HomeMy WebLinkAboutR16-Economic Development Agency
o
o
o
.'
o 0
DBVBLOPIIBllr DBPAllrllBllr
OF l'IIE CITY OF SU BBJllUm)IlIO
REOUEST FOil COtMISSIOl'l/COUJIICIL ACTIOl'l
From:
KENNETH J. HENDERSON
Executive Director
Subject:
WATEIl/SBWBIl/RBFUSB CIlAItGB
REBATE PIlOGJWIJ
Date:
November IS, 1991
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SvnoDsis of Previous Commission/Council/Committee Action(s):
On November 13, 1991, the Housing Committee considered and rejected a
request to use the low- to moderate-income housing fund to provide
rebates to citizens for payment of increases in water, sewer and refuse
charges.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Recommended lIotion(s):
(Community Deve10Dlllent Commission)
IIOTIOl'l:
That the Community Development Commission consider the payment
of increases in water, sewer and refuse charges through its
low- to moderate-income housing fund and direct staff to
prepare an implementation program for same.
~RSOII
Executive Director
Administrator
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Contact Person(s): Ken Henderson/Doris Daniels
384-5081
Phone:
Project Area(s):
Ward(s):
All Wards
All Proiect Areas
Supporting Data Attached:
S~aff Reoort: Exhibits
FUNDING REQUIREMENTS:
Amount: S
Source:
~\L%_~et-Aside Fund
Budget Authority:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Commission/Council Notes:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
KJH:DAD:paw:0283E
COtMISSIOII MKETIBG AGBIIDA
lIeeting Date: 11/18/1991
Agenda It_ llumber:
I~
o
o
o
o 0
DBVBLOPMBBT DBPARTMBBT
OF TIIB CIn OF SAB BBRlWlDIBO
STAFF REPORT
Water/Sever/Refuse CharRe Rebate ProRram
Staff has been requested by the Mayor to research the Department's ability to
rebate to citizens the costs expended for utility and other charges
associated with housing for low- and moderate-income households. The charges
in question are utility charges for water, sewer and refuse, as veIl as
paramedic and police alarm fees.
1. Water. Sewer and Refuse CharRes
According to information provided by Department counsel, water, sewer and
refuse charges are often considered a part of monthly housing costs in
determining affordability requirements for some State and federal housing
programs. Counsel has advised that since these utility costs may be
viewed as being similar to rent subsidies, they could be funded by
revenues available to the Department's low- and moderate-income housing
fund.
2.
Paramedic and Police Alana Fees
The payment of these fees is problematic in that (i) said fees are not
required costs for all residential unita within the City, and; (ii) not
required costs to secure afforedable housing. Pursuant to information
provided by counsel, it appears that the Department could not fund these
fees for lov- to moderate-income families and households. Further
research regarding the appropriateness of paying for these fees from one
housing fund is necessary and viII be completed in time for Commission
consideration on November 18, 1991.
3.
Elidbilitv
It is proposed that households Whose annual income is at or below
fifty-percent (50%) of the area median income vould be eligible for
rebate consideration. It is further proposed that the assistance be
provided on a sliding scale basis which will be more fully detailed in
the implementation strategy. Information is provided for the number of
elderly households that w!'>uld be sffect"d by this program (see ExhIbit I.)
On November 13, 1991, the Housing Committee considered and rejected a request
to use the low- to moderate-income housing fund to provide rebates for
payment of increases in water, sewer, and refuse charges. At the Committee
meeting, there was lengthy discussion regarding the appropriateness of using
housing funds for the rebate of these charges, the number of households that
would be eligible for such assistance, and the impact this program would have
upon mobilehome owners who rent space in mobilehome parks.
KJH:DAD:paw:0283E
COMMISSIOB MDTIRG AGBlUlA
Meeting Date: 11/18/1991
Agenda Itea __ber:
/fo
o
()
o
o
IlEVELOPIIEBr DBPAlrI.......r STAFF REPORT
Water/Sewer/Refuse Charge Rebate Program
Koveaber IS, 1991
Page Kumber -2-
o
The Housing Committee further recommended that the item be forwarded to the
Community Development Commission for discussion and consideration.
The program, as proposed, is the same philosophically as the Mobilehome Park
Rental Assistance Program, and would greatly assist low income homeowners in
retaininR their homes. The ability of San Bernardino residents to retain
ownership of their most significant private investment is the key to
maintaining neighborhood stability reducing crime and blight, increasing
property values and reducing the transiency rate in our local schools.
Based upon the information provided in the staff report, staff recommends
adoption of the form motion.
~BRSOK' B:xecutive
Development Department
Director
KJH:DAD:paw:0283E
COIMISSIOK IlEBTIKG AGDDA
Meeting Date: 11/18/1991
Agenda Itea Kumber: ~
o
o
o
It is estimated that there are approximately 13,700 residents of the City
of San Bernardino living in owner-occupied units whose incomes are at or
below the poverty level (below 50% of the median income)."
1980 1990
Total Population 117,490 164,164
Number that live in poverty
(using 16.3% 1980 census figure) 19,151 26,758
Percentage of total universe
that are renter occupied units 40.6% 48.8%)
Percentage of total universe
that are owner occupied units 59.4% 51. 2%
Number of those in poverty
that live in renter occupied units 7,775 (40.6%) 13,057 (48.8%)
0 Number of those in poverty
that live in owner occupied units 11,376 (59.4%) 13,700 (51. 2%)
"
Please note that the above estimate makes two questionable
assumptions. (1) The percentage of the population in poverty has
remained constant between 1980 and 1990; and (2) the percentages
representing owner/renter occupied units for the total population are
the same at the poverty level.
o
EXHIBIT I
o
o
o
o
o
SABO & GREEN
A PROJI'ESSIONAL CORPORATION
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
SUITE 400
6320 CANOGA A VENUE
WOODLAND HILLS. CALIFORNIA 91367
1818t 704-0195
TELECOPIER (818' 704-4729
MBMORANDUM
TO:
Kenneth Henderson
FROM:
Andre de Bortnowski
DATE:
November 7, 1991
RE:
Ability of Redevelopment Agency to Fund utility Bills And
Related Housing Costs on Behalf of Low- and Moderate-
Income Families (SBE00001)
ISSUE
An issue has arisen with respect to a redevelopment
agency's ability to fund utility costs and other costs associated
with housing for low- and moderate-income households which related
costs would include funding of an annual paramedic fee and a police
alarm fee which may be assessed upon residential units in the City
of San Bernardino (the "City"). It is the desire of the
redevelopment agency of the city of San Bernardino (the "Agency")
to fund a portion of the utility costs and related costs of certain
low- and moderate-income households from revenues available in the
Agency's Low- and Moderate-Income Housing Fund.
ANALYSIS
Health and Safety Code Section 33334.2 provides that not
less than twenty percent (20\) of all taxes which are allocated to
the Agency pursuant to Section 33670 shall be used by the Agency
for the purposes of increasing, improving and preserving the
community's supply of low- and moderate-income housing available at
affordable housing cost. Subdivision (e) of Health and Safety Code
Section 33334.2 states that the Agency may exercise any or all of
its powers in carrying out the requirement that it set aside 20\ of
its tax revenues for low- and moderate-income housing purposes. It
also delineates certain powers that the Agency may exercise but
does not reference the payment of utilities costs as one of the
o
o
o
o
o
Page 2
listed powers. However, included within enumerated powers is the
ability of the Agency to "Provide subsidies to, or for the benefit
of, very low income households..., lower income households,... or
persons and families of low or moderate income,... to the extent
those households cannot obtain housing at affordable costs on the
open market". (California Health and Safety Code Section
33334.2(e)(8)). Housing units available on the open market are
defined as those units developed without direct government
subsidies.
Accordingly, even though paying the costs of utilities is
not specifically defined as one of the permitted powers which an
Agency may exercise, there is latitude within the language of
Health and Safety Code section 33334.2(e) which enables the Agency
to exercise any of its powers. Since utility costs are often
considered a part of monthly housing costs in determining
affordability requirements for some State and federal housing
programs and since the Agency has the ability to provide subsidies
including rent subsidies to low- and moderate-income housing to
assist in paying housing costs, it would follow that the Agency
should be permitted to fund utility costs.
I have been in contact with Toni Symonds who is a Senior
Consultant with the Assembly Committee of Housing and Community
Development in Sacramento and her analysis of the issue with
respect to utilities costs was in accord. According to
Ms. Symonds, utility costs should be viewed as being similar to
rent subsidies and accordingly, such costs could be funded by
revenues available on the Agency's low- and moderate-income housing
fund.
The paramedic fees and police alarm fees are more
problematic since both provide for an optional payment plan and as
such are not levied upon all residential units within the City.
Accordingly, persons could reside in San Bernardino without ever
being required to pay such fees. As such, it is unlikely that low-
and moderate-income housing funds could be used to pay such costs
since they are not necessarily a cost required in order to secure
affordable housing. To the extent such paramedic fees and police
alarm fees were levied on all residential properties in the City
then it would seem logical to permit a redevelopment agency to fund
the costs of such paramedic and police alarm fees for low- and
moderate-income families and households.
Depending on the structure of the program to be initiated
by the Agency, the affordability covenants and restrictions as
provided in the low-and moderate-income housing statutes may be
applicable, especially if the utility bills and related costs are
being paid on behalf of owners of properties as opposed to renters.
For more information regarding this analysis or if you
have any questions, please contact me at your earliest convenience.
~11MBM\23
cc: Doris Daniels