1979 REG MTG MIN MAR 20 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

221 5 percent of the existing housing. Mr. Rush said he is really not familiar with the legal aspects and could not advise the City in that matter, as to whether or not the County could in fact bring suit against the City, if Colton had not met the 5 percent quota as listed in the Cooperation Agreement. City Attorney Edwards asked if. the City of Colton is compelled to go forward with a project of this kind. Mr. Rush answered yes, due to the fact that the City of Colton is participating in the Community Development Block Grant Program, they are required to address the housing needs of the low and moderate income households in the community as a part of receiving those Block Grant -funds, and also to implement the Housing Assistance Plan, which outlines goals and projected units to be located in the City for speci- fic assistance to low and moderate income households; therefore, this Cooperation Agreement is one tool that the=City of Colton can use in an effort to implement the Housing Assistance Plan as required by Block Grant regulations. City Attorney Edwards stated, then in other words, what Mr. Rush is saying at this point is that this Council has no choice but to go forward with this program and it would be a breach of some duty on the part of the Council if it stopped right now. (� Mr. Rush pointed out that the City Council has signed the agreement regarding the (Yj Block Grant Program, and they have the prerogative of rejecting the Cooperative Agreement itself, that is not the only means by which the Council may achieve the �Q Housing Assistance Goals indicated in the Housing Assistance Plan, however, the Department: of Housing and Urban Development, which administers the Block Grant Program, Q has indicated that lack of performance on meeting the goals indicated in the Housing Q Assistance Plan may be grounds for conditioning or removing the Block Grant funding, which has occurred in several cities because they have not implemented the Housing Assistance Plan. Mr. Rush again stated that the -Cooperation Agreement is one of the tools the City may use, however, it is not the only one available for meeting the housing needs; however, in rejection of this, HUD may determine that the Council is not addressing the goals in the Housing Assistance Plan with available units. Mr. Rush advised the only advertised assisted units available at this time are the 319 public: housing units made available through HUD, there are no other Section 8 new construction units to be issued at this time; therefore, the only available units are the 319 publicly owned housing units. Councilman Rehrer stated it was his understanding that the Housing Assistance Plan was for the rehabilitation of existing housing and not for new construction. Mr. Rush stated the goals of the Housing Assistance Plan are for rehabilitation of existing units, as well as for new construction, it is not specifically limited to rehabilitation only. Mr. Rush then discussed the goals of the Housing Assistance Plan, with regard to rehabilitation of existing structures as well as new construction, to meet the housing needs in the County. Mr. Rush explained that these housing needs are de- termined and identified by SCAG. City Manager Calabrese stated he is not familiar with reports and statistics as identified by SCAG, however, this information should be made available to the City Council so that they are in a better position to make a decision on this matter. Mr. Calabrese said the City of Colton is heavily involved in the Housing Rehabilitation Program, and perhaps doing more than any other City with regard to housing rehabilitation. Mr. Calabrese advised part of the Block Grant was that the City of Colton would designate at least a minimum of 30 percent of the Grant towards rehabilitation of housing, and from all indications, Colton will exceed even that amount. Mr. Calabrese concluded based on this, he felt the City Council should have the information from SCAG before them, before making any decision on this matter, and would therefore recommend continuation,of this hearing. Discussion was then held between Mr. Calabrese and Mr. Rush with regard to the language as stated in the Article 34 Referendum Authority and the Ballot Measure, and the requirement of State Bonded Funds with regard to housing needs. Councilman Temby asked who determines these housing needs in the communities. MAR 2 01979