individuals additional selection criteria
f) Availability of vacant units. HUD will award up to 100 Points to
SRO applicants based on the percentage of units (beyond the required 50
percent) proposed for assistance which are vacant at the time of application.
q) Supportive service commitments. HUD will award up to 50 Points
based on the extent to which commitm ate to provide supportive services are
available at the time of application. (ROTE: Any applicant who wishes to
receive points under this criterion swat submit documentation of supportive
service resources which meet the requirements stated in the application. This
is optional; applicants who cannot, or choose not to, will forego any points
for this criterion.)
An applicant does not have to receive points under either of theme
criterion to be eligible for an award.
Grant award Process
HDD will notify applicants with the highest ranked applications that can
be funded with the dollars available for that competition that they have been
conditionally selected. BUD expects to announce theme selections within
approximately 60 days of the application submission deadline. such applicants
will be subsequently notified of the additional project information necessary
for grant award and the date of the three month deadline for submission of
such information. If an applicant is unable to meet any conditions for grant
award within the specified timeframe, HUD reserves the right not to award
funds and to use the funds available in the next competition for the
applicable program.
15
Technical Deficiencies
BUD will notify an applicant, in writing, of any curable technical
deficiencies in the application. The applicant must submit corrections in
accordance with the information specified in HUD's letter within 14 calendar
days from the date of HUD's letter. if the applicant fails to submit the
corrections within the 14 -day cure period, BUD will disqualify the
application.
Curable technical deficiencies are items that ere not necessary for miD
review under the selection criteria (e.g., failure to submit a required
certification). Applicants may not submit items that would improve the
substantive quality of the application after the application deadline.
Technical Assistance
In order to afford applicants every opportunity to submit a ratable
application, prior to the application deadline, BUD field office personnel
will be available to provide advice and guidance to potential applicants on
application requirements and program policies. Following selection of
applications, HUD field office personnel will be available to assist
applicants in clarifying or confirming information that in a prerequisite to
the offer of a grant agreement by BUD. However, between the application
deadline and the announcement of selections, BUD will accept no information
that would affect the rating or ranking of applications.
other Matters
Paperwork Reduction Act
The information collection requirements contained in this HOPA have been
approved by the office of Managament and Budget (OHS) under section 3540(h) of
the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980 (44 u.s.C. 3504(h)), and assigned on
control numbers 2506-0131, 2506-0112, and 2506-0118.
Documentation and Public.Access Reauirements., Applicant/RecinientDieelosureee
Ss tiOn 102. HUD Reform Act
Documentation and public access reauiremente. HUD will ensure that
documentation and other information regarding each application submitted
pursuant to this HOFA are sufficient to indicate the basis upon which
assistance was provided or denied. This material, including any letters of
support, will be made available for public inspection for a five-year period
beginning not less than 30 days after the award of the assistance. Material
will be made available :n accordance with the Freedom of :nformation Act (5
U.S.C. 552) and HUD's implementing rugulations at 24 CFR part 15. :n
addition, HUD will include t. -a recipients of assistance pursuant to this NOPA
in its quarterly Federal Register notice of all recipients of BUD assistance
awarded on a competitive basis. (see 24 CPR 12.14(a) and 12.16(b), and the
Notice published in the Federal Register on January 16, 1992 (57 FR 1942), for
further information on these documentation and public access requirements.)
Disclosures. BUD will make available to the public for five years all
applicant disclosure reports (BUD Form 2880) submitted in connection with this
NO.A. update reports (also Form 2880) will be made available along with the
applicant disclosure reports, but in no case for a period generally less than
three years. All reports --both applicant disclosures and updates --will be
made available in accordance with the Freedom cf information Act (5 U.S.C.
552) and BUD's implementing regulations at 24 CFR part 15. (Bee 24 CFR part
15, subpart C, and the notice published in the Federal Register on January 16,
1992 (57 FR 1542), for further information on these disclosure requirements.)
Prohibition aaainet Lobbvina Activities
The use of funds awarded under this NOFA is subject to the disclosure
requirements and prohibitions of section 319 of the Department of interior and
Related Agencies Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 1990 (31 U.S.C. 1352) and
the implementing regulations at 24 CFR part 87. These authorities prohibit
recipients of Federal contracts, grants, or loans from using appropriated
16
fusds tar lobbying the executive or logidUtive I ban of the Federal
90VOgummM-am eenme um wsth a sppaaaaific contrast; grant, or loan. The
pecIdUtlon almorcosarr the•awardisg 09 contracts, grants, a ative
agresosnts: or loans unless the recipient ban made an acceptable certification
r gardinq lobbying. Under 24 CPR pact 67, applicants, recipients, and
subreai teats of assistance axeeedia 4100,000 must certify that ne Federal
funds have or will be spout on labbyin9 activities in eenneeties with the
assistance.
Probibitien ",tinst r-Mmi sup --scanel
section 112 of the Bowing and Usbam Development Reform Act of 1969
IFAEOM Act) added a now section 13 to the Department of flowing and Urban
Development Act (42 U.B.C. 3531). Section 13 contains two provisions
concerning efforts to influence BUD•s decisions with respect to financial
assistance. The first imposes disclosure requirements on thaw who are
typically involved in these efforts--thwe who pay others to influence this
award of assistance or the taking of a managemat action by the Department Md
these who are paid to provide the influence. The second restricts the palawt
Of tees to those who are paid to influence the award of BUD assistance, it the
tees are tied to the number of housing units received or are based on the
amount of assistance received, or it they are contingent upon the receipt of
assistance. section 13 was implemented at 24 CPR part 66. Appendix A of the
rule contains example of activities covered by the rule. Any questions
concerning the role should be directed to the office of Ethics, Room 2158,
Department of Rousing and Urban Development, 451 seventh street BY,
Washington. 2C 204101 (2021 705-3615 TDD/Voice. Min is not a tell -tree
number.) Forms necessary for compliance with the rule may be obtained from
the local BOD office.
Pmhibitien —aiat adwa 3w/ermati"" es 11 iw DenisLM
section 103 of the nature Act proscribes the communication of certain
information by M employees to persons sot authorised to receive that
information during the selection process for the award of assistance. BUD•s
regulations implementing section 103 we at 24 CPR part 4. In accordance with
the requirements of section 103, BUD employees involved in the review at
applications and in the making of 9 -oda decisions are restrained by 24 CPR
part 4 from providing advance information to any person lothor than an
authorised employee of BUD) concerrpneitnig funding decisions, or tram otherwise
giving
sitam applicant an unfair
should confine
thtLve
eir
Persons who apply tar
eat
areas permitted by 24CPRpart 4. Applicants who bave queestions shonld
irLes to the j
contact the BUD office of Ethics at the address or telephone number in the
preceding paragraph.
MMUMMMMUMM
A Finding of no significant mpeat with respect to the environment ban
been made in accordance with EUD regulations at 24 CPR Part 50, which
implement section 102121(C) of the national Environmental Policy Act of 1969.
Thewkdayys in ttheaofficeiof theRules
Dlic
Doocckettion
clock,toficelof the.
and
awera130
p.m.
Counsel, Department of Sousing and Urban Development, Rom 10276, 451 seventh
street ON, Washington, DC 20410.
Federali® nz.cntiae order
The General Counsel, as the Designated official undsr section 6(a) of
mewative order 12612, ZIdgIAUM, bas determined provisions in the sepDostive
Sousing and shelter Plus Cara program rules requiesng governmental app ants
to wwas the responsibilities for environmental review, decisionmaking, and
action under the national Eoviroamental Policy Act and other anviroamental
authorities bas Federalism implications. While the aettgameat of these
responsibilities under section 104(9) of the mousing and Community Development
Act at 1974 is discretionary with EM, it is authorised and clearly the intent
of section 443 of the nounney Act. Therefore, the policy is not subject to
further cavi" under the order.
Family rsacutiva order
17
The General counsel, as the Designated official under executive order
12606, The.Paeilv,.has determined that this document may 'rave potential for
significant impact on the formation, maintenance, and general well-being of
the family. Funding under the NOFA will be used to provide housing and
supportive services to homeless families. Participation of families in the
programs can be expected to support family values through helping families
remain together by enabling them to live in decent, safe, and sanitary housing
and to acquire the skills and means to live independently in mainstream
American society. since the impact: upon the family is considered beneficial,
no further review under order is necesr-y.
BUD FINLD OFFIC38s
ALABAMA Jasper Boatright, Beacon Ridge Tower, 600 Beacon
Pkwy. West, Suite 3000, Birmingham, AL 35209-
3144; (205) 2P0-7672.
I A9}A Colleen Craig, Federal Bldg., 222 W. 8th Ave.,
064, Anchorage, AR 99513-7537; (907) 271-3669.
ARIZONA Diane Domzalski, 400 North Fifth St., suite
1600, Phoenix AS 85004-2361; (602) 379-4754.
ARKANSAS Billy M. Parsley, Lafayette Bldg., 523
Louisiana, Ste. 200, Little Rock, AR 72201-3707;
501) 324-6375.
CALIFORNIA (Southern) Herbert L. Roberts, 1615 W. Olympic Blvd., Los
Angeles, CA 90014-3801; (213) 251-7235.
Northern) Gordon B. McKay, 450 Goldengate Ave., P.O. Box
36003, San Francisco, CA 94102-3448; (415) 556-
5576.
CARISSEAN Carmen R. Cabrera, 159 Carlos Chardon Ave., San
Juan, PR 00918-1804; (809) 766-5576.
COLORADO Barbara Richards, Exec. Tower Bldg., 1405 Curtis
St., Denver, Co 80202-2349; (303) 844-3811.
CONNECTICUT Daniel Rolesar, 330 Main St., Hartford, CT
06106-1860; (203) 240-4508.
DELAWARE John Kane, Liberty sq. Pldq., 105 S. 7th St.,
Philadelphia, PA 19106-3392; (215) 597-2665.
DISTRICT of COLUMBIA James H. McDaniel, 820 lot St. Nz, Washington,
and ND and VA suburbs) DC 20002; (202) 275-0994.
FLORIDA Jame N. Nichol, 301 w. Bay St., suite 2200,
Jacksonville, FL 32202; (904) 232-2626.
G o GIA Charles N. Straub, Mussell Fed. Bldg., Roam 270,
75 Spring St. SW, ?.tlanta, GA 30303-3388; (4Ct)
331-5139.
BANA II Patty A. Nicnolas, 7 Waterfront Plaza, Suite
500, 500 Ala Moana Blvd., Honolulu, HI 96813-
4918; (808) 541-1327.
IDAHO John G. Bonham, 520 SN 6th Ave., Portland, OR
97204-1596; (503) 326-7018.
I:.LINOIS James S. Barnes, 77 W. Jackson Blvd., Chicago,
IL 60604; (312) 353-2977.
INDIANA Robert F. Poffenberger, 151 N. Delaware St.,
Indianapolis, IN 46204-2526; (317) 226-5169.
l8