HomeMy WebLinkAboutRDA Min 2003-08-25 I I I 6-23-03 / 7-28-03 / 8-25-03 Seal Beach, California June 23, 2003 The Redevelopment Agency regular meeting was canceled by action of the City Council. Seal Beach, California July 28, 2003 Redevelopment Agency regular meeting was canceled due to ack of business items in need of consideration. Seal Beach, California August 25, 2003 The Redevelopment Agency of the City of Seal Beach met in regular adjourned session at 6:52 p.m. with Chairman Campbell calling the meeting to order. ROLL CALL Present: Chairman Campbell Agencymembers Antos, Doane, Larson, Yost Absent: None Also present: Mr. Bahorski, Executive Director Mr. Barrow, City Attorney Mr. Whittenberg, Director of Development Services Ms. Yeo, City Clerk APPROVAL OF AGENDA Antos moved, second by Doane, to approve the order of the agenda as presented. AYES: NOES: Antos, Campbell, Doane, Larson, Yost None Motion carried PUBLIC COMMENTS Chairman Campbell declared Public Comments to be open. Ms. Joyce parque, Seal Beach, said she was concerned with the program on the agenda with regard to grants and loans for Agency approval in that an area newspapet'"reported that Cypress also has a Redevelopment Agency, their program is somewhat different from that of Seal Beach, their four person households have an income cap of $73,000, in Seal Beach it is around $90,000, it had been stated that this program was the 8-25-03 median income of all of Orange County, how can Cypress have a different program, the Cypress downpayment program is 17.5 percent of the home purchase price not to exceed $25,000, their loan program for home improvements is $20,000, their $10,000 forgivable loan is 10 percent for each year that one stays in the property, in Seal Beach it is free, how can Seal Beach give away more money when it supposedly based on the I median income in Orange County. Ms. parque stated that the Trailer Park residents can receive $10,000 for repairs can then sell their residence for a large profit, and asked if they can come back the following year and request another $10,000 of grant money. She said there should be a reasonable program, her belief is that Civic Stone developed the guidelines, last year they were paid $43,000 to just receive the applications yet loan agents do not get paid until everything is completed. Ms. parque made reference to the letter that was sent to the loan applicants, the Mobile Park Resident ownership Program should have nothing to do with the loans or the grant monies, those are two different programs, both could be tied to the free money which should not be, the Mobile Park Resident ownership Program is totally different, she would be interested to know who was instructed to send out the letter, two to three days before they were to hav~ an election as well, then the Mayor went to the Park and told people they had to sign for the MPROP, the million dollars that was loaned to complete the Trailer Park purchase and now the City is trying to get it back, it is said that one person was required to sign in support of the MPROP by Civic Stone. To that she said that that money had nothing to do with home improvements, the Mayor should not have gone to the Trailer Park, sits on the Linc board, as Mayor should be I protecting the interest of the taxpayers, and claimed this is a conflict of interest. She asked how many of the people who have received a loan or grant are families, it is supposed to be sixty-two percent, how is it known that they are poor people, this program needs to be looked at, if the Cypress program is better the City should go with it, they are in Orange County as well. Ms. Sue Corbin, Seal Beach, agreed with the prior speaker, no one should interfere with the Trailer Park elections, not take sides or try to influence, the residents who are making application for loans should not be required to sign something they do not want to sign, the public trust should not be abused, members of the Council have to live with themselves. There being no further comments, Chairman Campbell declared the Public Comment period to be closed. AGENCY REORGANIZATION Selection of Chairman Agencymember Doane nominated Dr. Yost to be the Agency Chair for 2003/2004. Doane moved, second by Campbel~ to close nominations. AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: Antos, Campbell, Doane, Larson None Yost Motion carried I Dr. Yost assumed the Chairmanship and in turn presented Agencymember Campbell with a commemorative plaque in appreciation for her services as Chairman during 2002/2003. Agencymember Campbell mentioned that she has been involved with the Trailer Park for a long time, she feels that what was done for the Park worked well. She explained that the 8-25-03 I MPROP repays the money that came from the Agency for the Bridge Loan, the MPROP pays back the $1 million into that fund, so there is a connection, and noted that she had visited the Trailer Park this past weekend as a member of the Linc board to explain the MPROP to the people because it is important, the person making accusations was not there, some of the Park residents think that they are holding the MPROP hostage, which is amazing, she had nothing to do with their elections. Selection of vice-Chairman Agencymember Doane nominated Mrs. Campbell as Vice-Chairman for 2003/2004. Agencymember Campbell as well as Chairman Yost nominated Agencymember Doane who declined the nomination. Chairman Yost declared nominations closed and the vote of the Agency to declare Agencymember Campbell Vice- Chair was as follows: AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: Doane, Larson, Yost Antos Campbell Motion carried APPROVAL OF MINUTES Larson moved, second by Doane, to approve the minutes of the regular meeting of April 28, 2003. AYES: NOES: Antos, Campbell, Doane, Larson, Yost None Motion carried I ADDITIONAL FUNDING SOURCES - HOME IMPROVEMENT PROGRAMS Chairman Yost inquired if he would be allowed to vote on this item if it is a citywide program, the response was yes. The Director of Development Services presented the staff report, noted that the report describes the history of the rehabilitation loan program up to this point, indicates that all of the available funds have been obligated, there are presently no additional monies to fund projects that are in the process, it is not possible to totally fund them for the work to be undertaken, there are ten applicants in that situation where they have started through the process but can not complete it due to the prior obligation of funds. He noted that the staff report does discuss the issue of the MPROP, what effect that would have on the Agency funds if that program was funded, the Redevelopment Agency would be reimbursed which would then flow back into the different rehab programs that the Council and Agency approved in May of 2002, those funds would be sufficient to fund the ten applicants that are currently in the process with about $400,000 remaining that could be obligated to future projects. The Director mentioned that there is an attempt to find other funding sources for these projects, assuming that the MPROP may never be approved, a State program called CalHome has been identified, the application for same is due to be submitted by October 3rd. He mentioned that included with the staff report are two Resolutions, one requesting a loan from the General Fund in the amount of $3,500 to cover the cost of the consultant preparing the CalBome application, the other authorizes the filing of the application and authorizes the Executive Director to execute other necessary documents if the Agency is funded under that program. Be noted that there is a limit as to the amount that cities can request under the CalHome program, if less than four hundred thousand population the amount can not be more than $500,000, as indicated the City would be requesting $498,000, the funds flow to the City and can then be used for the Agency housing I 8-25-03 program as it currently exists, the State program basically says that the cities can develop their own program as to how the funds are used, it is hoped that this may be a potential funding source to accommodate those projects that are now on hold and allow them to proceed. The Director mentioned also that there have been some discussions with the County Housing/Community Development Block Grant program as there are some monies available for what is called emergency repair work, there are a couple of applications that may fall within that category criteria. The main concern is to try to find a way to get the people who are in the process funded so that they can proceed with the work that they want to have done. Agencymember Campbell noted that the money that the applicants borrow is not free, it must be paid back, and requested an explanation of that process. The Director confirmed that there is a payback provision, a provision also that if a person is on the property for a certain number of years for each year a certain amount is forgiven, and if it is for the full term the entire loan is forgiven. Agencymember Campbell then said if someone tried to turn the property over within a year they would need to repay a majority of the loan, the response of the Director was that there are provisions for repayment during that period of time, partly on the equity increase in the value of the property compared to the City's share of the funds that went into the valuation of the property, that is within the program guidelines. To that Agencymember Campbell noted that the purpose then is to not encourage turn arounds, rather that people be encouraged to improve the homes in which they are going to live in for a considerable period of time, the only way the loans are forgiven is if they stay in the program for ten years under one program twenty years in another. Agencymember Antos asked why it is necessary to have a consultant, rather than staff, fill out the application form, he would also like to have information as to how the Agency got here, this program was started with a certain amount of money, he would like to know that amount, the total number of loans or grants that were generated by the program, the range of the amount per, a low and high amount, and how much was spent for administration of the program. The Development Services Director stated he could not answer the last question as he did not have those numbers available. With regard to preparation of the application by a consultant rather than staff, the Director responded that the application form is about three hundred fifty pages in length, it must be submitted to the State by October 3rd, staff is in the process of preparing items for public hearings relating to the General Plan and Local Coastal Plan updates before the Planning Commission and City Council, and other highly time consuming projects, the staff consists of the Associate Planner and himself, it was felt that to use the consultant to prepare the application for $3,500 was a good source rather than reallocate staff time which would entail pushing back other projects that are important to the Council and the City as a whole. In regard to the number of loans, amounts, etc., the Director stated he could provide an answer in general as he did not have specifics with him. He explained that the City approved a program in May, 2002 that had a total funding commitment of $2.8 million, of that it was assumed that $1 million was going to be repaid from the MPROP, those funds have not been allocated, the $2.8 million was a five year projection so there is $1 million of future tax/increment that flows back into the Agency, therefore there was about $800,000 initially, recollection is that about $680,000 has been spent, the remainder is I I I 8-25-03 I administrative fees to the consultant and legal costs for Redevelopment Agency involvements in lawsuits filed by the Trailer Park against the Agency and its members, the funds that are now available will allow the funding of the projects that are in hand completely, and until there are additional funds there is no money to allow the remaining projects to proceed. Chairman Yost asked if these are programs that agencies are required to do by law and for which the City was fined because it did not have sufficient programs. The Director responded that under State law there is a penalty if the Agency does not spend its money for program activities within certain periods of time, the penalty is that money is taken from the normal redevelopment program funds and put it into the housing funds, which means doing more housing assistance, it is not a penalty from which you lose money, it is that there is more money put into it to do future projects. The Director explained further that there are $10,000 grants, it is believed that all of the grants have been for the total amount, the maximum amount on both the Mortgage Assistance Program and the Rehabilitation Loan Program is $50,000, those programs were approved by Council in May, 2002, and in response to a comment from the public, each city can develop its own program as to how it wants to use the funds, most likely different program standards and guidelines, in the Cypress situation he would imagine they are not using a moderate income level, probably something less than that, the Seal Beach program goes to moderate income which is one hundred twenty percent of median income. In response to Agencymember Campbell, the Director said the City's program is not tied into the County standards, the City program allows people of very low, low, and moderate income to apply for program funds, some cities may cap the monies at something less than moderate, and confirmed that it is at the discretion of each city to select the program that they wish to administer, how to best use its funds for housing purposes, it is the choice of each city. I Campbell moved, second by Doane, to authorize staff to pursue alternative funding sources as outlined in the staff report to utilize for housing program activities. AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: Campbell, Doane, Larson, Yost None Antos Motion carried I Campbell moved, second by Doane, to adopt Resolution Number 03-2 entitled "A RESOLUTION OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH REQUESTING AND CONFIRMING A LOAN FROM THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH ACCEPTING SAID LOAN ON THE TERMS ESTABLISHED, AND AUTHORIZING REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY BUDGET AMENDMENT NUMBER 04-01 FOR THE 2003/2004 FISCAL YEAR" and to adopt Resolution Number 03-3 entitled "A RESOLUTION OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH AUTHORIZING THE FILING OF AN APPLICATION FOR FUNDING UNDER THE CALHOME PROGRAM AND AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR TO EXECUTE ALL DOCUMENTS NECESSARY TO PARTICIPATE IN SAID PROGRAM." By unanimous consent, full reading of Resolution Number 03-2 and 03-3 was waived. AYES: NOES: Antos, Campbell, Doane, Larson, Yost None Motion carried Campbell moved, second by Doane, to instructed staff to pursue additional funds through the County of Orange 8-25-0~ / 9-22-03 Community Development Block Grant Program, instruct staff to continue to meet with impacted applicants to respond to additional questions and concerns of program applicants, and receive and file the staff report. AYES: NOES: Antos, Campbell, Doane, Larson, Yost None Motion carried I ADJOURNMENT It was the order of the Chair, with consent of the Agency, to adjourn the meeting at 7:20 p.m. ~rm~ Seal Beach, California September 22, 2003 The Redevelopment Agency of the City of Seal Beach met in regular session at 6:45 p.m. with Chairman Yost calling the meeting to order. I ROLL CALL Present: Chairman Yost Agencymembers Antos, Campbell, Doane, Larson Absent: None Also present: Mr. Bahorski, Executive Director Mr. Barrow, City Attorney Ms. Yeo, City Clerk APPROVAL OF AGENDA Larson moved, second by Campbell, to approve the order of the agenda as presented. AYES: NOES: Antos, Campbell, Doane, Larson, Yost None Motion carried PUBLIC COMMENTS Chairman Yost declared Public Comments to be open. Ms. Joyce Parque, Seal Beach, said since the Department of Water and Power property is in the Redevelopment Agency area it may be a good idea to speak to that matter at both meetings in that the Agency meetings are not cablecast. She claimed that people do not understand what the Redevelopment Agency is, a flawed policy adopted by the Council, the Council has been asked to disband the Agency which they have not done. With regard to where the property tax goes Ms. parque said she would imagine that the DWP property sold in the range of $5 million, a property on Ocean Avenue, not in the Agency area, sold for $4.3 million, the frozen basis of the DWP property I