HomeMy WebLinkAbout2014-09-24 e-packet
PEOPLE OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO
You are invited to offer your suggestions. In order that you may know our method of conducting Council
business, we proceed as follows:
The regular meetings of the City Council are held on the second and fourth Wednesday of each month at
7:00 p.m. in the Municipal Services Building, Council Chambers, 33 Arroyo Drive, South San Francisco,
California.
The City Clerk will read successively the items of business appearing on the Agenda. As she completes
reading an item, it will be ready for Council action.
KARYL MATSUMOTO
Mayor
RICHARD GARBARINO
Vice Mayor
MARK ADDIEGO
Councilman
PRADEEP GUPTA
Councilman
LIZA NORMANDY
Councilwoman
FRANK RISSO
City Treasurer
KRISTA MARTINELLI
City Clerk
MIKE FUTRELL
City Manager
STEVEN T. MATTAS
City Attorney
PLEASE SILENCE CELL PHONES AND PAGERS
HEARING ASSISTANCE EQUIPMENT AVAILABLE FOR USE BY THE HEARING IMPAIRED AT CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS
In accordance with California Government Code Section 54957.5, any writing or document that is a public record, relates to an open
session agenda item, and is distributed less than 72 hours prior to a regular meeting will be made available for public inspection in the
City Clerk’s Office located at City Hall. If, however, the document or writing is not distributed until the regular meeting to which it relates,
then the document or writing will be made available to the public at the location of the meeting, as listed on this agenda. The address of
City Hall is 400 Grand Avenue, South San Francisco, California 94080.
AGENDA
CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO
REGULAR MEETING
MUNICIPAL SERVICES BUILDING
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
33 ARROYO DRIVE
SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CA
WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 24, 2014
7:00 P.M.
REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING SEPTEMBER 24, 2014
AGENDA PAGE 2
CALL TO ORDER
ROLL CALL
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
AGENDA REVIEW
PRESENTATIONS
Housing Endowment and Regional Trust (“HEART”) presentation given by Mark Moulton.
Urban Shield Report to Council. (Bill Reilly, Interim Fire Chief)
Presentation on the City of South San Francisco's Central Safety Committee. (Ken
Anderson, Disaster Preparedness Manager)
Presentation of new employees and promotions. (Mich Mercado, Human Resources
Manager)
PUBLIC COMMENTS
For those wishing to address the City Council on any Agenda or non-agendized item, please complete a speaker card
located at the entrance to the Council Chamber’s and submit it to the City Clerk. Please be sure to indicate the Agenda
Item number you wish to address or the topic of your public comment. California law prevents the City Council from
taking action on any item not on the Agenda (except in emergency circumstances). Your question or concern may be
referred to staff for investigation and/or action where appropriate or the matter may be placed on a future Agenda for
more comprehensive action or a report. When your name is called, please come to the podium, state your name and
address (optional) for the Minutes. COMMENTS ARE LIMITED TO THREE (3) MINUTES PER SPEAKER. Thank
you for your cooperation.
COUNCIL COMMENTS/REQUESTS
1. Discussion of a Resolution proposed by the community organization Evolve to close the
Commercial Property Tax Loophole of Proposition 13.
CONSENT CALENDAR
2. Motion approving the minutes from the meetings of March 19, 2014 and September 10,
2014.
3. Motion confirming payment registers for September 24, 2014.
4. Motion to waive reading and adopt an Ordinance amending the Municipal Code to: (1)
increase the contract approval authority for the City Manager; and (2) Modify the
Abbreviated Bid Process for Public Projects to be consistent with the State Public Contracts
Code. (Richard Lee, Financial Services Manager)
REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING SEPTEMBER 24, 2014
AGENDA PAGE 3
5. Resolution authorizing the City Manager to enter into an Exclusive Negotiating Rights
Agreement (ENRA) amongst the City of South San Francisco, South San Francisco
Successor Agency and Brookwood Development, LLC for potential development of the
properties at 201, 207, 217-19 and 227 Grand Avenue and 418 Linden Avenue. ECD
(Armando Sanchez, Housing Consultant).
ADMINISTRATIVE BUSINESS
6. Resolution authorizing the City Manager to execute a Landscape Maintenance Services
Agreement with Frank and Grossman of San Francisco, CA for citywide landscape
maintenance services in an amount not to exceed $851,960. (Samantha Haimovitch, Parks
Manager)
7. Discussion regarding potential amendment of zoning ordinance provisions to allow
temporary banners. (Suzy Kalkin, Chief Planner)
PUBLIC HEARING
8. Public hearing on the 2013-2014 Consolidated Annual Performance and Evaluation Report
(CAPER) for the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program and authorizing
the submittal of the 2013-2014 CAPER to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban
Development. (Alin Lancaster, Community Development Specialist)
ITEMS FROM COUNCIL – COMMITTEE REPORTS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS
ADJOURNMENT
RESOLUTION NO. ________
CITY COUNCIL, CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO,
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE 2013-2014 CONSOLIDATED
ANNUAL PERFORMANCE AND EVALUATION REPORT (CAPER)
FOR THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT (CDBG)
PROGRAM AND AUTHORIZING THE SUBMITTAL OF THE 2013-
2014 CAPER TO THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND
URBAN DEVELOPMENT
WHEREAS, the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (“HUD”)
requires communities receiving Community Development Block Grant (“CDBG”) funds
to submit a year-end Consolidated Annual Performance and Evaluation Report
(“CAPER”); and
WHEREAS, the CAPER has been available for public review in the Economic
and Community Development Department, the City’s public libraries, and on the City’s
website since September 8, 2014 and a notice of public hearing was published in the San
Mateo County Times on September 8, 2014; and
WHEREAS, in fiscal year 2013-2014, the City expended a total of $691,053 in
CDBG funding and $8,901 in HOME administrative funding received from the San
Mateo County HOME Consortium to carry out a broad range of community development
activities; and
WHEREAS, on September 24, 2014, the City held a duly noticed public hearing
on the 2013-2014 CAPER for the CDBG Program; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of
South San Francisco that the City Council hereby approves the 2013-2014 CAPER.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Council hereby authorizes the City
Manager to submit the CAPER to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban
Development, and to take any other actions as necessary to carry out the intent of this
Resolution.
* * * *
I hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was regularly introduced and
adopted by the City Council of the City of South San Francisco at a regular meeting held
on the 24th day of September, 2014 by the following vote:
AYES: ___________________________________________________________
NOES: ___________________________________________________________
ABSTAIN: ___________________________________________________________
1
ABSENT: ___________________________________________________________
ATTEST: __________________________
City Clerk
2329395.1
2
FY 2013-2014
Consolidated Annual
Performance and Evaluation
Report (CAPER)
Lead Agency:
City of South San Francisco
Economic and Community
Development Department
Prepared by:
Economic Development
& Housing Division
Adopted September 24, 2014 by Resolution #______
City of South San Francisco
3
Exhibit A
CAPER φτυχ‐φτυψ
υ OMB Control No: 2506‐0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
City of South San Francisco
Consolidated Annual Performance and Evaluation Report (CAPER)
FY 2013‐2014
Contents
CR‐05 ‐ Goals and Outcomes ..................................................................................................................................... 2
CR‐10 ‐ Racial and Ethnic Composition of Families Assisted ..................................................................................... 7
CR‐15 ‐ Resources and Investments .......................................................................................................................... 7
CR‐20 ‐ Affordable Housing ....................................................................................................................................... 9
CR‐25 ‐ Homeless and Other Special Needs ............................................................................................................ 12
CR‐30 ‐ Public Housing ............................................................................................................................................. 15
CR‐35 ‐ Other Actions .............................................................................................................................................. 16
CR‐40 ‐ Monitoring .................................................................................................................................................. 21
CR‐45 ‐ CDBG .......................................................................................................................................................... 22
Appendix A – PR 26 CDBG Financial Summary Report ............................................................................................ 23
Appendix B – Public Notification Efforts ................................................................................................................. 26
Appendix C – IDIS Reports ....................................................................................................................................... 32
4
Exhibit A
CAPER φτυχ‐φτυψ
φ OMB Control No: 2506‐0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
CR‐05 ‐ Goals and Outcomes
Progress the jurisdiction has made in carrying out its strategic plan and its action plan. 91.520(a)
The 2013‐2014 Consolidated Annual Performance and Evaluation Report (CAPER) describes how the City of
South San Francisco addressed the City’s housing, economic, and community development needs during the
2013‐2014 fiscal year. Listed below is a brief overview of the City’s accomplishments for the year.
Housing
City‐Sponsored Housing Rehab Program
Seven (7) households served
Multi‐Family Rehab
Rehabbed the Sundial Apartments
Minor Home Repair Programs
Center for Independence of Individuals with
Disabilities (CID): The City used CDBG funds
to support CID’s Housing Accessibility
Modification (HAM) Program which served
four (4) households.
Rebuilding Together Peninsula (RTP): The
City used CDBG funds to support two RTP
programs: National Rebuilding Day and Safe
at Home, which served 18 households in
total.
Sustain Economic Activities
CDBG funds were used to support the City‐sponsored Commercial Rehabilitation Program. This program issued
four (4) grants that provided new awnings to eight (8) Downtown businesses.
5
Exhibit A
CAPER φτυχ‐φτυψ
χ OMB Control No: 2506‐0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Public Services
CDBG Funds
Bay Area Legal Aid 54 individuals served
Health Mobile 135 individuals served
John’s Closet 125 individuals served
Rape Trauma Services 108 individuals served
Salvation Army 1 individual served
Sitike Counseling Center 20 individuals served
Youth Service Bureau 27 individuals served
Total 470 individuals served
HOME Admin Funds
Project Sentinel 96 individuals served
Public Facility Improvements Projects
City‐Owned Public Facilities
City Hall Tot Lot ADA Improvements: Installation of rubberized surfacing and an ADA accessible play structure.
Magnolia Senior Center Elevator Refurbishment Project: Refurbishment of the 25 year old elevator at the
Magnolia Senior Center. The majority of the work was completed in FY 12‐13 with the exception of a few items
in FY 13‐14.
Non Profit‐Owned Public Facilities
Boys & Girls Club: Demolition and rebuild of an exterior wall and portion of the roof that had severe water
damage and mold. In FY 12‐13 funding was provided for the demo and mold abatement and in FY 13‐14 both
the City and County provided funding to rebuild the wall and roof.
6
Exhibit A
Comparison of the proposed versus actual outcomes for each outcome measure submitted with the consolidated plan and explain, if
applicable, why progress was not made toward meeting goals and objectives. 91.520(g)
Goal
Category
Source /
Amount
Indicator
Unit of
Measure
Expected
5 Year
Strategic
Plan
Actual
5 Year
Strategic
Plan
Percent
Complete
Expected
13-14
Program
Year
Actual
13-14
Program
Year
Percent
Complete
Increase,
Maintain,
& Improve
Affordable
Housing
Affordable
Housing
CDBG:
$318,500
Rental Units Rehabilitated
Household
Housing
Unit
0 11 - 0 11 -
Homeowner Housing
Rehabilitated 125 29 23.2% 30 29 96.67%
Housing for Homeless
Added 0 0 0% 0 0 0%
Housing for People with
HIV/AIDS Added 0 0 0% 0 0 0%
Preserve
and
Improve
Public
Facilities
Public Facility
Improvements
CDBG:
$325,000
Public Facility or
Infrastructure Activities
other than
Low/Moderate Income
Housing Benefit
Other 5 2 40% 2 2 100%
Provide
Public
Services
to
Improve
Quality of
Life
Non-Housing
Community
Development
CDBG:
$77,898
Public Service Activities
other than
Low/Moderate Income
Housing Benefit Persons
Assisted
5000 470 9.4% 2000 470 23.5%
Homelessness Prevention 0 0 0% 0 0 0%
Provide
Service-
Enriched
Homeless
Shelters
Homeless CDBG:
$0
Homeless Person
Overnight Shelter
Persons
Assisted
0 0 0% 0 0 0%
Sustain
and/or
Increase
Economic
Activity
Non-Housing
Community
Development
Economic
Development
CDBG:
$50,000
Facade
Treatment/Business
Building Rehabilitation
Businesses
Assisted 5 8 160% 1 8 800%
Table 1 - Accomplishments – Program Year & Strategic Plan to Date
7
Exhibit A
FY 2013-2014 Financial Summary
Table 2 – Financial Summary
*Project was started and the majority completed in FY 12-13 however a few punch list items were completed in FY 13-14
Program Name
Prior Years
Uncommitted
Funds
FY 13-14
Allocation
FY 13-14
Program
Income
FY 13-14
Budget
FY 13-14
Expenses Balance
CDBG FUNDS
ADMINISTRATION
CDBG Administration - 94,260.00 - 94,260.00 89,961.15 4,298.85
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
City-Sponsored Commercial Rehab 34,111.54 - 15,888.46 50,000.00 41,780.01 8,219.99
HOUSING
CID - 13,500.00 - 13,500.00 3,990.90 9,509.10
Rebuilding Together - NRD - 10,000.00 - 10,000.00 10,000.00 -
Rebuilding Together - SAH - 35,000.00 35,000.00 34,353.33 646.67
City-Sponsored Housing Rehab Prog 17,715.63 74,679.17 23,870.71 116,265.51 57,152.84 59,112.67
Sundial Apts Rehab Project - 115,960.83 27,773.66 143,734.49 143,734.49 -
Subtotal 17,715.63 249,140.00 51,644.37 318,500.00 249,231.56 69,268.44
PUBLIC SERVICES
Bay Area Legal Aid - 10,000.00 - 10,000.00 10,000.00 -
Health Mobile - 10,000.00 - 10,000.00 10,000.00 -
John's Closet - 5,000.00 - 5,000.00 5,000.00 -
Rape Trauma Services - 10,000.00 - 10,000.00 10,000.00 -
Salvation Army - Rental Assistance - 24,000.00 - 24,000.00 2,770.00 21,230.00
Sitike Counseling Center - 8,898.00 - 8,898.00 8,781.79 116.21
Youth Service Bureau - 10,000.00 10,000.00 9,999.96 0.04
Subtotal - 77,898.00 - 77,898.00 56,551.75 21,346.25
PUBLIC FACILITY IMPROVEMENTS
Boys & Girls Club Rehabilitation 106,952.23 - - 106,952.23 106,952.23 -
City Hall Tot Lot ADA Improvements 138,873.06 - 3,834.73 142,707.79 142,707.79 -
Magnolia Senior Center Elevator*3,868.60 - - 3,868.60 3,868.60 -
Remaining Funds Available 71,471.38 - - 71,471.38 71,471.38
Subtotal 321,165.27 - 3,834.73 325,000.00 253,528.62 71,471.38
TOTAL CDBG 372,992.44 421,298.00 71,367.56 865,658.00 691,053.09 174,604.91
HOME ADMIN FUNDS
FAIR HOUSING ACTIVITIES
Project Sentinel - 8,901.00 - 8,901.00 8,901.00 -
TOTAL FUNDS (ALL SOURCES)372,992.44 430,199.00 71,367.56 874,559.00 699,954.09 174,604.91
Revenue Type
8
Exhibit A
CAPER φτυχ‐φτυψ
ϊ OMB Control No: 2506‐0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Assess how the jurisdiction’s use of funds, particularly CDBG, addresses the priorities and specific
objectives identified in the plan, giving special attention to the highest priority activities identified.
The City’s FY 13‐14 Annual Action Plan identified five primary needs in the community and set goals to meet
those needs. This year the City made tremendous efforts to implement activities and expend CDBG funds to
meet these goals.
Need: Affordable Housing
Goal: Increase, maintain, and improve the supply of affordable housing for extremely low, very low, low,
and moderate income individuals and families.
Activities Implemented: The City was able to rehabilitate and maintain a total of 40 homes this year.
See Section CR‐20 ‐ Affordable Housing for more information.
Need: Public Facility Improvements
Goal: Preserve and improve public facilities that serve a high percentage of low income or special needs
residents.
Activities Implemented: The City completed three public facility improvement projects this year. The
City Hall Tot Lot which serves the City’s low income Downtown Target Area, the Boys and Girls Club
which serves low‐income youth, and the Magnolia Senior Center which serves the City’s senior
residents.
Need: Public Services
Goal: Provide public services to improve the quality of life for low income individuals and families,
including those at risk of becoming homeless and special needs populations.
Activities Implemented: Although the City was successful in providing public services to 470 residents,
the City did face some challenges in meeting its public service numeric goals. This year both the City and
the County cut their funding to North Peninsula Neighborhood Services Center (NPNSC), the City’s core
service agency, due to the organization’s lack of capacity to meet programmatic and financial standards.
In prior years NPNSC served up to 2,000 people per year and the City had included NPNSC’s proposed
goals into its overall public service goals. This explains why the City was only able to meet 23% of its
goal.
Need: Economic Development
Goal: Sustain and/or increase the level of business and economic activity in areas that serve or have a
high percentage of low income residents.
Activities Implemented: The City provided façade improvements to 8 businesses through its City‐
Sponsored Commercial Rehabilitation Program.
Need: Homeless Services and Housing
Goal: Provide service enriched shelter and transitional housing for homeless families and individuals.
Activities: This year the City lacked funding for operating costs of emergency and transitional housing.
However, the City made other, non‐monetary efforts to improve homeless services and outreach. See
Section CR‐25 ‐ Homeless and Other Special Needs for more information.
9
Exhibit A
CAPER φτυχ‐φτυψ
ϋ OMB Control No: 2506‐0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
CR‐10 ‐ Racial and Ethnic Composition of Families Assisted
Describe the families assisted (including the racial and ethnic status of families assisted). 91.520(a)
Race: CDBG
White 281
Black or African American 18
Asian 73
American Indian or American Native 39
Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander 12
Total 423
Ethnicity:
Hispanic 273
Not Hispanic 150
Table 3 – Table of assistance to racial and ethnic populations by source of funds
CR‐15 ‐ Resources and Investments 91.520(a)
Identify the resources made available
Source of Funds Source Expected
Amount Available
2013‐2018
Actual
Amount Expended
Program Year 2013
CDBG CDBG 1,600,000 691,053
Other HOME Administrative Funds 32,000 8,901
Table 4 – Resources Made Available
Narrative
In FY 13‐14, the City received a CDBG entitlement grant of $421,298. Combining the entitlement amount with
$71,367.56 in FY 13‐14 program income and $198.387.53 in uncommitted funds from prior years, the City spent
a total of $ 691,053.09 in CDBG funds. The City also supplemented CDBG funds by spending $8,901 in HOME
administration funds received from the San Mateo County HOME Consortium for fair housing activities. Overall
the City spent $699,954.
Identify the geographic distribution and location of investments
Target Area Planned Percentage of
Allocation
Actual Percentage of
Allocation
Narrative
Description
SSF Downtown Tracts 6021 & 6022 25% 48% See Below
Table 5 – Identify the geographic distribution and location of investments
Narrative
The Downtown census tracts of 6021 and 6022 are predominately low‐income areas that the City has identified
as a local target area. This year the City surpassed its goal and spent 48% of its total CDBG expenditures within
the Downtown Target Area. Projects in this area included the Sundial Apartments Rehabilitation Project, the
City‐Sponsored Commercial Rehabilitation Program, and the City Hall Tot Lot ADA Improvements Project.
10
Exhibit A
CAPER φτυχ‐φτυψ
ό OMB Control No: 2506‐0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Leveraging
Explain how federal funds leveraged additional resources (private, state and local funds), including a
description of how matching requirements were satisfied, as well as how any publicly owned land or
property located within the jurisdiction that were used to address the needs identified in the plan.
The non‐profit organizations that received CDBG funding leveraged their CDBG grants with their own funding
from foundations, state and county grants, private donors, corporations, in‐kind donors, and/or fees for service.
Overall the non‐profits were able to leverage over $2.9 million dollars (see below).
Agency Total Funds
City
CDBG
Other
CDBG*FederalStateLocalPrivateOther
Bay Area Legal Aid 437,565 10,000 20,000 392,565 ‐ ‐ 15,000 ‐
Boys & Girls Club 206,952 106,952 100,000 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐
CID ‐ HAM Program 135,695 3,991 115,000 ‐ 16,704 ‐ ‐ ‐
Health Mobile 10,000 10,000 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐
John's Closet 57,460 5,000 6,050 ‐ ‐ ‐ 13,410 33,000
MidPen Sundial Rehab154,478 143,734 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 10,744
Project Sentinel 51,901 8,901 38,000 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 5,000
Rape Trauma Services299,000 10,000 16,000 113,00045,000 80,000 35,000 ‐
Rebuilding Together ‐ NRD806,000 10,000 96,000 ‐ ‐ ‐ 500,000 200,000
Rebuilding Together ‐SAH324,716 35,000 189,716 ‐ ‐ ‐ 100,000 ‐
Salvation Army 122,250 2,770 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 119,480
Sitike Counseling Center318,634 8,782 ‐ 298,265 ‐ ‐ 11,587
Youth Service Bureau 16,385 10,000 ‐ ‐ ‐ 5,000 1,385
Total2,941,036 365,130 580,766505,565359,96980,000 668,410 381,196
*This amount is CDBG funding from other jurisdictions
Table 6 ‐ Leveraged Funds
The City also leveraged multiple City‐owned properties to meet the needs of the FY 13‐14 Action Plan.
Need: Affordable Housing
Property: Sixteen City‐owned housing units are rented to low income individuals/families at affordable
rates; this also includes five units that are rented to San Mateo County for the Emancipated Foster
Youth Program.
Need: Public Services
Property: The City owns and operates the Community Learning Center, two public libraries, the
Magnolia Senior Center, and two preschools, all of which provide an array of public services.
Additionally, the City rents commercial space to the Sitike Counseling Center and the South San
Francisco Medical Clinic both of which provide services to low income residents.
11
Exhibit A
CAPER φτυχ‐φτυψ
ύ OMB Control No: 2506‐0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
CR‐20 ‐ Affordable Housing 91.520(b)
Evaluation of the jurisdiction's progress in providing affordable housing, including the number and
types of families served, the number of extremely low‐income, low‐income, moderate‐income, and
middle‐income persons served.
One‐Year Goal Actual
Number of homeless households to be
provided affordable housing units
0 0
Number of non‐homeless households to be
provided affordable housing units
0 0
Number of special‐needs households to be
provided affordable housing units
0 0
Total 0 0
Table 7 ‐ Number of Households
One‐Year Goal Actual
Number of households supported through
rental assistance
5 1
Number of households supported through
the production of new units
0 0
Number of households supported through
the rehab of existing units
52 40
Number of households supported through
the acquisition of existing units
0 0
Total 57 41
Table 8 ‐ Number of Households Supported
Discuss the difference between goals and outcomes and problems encountered in meeting these
goals.
This year the City provided rental assistance to one household through the Salvation Army’s Rental Assistance
Program and served 40 households through the following housing rehabilitation programs/projects: Center for
Independence of Individuals with Disabilities (CID) Housing Accessibility Modification (HAM) Program, City‐
Sponsored Housing Rehabilitation Program, Rebuilding Together Peninsula’s (RTP) National Rebuilding Day and
Safe at Home Programs, and the Sundial Apartments Rehabilitation Project.
Salvation Army – Rental Assistance Program
The Salvation Army was able to provide rental assistance to one elderly resident. The Salvation Army reported
challenges working with the landlord/apartment managers along with finding clients that meet program
requirements. The program was intended for non‐recurring emergency situations (e.g. unexpected medical or
auto expenses) and the applicants had to demonstrate that they could pay rent in future months. Additionally,
the grant was allocated mid‐year, so the Salvation Army only had six months to implement the program. The
Salvation Army had a remaining grant balance of $21,230 which has been recaptured.
12
Exhibit A
CAPER φτυχ‐φτυψ
υτ OMB Control No: 2506‐0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
CID ‐ HAM Program
CID was able to provide accessibility modifications to four (4) low‐income households however the organization
only met 20% of its proposed goals. This year, CID faced a number of challenges in meeting its goals. CID
explained that the biggest cause for the unmet goals is the increasing reluctance of consumers to answer in
depth questions, especially in the area of income verification. Additionally, CID relocated its headquarters this
year and had staff turnover in two HAM program positions. CID had a remaining grant balance of $9,509.10
which has been recaptured.
City‐Sponsored Rehabilitation Program
This year the City was able to issue four (4) debris box vouchers and three (3) home repair vouchers, all of which
were used to repair broken or blocked sewer lines, to serve a total of seven (7) households. This year staff sent
out ten (10) loan applications however only two completed loan applications were received and both
homeowners ended up not qualifying for the program.
RTP ‐ National Rebuilding Day
National Rebuilding Day is completed annually in April where approximately 3,000 volunteers give their time and
skills to help neighbors live more independently in safer, cleaner, and healthier environments. Rebuilding
Together met its goals and served three (3) South San Francisco households as part of National Rebuilding Day.
RTP – Safe at Home Program
RTP met its goal and completed free minor home repairs for 15 households, including repairs at several mobile
homes at the Treasure Island Mobile Home Park. The program primarily served seniors who could not afford to
take care of essential repairs on a fixed income. This year RTP’s projects were more extensive and required more
labor and materials than in previous years. Due to these larger project scopes, RTP had expended all of its grant
funding by the third quarter and therefore requested a grant increase. The City gave RTP a grant increase of
$15,000.
Sundial Apartments Rehabilitation
The City provided CDBG funding to rehabilitate the Sundial Apartments, eleven (11) studio apartments located
in the City's Downtown that are restricted to tenants with incomes at or below 80% of Area Median Income. The
project consisted of new exterior paint, signage, stoves, electrical panels, an energy efficient water heater,
energy efficient lighting, flooring, and concrete at the trash enclosure. The project enhances the streetscape and
commercial district, as well as provides an improved place to live for the residents
Discuss how these outcomes will impact future annual action plans.
All of the City’s housing rehabilitation activities met or exceeded their proposed goals with exception of CID’s
HAM Program. In recent years CID has been unable to meet performance goals and expend its full grant amount.
The City has noted that continued staff turnover and relocating their offices have attributed to the program’s
performance issues. Although CID’s underperformance is an issue and could impact future annual action plans,
CID does provide a much needed service to the community that is hard to replicate. CID provides an
occupational therapist that assesses the accessibility of each client’s home and provides an accessibility
modification plan tailored to each client’s needs. Due to the unique service CID provides, the City, in
collaboration with the other jurisdictions, will continue to provide training and guidance to CID staff, help CID
staff identify new outreach opportunities and areas of improvement, and monitor CID on a regular basis until
the organization is performing at an adequate level.
13
Exhibit A
CAPER φτυχ‐φτυψ
υυ OMB Control No: 2506‐0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Additionally, the Salvation Army did not meet its goal of providing rental assistance to 5 households however
this was a one‐time program and this result will not impact future annual action plans.
Include the number of extremely low‐income, low‐income, and moderate‐income persons served by
each activity where information on income by family size is required to determine the eligibility of
the activity.
Number of Persons Served CDBG Actual HOME Actual
Extremely Low‐income 23 0
Low‐income 10 0
Moderate‐income 8 0
Total 41 0
Table 9 – Number of Persons Served
Narrative Information
All households served met the CDBG income requirements of either being extremely low income (30% or less of
AMI*), low income (31‐50% of AMI*), or moderate income (51‐80% of AMI*). Additionally, 56% of the
households served were considered extremely low income.
Note the City does not have any accomplishments to report under the HOME column as the City does not
receive HOME funds directly from HUD. The City of South San Francisco is part of the San Mateo County HOME
Consortium and therefore all HOME related accomplishments are reported by the County.
*AMI = Area Median Income
14
Exhibit A
CAPER φτυχ‐φτυψ
υφ OMB Control No: 2506‐0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
CR‐25 ‐ Homeless and Other Special Needs 91.220(d, e); 91.320(d, e); 91.520(c)
Evaluate the jurisdiction’s progress in meeting its specific objectives for reducing and ending
homelessness through:
Reaching out to homeless persons (especially unsheltered persons) and assessing their individual
needs
This year a multi‐disciplinary, bilingual, Homeless Outreach Team (HOT) Program was created in South San
Francisco. The HOT Program has a full‐time case manager that works, in collaboration with the City’s police, to
identify and serve the most difficult, long‐term homeless individuals by placing them in emergency shelters and
connecting them with County medical and rehabilitation services. So far the HOT Program has been very
successful and has already provided many HOT clients with needed medical care and identification cards, signed
HOT clients up for assistance programs such as Supplement Security Income (SSI), and placed HOT clients into
emergency shelters or other housing programs such as the Veterans Affairs (VA) Housing Vouchers.
Additionally, on a monthly basis the HOT Program holds a Case Managers Meeting that brings together
homeless providers, other social service providers, County staff, City staff, City Police, and the HOT case
manager to discuss current issues with HOT clients and to identify potential solutions. Additionally, there is a
HOT Steering Committee comprised of elected officials, program managers, and City staff who work to make
larger program‐wide and policy level changes to improve the homeless outreach, services, and prevention
efforts in South San Francisco and County‐wide.
Addressing the emergency shelter and transitional housing needs of homeless persons
Due to the CDBG spending limitations on public service activities, the City has very few funds to support public
services which include the operating costs of the shelters. This year the City was unable to allocate CDBG
funding to an emergency and/or transitional shelter. However, the City was able to make non‐monetary efforts
to address the emergency shelter and transitional housing needs of homeless persons by continuing to actively
participate in the San Mateo County Continuum of Care (CoC), the county‐wide planning body that coordinates
housing and services funding for homeless families and individuals. Currently, City staff sits on the CoC Steering
Committee and Project Performance Subcommittee. This year the CoC focused on creating ways to better
evaluate and improve the effectiveness of the County’s homeless programs. In FY 13‐14 the CoC adopted a set
of performance standards and is in the process of developing policies and procedures for performance
monitoring. The standards that were approved are:
1. Percentage of exits to permanent housing;
2. Housing retention rate;
3. Participants obtaining employment income during program participation;
4. Participants increasing total income during program participation;
5. Program occupancy levels;
6. CoC/Emergency Solutions Grant (ESG) grant spending rates; and
7. Homeless Management Information System (HMIS) data quality.
These performance measures will allow the CoC to identify areas of improvement and better address the needs
of homeless persons.
15
Exhibit A
CAPER φτυχ‐φτυψ
υχ OMB Control No: 2506‐0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Helping homeless persons (especially chronically homeless individuals and families, families with
children, veterans and their families, and unaccompanied youth) make the transition to permanent
housing and independent living, including shortening the period of time that individuals and families
experience homelessness, facilitating access for homeless individuals and families to affordable
housing units, and preventing individuals and families who were recently homeless from becoming
homeless again
As mentioned above, this year the City was unable to provide funding for the operating costs of the shelters.
However, the City has made other efforts to help homeless persons transition into permanent housing. First, the
City’s HOT Program has already successfully placed some clients into permanent housing which is a huge success
given the HOT clients are the most difficult to serve of the homeless population.
Second, the City actively participated in the San Mateo County Continuum of Care (CoC) Steering Committee
which developed system‐wide quantitative objectives this year that focus on prevention and rapidly rehousing
the homeless. Measures of success are analyzed quantitatively by the following results:
1. Reductions in total numbers of homeless people (including specific goals for reducing chronic, veterans,
and family homelessness);
2. Reductions in the number of new entries into homelessness;
3. Reductions in the rate of returns to homelessness; and
4. Reductions in the length of time people are homeless.
Further, there are a wide variety of services that helped homeless persons (shown below by type of homless)
transition into permanent housing within the County:
Families with Children ‐ San Mateo County Human Services Agency operates a motel voucher program for
homeless families and InnVision Shelter Network operates a wide range of emergency and transitional housing
programs for families.
Veterans ‐ There are dedicated beds for Veterans at the Maple Street Shelter and Haven Family House. In
addition, the Housing Authority operates the Veterans Affairs Supportive Housing (VASH) permanent housing
voucher program.
Youth ‐ The San Mateo County Mental Health Association (MHA) operates the Support and Advocacy for Youth
in Transition (SAYAT) Program, which provides case management and housing search/stabilization services to
homeless youth.
16
Exhibit A
CAPER φτυχ‐φτυψ
υψ OMB Control No: 2506‐0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Helping low‐income individuals and families avoid becoming homeless, especially extremely low‐
income individuals and families and those who are: likely to become homeless after being
discharged from publicly funded institutions and systems of care (such as health care facilities,
mental health facilities, foster care and other youth facilities, and corrections programs and
institutions); and, receiving assistance from public or private agencies that address housing, health,
social services, employment, education, or youth needs
In order to help individuals and families at risk of homelessness, the City's goal is to fund and support nonprofits
that provide basic supportive services such as health services, clothing, and legal services. These services
address basic needs and foster stabilization. For example, this year the City allocated CDBG funding to John’s
Closet, which provided new clothing to low income children, and to the Salvation Army’s Rental Assistance
Program, which provided emergency rental assistance. Also, City‐sponsored programs that are not funded with
CDBG help low income families and individuals. For example, the City has an adult literacy program (Project
Read), the Community Learning Center, subsidized child care and after school programs, and adult day care
programs for seniors. Project Read and the Community Learning Center programs provide residents with basic
skills, such as learning English and how to read and write and the child care and adult day care programs help
low income families care for their children and elderly family members.
Additionally, the City rented out five (5) City‐owned affordable housing units to the County for their
Emancipated Foster Youth Program. In addition to the housing provided by the City, the County also provides
case management for all of the foster youth in the program. This provided housing for 10 individuals and helped
prevent them from becoming homeless.
Although the City was successful in providing social services and housing assistance for those at risk of
homelessness, the City did face some challenges. This year both the City and the County cut their funding to
North Peninsula Neighborhood Services Center (NPNSC), the City’s core service agency, due to the organization’s
lack of capacity to meet programmatic and accounting standards. This significant loss in funding eventually led
to NPNSC’s closing. Although the City lost its core service agency, the County Human Services Agency (HSA) was
able to fill this safety net service gap in the interim and found a new core service agency, the YMCA Community
Resource Center, which began operating in July 2014.
17
Exhibit A
CAPER φτυχ‐φτυψ
υω OMB Control No: 2506‐0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
CR‐30 ‐ Public Housing 91.220(h); 91.320(j)
Actions taken to address the needs of public housing
The South San Francisco Public Housing Authority (SSFPHA) operates as a separate entity and submits its own
action plans and performance reports to HUD separately from the City of South San Francisco. The SSFPHA
manages 80 units of affordable public housing. Information about the needs and strategy of the SSFPHA can be
found in the SSFPHA’s Annual Plan.
Actions taken to encourage public housing residents to become more involved in management and
participate in homeownership
Not applicable
Actions taken to provide assistance to troubled PHAs
Not applicable
18
Exhibit A
CAPER φτυχ‐φτυψ
υϊ OMB Control No: 2506‐0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
CR‐35 ‐ Other Actions 91.220(j)‐(k); 91.320(i)‐(j)
Actions taken to remove or ameliorate the negative effects of public policies that serve as barriers to
affordable housing such as land use controls, tax policies affecting land, zoning ordinances, building
codes, fees and charges, growth limitations, and policies affecting the return on residential
investment. 91.220 (j); 91.320 (i)
The City took the following actions to remove or ameliorate the negative effects of public policies that serve as
barriers to affordable housing:
The City’s municipal code, SSFMC section 20.390, provides incentives to developers for the production
of housing that is affordable to lower and moderate‐income residents.
The City continued to implement the City’s Inclusionary Housing Ordinance which requires all new
residential development to provide a range of housing opportunities for all identifiable economic
segments of the population, including households of low‐ and moderate‐income. South San Francisco
has one of the higher requirements in San Mateo County, with a minimum of 20 percent of all approved,
owner‐occupied, residential development consisting of four or more units to be restricted to and
affordable to low‐ and moderate‐income households. The City also continued to support its existing
Below Market Rate (BMR) units.
The City’s General Plan, and specifically the Housing Element, includes policies that support the
development of affordable housing.
The City is currently participating in a grand nexus study with other cities in San Mateo County to
explore the option of adopting a commercial linkage fee that would go towards the establishment of an
affordable housing fund.
The City continued to support the rehabilitation of existing housing stock by using CDBG funding to
support home repair programs, including the Center of Independence of Individuals with Disabilities’
(CID) Housing Accessibility Modification Program, Rebuilding Together Peninsula, and the City‐
Sponsored Housing Rehabilitation Program.
The City continued to participate in 21 Elements, a Countywide Housing Element Update collaboration
project
The City continued to cooperate with other governmental agencies and take an active interest in seeking
solutions to area‐wide housing problems.
Actions taken to address obstacles to meeting underserved needs. 91.220(k); 91.320(j)
The main obstacle the City faces in meeting underserved needs is a lack of funding. With the loss of RDA funds
and declining CDBG entitlements, the City has limited capabilities in meeting the needs of the community.
Additionally, many local service providers are also experiencing declines in both private and public funding,
which further hinder their capability to meet needs. The City plans to address this obstacle by continuing to look
for new funding sources and find creative ways to leverage and utilize existing funding. Additionally, the City will
encourage collaboration amongst itself, other jurisdictions, and non‐profits.
19
Exhibit A
CAPER φτυχ‐φτυψ
υϋ OMB Control No: 2506‐0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Actions taken to reduce lead‐based paint hazards. 91.220(k); 91.320(j)
The City continued to incorporate lead testing and clearances for all rehabilitation projects it sponsors in order
to ensure that all federal lead safe practices are met. The City also made lead‐based paint information available
to local non‐profit agencies and to homeowners and renters in the City. Additionally, the City continued to have
lead‐based paint information on its website.
Actions taken to reduce the number of poverty‐level families. 91.220(k); 91.320(j)
The City of South San Francisco used a multi‐faceted approach to reducing poverty in the community:
Public Services
First, the City funds and/or supports a variety of non‐profit organizations that provide housing assistance, food,
child care, clothing, health services, and other emergency services to low income residents. The City also
promotes communication and collaboration among the nonprofits to avoid duplication of efforts and to be able
to provide more comprehensive, ”wrap around” services for low income residents. Additionally, the City has
in‐house programs that also help residents improve their economic opportunities. For example, the City’s
Community Learning Center offers classes in English, computers, native language literacy, job training, and
citizenship along with providing activities for children.
Housing
Safe and affordable housing is an essential component in the efforts to reduce poverty. With the loss of RDA
funding, the City was unable to contribute to the development of new affordable housing however the City did
make efforts to maintain the existing supply of affordable housing by funding multiple home rehabilitation
activities (See Section CR‐20 ‐ Affordable Housing). The City also continued to operate its 16 affordable housing
units and oversee the Below Market Rate (BMR) Program. Finally, this year City staff mailed and/or emailed 101
affordable housing resources packets in addition to fielding numerous phone calls and in‐person inquiries
regarding information on affordable housing. These resource packets along with the City’s website are updated
on a regular basis with affordable housing information.
Economic Development
The City also takes on various economic development efforts to attract and retain businesses which in turn
create jobs in South San Francisco. The City operates the Business Cooperation Program (BCP) which seeks to
lower the cost of doing business in the City. The BCP implements the City’s Business Attraction and Retention
objectives by offering assistance to companies through the Private Assessment Clean Energy (PACE) program,
the Employment Training Panel (ETP) assistance, and the Governor’s Office of Business and Economic
Development (Go‐Biz) financial programs.
The City also partnered with Skyline College’s Bay Area Entrepreneur Center (BAEC) which is a business
incubator/accelerator and resource center for start‐up companies and early stage companies. Additionally, the
BAEC offers classes, workshops, one‐on‐one technical assistance, and other support services to increase the
likelihood of business success.
Finally, the City’s Commercial Rehabilitation Program provided façade improvement grants/loans to Downtown
businesses to improve the appearance in the historic Downtown. These improvements are aimed to help the
Downtown increase sales, stabilize businesses, retain jobs, and reduce vacancies. For the next fiscal year this
program will be funded with the City’s General Fund rather than CDBG funds to allow for both interior and
20
Exhibit A
CAPER φτυχ‐φτυψ
υό OMB Control No: 2506‐0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
exterior business improvements.
The City is continually working to help reduce the number of families living in poverty however there are
significant challenges to accomplishing this long‐term goal. The biggest barrier to reducing poverty is the lack of
adequate state, county, and federal funds for social services and affordable housing. For example, CDBG funding
for public services is limited to 15% of the City’s entitlement amount. With that said the City continues to strive
for efforts that creatively and efficiently work within these constraints.
Actions taken to develop institutional structure. 91.220(k); 91.320(j)
The City made the following efforts to improve and/or develop institutional structure:
Continued to work with other local jurisdictions as part of the CDBG "Work Group" to increase
collaboration and standardize and automate administrative and monitoring processes. For example, this
year the CDBG Work Group moved the environmental review and project approval process for minor
home repair programs into an online format.
Continued to serve on the Continuum of Care (CoC) Steering Committee and be involved in all CoC
decision‐making. The CoC Steering Committee is the organized group that guides the implementation of
San Mateo County's homeless services system. The CoC undertakes a wide range of efforts to meet the
needs of homeless persons and those at risk of homelessness.
The City continued to participate in 21 Elements, a Countywide Housing Element Update collaboration
project.
Continued to participate in the San Mateo County HOME Consortium and to serve on the San Mateo
County Housing & Community Development Committee (HCDC).
Continued to work with the Homeless Outreach Team. This includes the City’s participation in the HOT’s
Case Manager meetings and Steering Committee.
Continued using City Data Services, an online grant management system, in conjunction with the County
of San Mateo and other entitlement cities to increase efficiency, consistency, and timeliness of reporting
and invoicing for CDBG subrecipients.
Actions taken to enhance coordination between public and private housing and social service
agencies. 91.220(k); 91.320(j)
The City took the following actions to enhance coordination between public and private housing and social
service agencies:
Continued to collaborate with the County of San Mateo, private housing developers, lenders, and non‐
profit housing developers in order to create more affordable housing.
Encouraged collaboration and cooperation among local service providers.
21
Exhibit A
CAPER φτυχ‐φτυψ
υύ OMB Control No: 2506‐0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Continued to participate in the CoC Steering Committee which brings together all the homeless service
providers throughout the County.
Continued to work with the Homeless Outreach Team which brings together the HOT case manager, City
police and staff, homeless providers, and other social service providers.
Continued to fund non‐profit agencies serving low‐income residents.
Continue to build and improve relationships with local service providers.
Worked with Rebuilding Together Peninsula and CID to coordinate housing repair and rehabilitation
needs throughout the community.
Provided event space and staffed a housing resource fair which was put on by the Housing Leadership
Council during Affordable Housing Week (May 2014). The fair featured exhibitors and presentations on a
wide‐range of available products, services, and programs targeted for homebuyers, renters, seniors, and
homeowners.
Identify actions taken to overcome the effects of any impediments identified in the jurisdictions
analysis of impediments to fair housing choice. 91.520(a)
This year the City supported Project Sentinel, a fair housing provider, which successfully investigated and
conciliated one reasonable accommodation case (benefiting two individuals) and is in the process of
investigating three other reasonable accommodations for one disabled tenant and two familial status
discrimination cases. Project Sentinel also conducted three fair housing audits (i.e. fair housing tests),
participated in five outreach events, and provided consultations and referrals to 73 South San Francisco
residents.
Additionally in FY 12‐13, the City adopted an updated Analysis of Impediments (AI) to Fair Housing Choice which
identifies private and public sector impediments to fair housing. Below are the impediments identified in the AI
and the actions the City took to address each impediment.
Private Sector Impediments & Actions
Impediment 1: Discriminatory terms, conditions, privileges, or services and facilities in the rental markets
The City continued to support testing and enforcement activities, efforts to educate landlords and property
management companies about fair housing law, and efforts to educate housing consumers in fair housing rights.
Impediment 2: Discriminatory refusal to rent or negotiate for rental
The City continued to support testing and enforcement activities, efforts to educate landlords and property
management companies about fair housing law, and efforts to educate housing consumers in fair housing rights.
Impediment 3: Failure to make reasonable accommodation or modification
The City continued to support testing and enforcement activities, investigations into actual cases, and efforts to
educate housing providers about requirements for reasonable accommodation or modification.
22
Exhibit A
CAPER φτυχ‐φτυψ
φτ OMB Control No: 2506‐0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Impediment 4: Discriminatory patterns in predatory lending
The City continued to support efforts by outside groups to educate buyers through credit counseling and home
purchase training.
Impediment 5: Unequal distribution of small business loans
The City of South San Francisco does not have the capacity or resources to monitor or enforce equal distribution
of small business loans however should an opportunity become available to do so, the City would consider it.
Public Sector Impediments & Actions
Impediment 1: Lack of 2012 HUD funding for Project Sentinel
Project Sentinel was able to identify and evaluate the causes of denial of HUD funding in 2012.
Impediment 2: Ineffective fair housing outreach and education efforts by Project Sentinel
The City, along with the County and other entitlement jurisdictions, conducted an on‐site monitoring visit of
Project Sentinel’s fair housing cases, audits, outreach, and education efforts and identified improvements to
make them more effective.
Impediment 3: Failure to adequately document fair housing activities done by Project Sentinel
The City revised Project Sentinel’s reporting requirements to improve the effectiveness of Project Sentinel’s
outreach and documentation. These reporting changes included requiring Project Sentinel to hold at least one
outreach in South San Francisco each year and required more detailed information on cases, audits, and
consultations.
23
Exhibit A
CAPER φτυχ‐φτυψ
φυ OMB Control No: 2506‐0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
CR‐40 ‐ Monitoring 91.220 and 91.230
Description of the standards and procedures used to monitor activities carried out in furtherance of
the plan and used to ensure long‐term compliance with requirements of the programs involved,
including minority business outreach and the comprehensive planning requirements
The City uses the Consolidated Subrecipient Monitoring Plan (“Monitoring Plan”) that was developed by the
entitlement jurisdictions in San Mateo County to review performance over a period of time and to evaluate
compliance of non‐profit subrecipients funded with CDBG funding. The Monitoring Plan specifies the criteria the
City uses to determine potential areas and levels of risk, which include quarterly desk reviews, new
subrecipients or organizational change, cumulative grant award amount, administrative history, program
performance, and financial capacity. On a quarterly basis, the City conducts a limited review of all subrecipients,
which includes reviewing quarterly performance reports and expense summaries that are submitted by the
subrecipients. These quarterly performance reports update staff as to whether the non‐profit is meeting its
annual objectives and the status of the program. Additionally, the City will conduct on‐site monitoring reviews of
those subrecipients the City determines to have potential risks and/or have not been monitored in recent
years. The on‐site monitoring consists of a programmatic and fiscal review of files, a tour of the program
facilities (as appropriate), an explanation of the services provided, discussions with program and administrative
staff, and introduction to one or more actual beneficiaries (if possible). Also the City conducts in‐depth reviews,
if needed, which typically consist of a concentrated review of a known high‐risk area or critical function.
This year the City conducted on‐site monitoring reviews of Project Sentinel, Rebuilding Together Peninsula,
Sitike Counseling Center, and the Youth Service Bureau. Prior to the on‐site visits, staff reviewed the
subrecipients’ quarterly/annual reports, current budget, requests for payment, fiscal policies & procedures,
audit, financial statements, personnel policies, and profit & loss statements. This review covered the non‐profits’
ability to manage the organization in relation to finances, grant compliance, and program performance. Once
on‐site, staff conducted interviews of key program staff, reviewed program/client files, and asked any follow up
questions that may have arisen from the pre‐visit document review.
The City Council also reviewed the City’s Annual Action Plan and the previous year’s CAPER to ensure that the
City applied its resources to meet community goals.
Citizen Participation Plan 91.105(d); 91.115(d)
Description of the efforts to provide citizens with reasonable notice and an opportunity to comment
on performance reports.
Public Notification Effort
A notice announcing the 15 day public comment period and a public hearing for the CAPER was published in the
San Mateo County Times on September 8, 2014 and a public hearing was held on September 24, 2014. All
notices informed citizens about the purpose of the CAPER and invited them to review the document and to
either submit comments or provide them at the public hearing. All notices included the phone number and
address of the ECD office in order to address any community inquiries. This notification was written in English
and Spanish in an effort to reach the City’s Spanish language community. Draft copies of this report were made
available at all public libraries, at the City’s Department of Economic and Community Development, and on the
City’s website. Additionally, an email notification was sent out to local non‐profits and CDBG subrecipients.
Summary of Citizen Comments ‐ TBD
24
Exhibit A
CAPER φτυχ‐φτυψ
φφ OMB Control No: 2506‐0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
CR‐45 ‐ CDBG 91.520(c)
Specify the nature of, and reasons for, any changes in the jurisdiction’s program objectives and
indications of how the jurisdiction would change its programs as a result of its experiences.
The City did not experience any changes in its program objectives this year. All of this year’s CDBG activities
addressed one of the objectives that were identified in the FY 13‐14 Action Plan. Each year the City conducts a
needs assessment and reviews the prior year performance of each CDBG activity before it allocates funding. This
is to ensure that CDBG funding is being used to meet the City’s objectives for the year. Additionally, each Annual
Action Plan is tailored to address both the long‐term and more immediate needs of the City. For example, in FY
13‐14 the City focused on ADA improvements at public facilities however in the upcoming year the City is
shifting its priorities to improving the Downtown with public right of way improvement projects instead as there
is a greater need to revitalize the Downtown.
Does this Jurisdiction have any open Brownfields Economic Development Initiative (BEDI) grants?
No
25
Exhibit A
CAPER φτυχ‐φτυψ
φχ OMB Control No: 2506‐0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Appendix A – PR 26 CDBG Financial Summary Report
26
Exhibit A
CAPER φτυχ‐φτυψ
φψ OMB Control No: 2506‐0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Appendix A – PR 26 CDBG Financial Summary Report
27
Exhibit A
CAPER φτυχ‐φτυψ
φω OMB Control No: 2506‐0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Appendix A – PR 26 CDBG Financial Summary Report
28
Exhibit A
CAPER φτυχ‐φτυψ
φϊ OMB Control No: 2506‐0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Appendix B – Public Notification Efforts
29
Exhibit A
CAPER φτυχ‐φτυψ
φϋ OMB Control No: 2506‐0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Appendix B – Public Notification Efforts
30
Exhibit A
CAPER φτυχ‐φτυψ
φό OMB Control No: 2506‐0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Appendix B – Public Notification Efforts
31
Exhibit A
CAPER φτυχ‐φτυψ
φύ OMB Control No: 2506‐0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Appendix B – Public Notification Efforts
32
Exhibit A
CAPER φτυχ‐φτυψ
χτ OMB Control No: 2506‐0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Appendix B – Public Notification Efforts
33
Exhibit A
CAPER φτυχ‐φτυψ
χυ OMB Control No: 2506‐0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Appendix B – Public Notification Efforts
34
Exhibit A
Appendix C – IDIS Reports
35
Exhibit A
Appendix C – IDIS Reports
36
Exhibit A
Appendix C – IDIS Reports
37
Exhibit A
Appendix C – IDIS Reports
38
Exhibit A
Appendix C – IDIS Reports
39
Exhibit A
Appendix C – IDIS Reports
40
Exhibit A
Appendix C – IDIS Reports
41
Exhibit A
Appendix C – IDIS Reports
42
Exhibit A
Appendix C – IDIS Reports
43
Exhibit A
Appendix C – IDIS Reports
44
Exhibit A
Appendix C – IDIS Reports
45
Exhibit A
Appendix C – IDIS Reports
46
Exhibit A
Appendix C – IDIS Reports
47
Exhibit A
Appendix C – IDIS Reports
48
Exhibit A
Appendix C – IDIS Reports
49
Exhibit A
Appendix C – IDIS Reports
50
Exhibit A
Appendix C – IDIS Reports
51
Exhibit A
Appendix C – IDIS Reports
52
Exhibit A
Appendix C – IDIS Reports
53
Exhibit A
Appendix C – IDIS Reports
54
Exhibit A
Appendix C – IDIS Reports
55
Exhibit A
Appendix C – IDIS Reports
56
Exhibit A
Appendix C – IDIS Reports
57
Exhibit A
Appendix C – IDIS Reports
58
Exhibit A
Appendix C – IDIS Reports
59
Exhibit A
Appendix C – IDIS Reports
60
Exhibit A
Appendix C – IDIS Reports
61
Exhibit A
Appendix C – IDIS Reports
62
Exhibit A
Appendix C – IDIS Reports
63
Exhibit A
Appendix C – IDIS Reports
64
Exhibit A
Appendix C – IDIS Reports
65
Exhibit A
Appendix C – IDIS Reports
66
Exhibit A
9/24/2014 1
FY
2
0
1
3
-
2
0
1
4
Co
n
s
o
l
i
d
a
t
e
d
A
n
n
u
a
l
P
e
r
f
o
r
m
a
n
c
e
an
d
E
v
a
l
u
a
t
i
o
n
R
e
p
o
r
t
(
C
A
P
E
R
)
Se
p
t
e
m
b
e
r
2
4
,
2
0
1
4
Ci
t
y
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
M
e
e
t
i
n
g
67
Ex
h
i
b
i
t
B
9/24/2014 2
Ho
u
s
i
n
g
Ci
t
y
-
S
p
o
n
s
o
r
e
d
H
o
u
s
i
n
g
Re
h
a
b
i
l
i
t
a
t
i
o
n
P
r
o
g
r
a
m
•
7
h
o
u
s
e
h
o
l
d
s
s
e
r
v
e
d
Mi
n
o
r
H
o
m
e
R
e
p
a
i
r
P
r
o
g
r
a
m
s
•
Ce
n
t
e
r
f
o
r
I
n
d
e
p
e
n
d
e
n
c
e
o
f
In
d
i
v
i
d
u
a
l
s
w
i
t
h
D
i
s
a
b
i
l
i
t
i
e
s
(
C
I
D
)
▫
Ho
u
s
i
n
g
A
c
c
e
s
s
i
b
i
l
i
t
y
M
o
d
i
f
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
(H
A
M
)
P
r
o
g
r
a
m
4
h
o
u
s
e
h
o
l
d
s
s
e
r
v
e
d
•
Re
b
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
T
o
g
e
t
h
e
r
P
e
n
i
n
s
u
l
a
(
R
T
P
)
▫
Na
t
i
o
n
a
l
R
e
b
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
D
a
y
3
h
o
u
s
e
h
o
l
d
s
s
e
r
v
e
d
▫
Sa
f
e
a
t
H
o
m
e
15
h
o
u
s
e
h
o
l
d
s
s
e
r
v
e
d
Be
f
o
r
e
Af
t
e
r
RT
P
N
a
t
i
o
n
a
l
R
e
b
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
D
a
y
FY
1
3
-
1
4
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
68
Ex
h
i
b
i
t
B
9/24/2014 3
Ho
u
s
i
n
g
•
11
s
t
u
d
i
o
a
p
a
r
t
m
e
n
t
s
f
o
r
t
e
n
a
n
t
s
at
8
0
%
o
f
A
M
I
*
o
r
l
o
w
e
r
•
Ne
w
e
x
t
e
r
i
o
r
p
a
i
n
t
,
s
i
g
n
a
g
e
,
st
o
v
e
s
,
e
l
e
c
t
r
i
c
a
l
p
a
n
e
l
s
,
a
n
en
e
r
g
y
e
f
f
i
c
i
e
n
t
w
a
t
e
r
h
e
a
t
e
r
,
en
e
r
g
y
e
f
f
i
c
i
e
n
t
l
i
g
h
t
i
n
g
,
f
l
o
o
r
i
n
g
,
an
d
c
o
n
c
r
e
t
e
a
t
t
h
e
t
r
a
s
h
en
c
l
o
s
u
r
e
.
*A
M
I
=
A
r
e
a
M
e
d
i
a
n
I
n
c
o
m
e
Su
n
d
i
a
l
A
p
a
r
t
m
e
n
t
s
R
e
h
a
b
i
l
i
t
a
t
i
o
n
69
Ex
h
i
b
i
t
B
9/24/2014 4
•
Is
s
u
e
d
4
g
r
a
n
t
s
t
h
a
t
p
r
o
v
i
d
e
d
ne
w
a
w
n
i
n
g
s
t
o
8
D
o
w
n
t
o
w
n
bu
s
i
n
e
s
s
e
s
:
▫
Bu
o
n
G
u
s
t
o
R
i
s
t
o
r
a
n
t
e
▫
Pr
o
n
t
o
P
i
z
z
a
(f
o
r
m
e
r
l
y
C
e
c
i
l
i
a
’
s
P
i
z
z
a
)
▫
Du
m
p
l
i
n
g
E
m
p
i
r
e
▫
Gr
a
n
d
A
v
e
n
u
e
H
a
r
d
w
a
r
e
▫
J
&
J
C
h
e
c
k
C
a
s
h
i
n
g
▫
J
&
J
M
a
r
k
e
t
▫
Me
t
r
o
P
C
S
▫
Mo
m
’
s
T
o
f
u
Co
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
R
e
h
a
b
i
l
i
t
a
t
i
o
n
P
r
o
g
r
a
m
70
Ex
h
i
b
i
t
B
9/24/2014 5
Pu
b
l
i
c
F
a
c
i
l
i
t
y
I
m
p
r
o
v
e
m
e
n
t
s
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
s
Ci
t
y
-
O
w
n
e
d
P
u
b
l
i
c
F
a
c
i
l
i
t
i
e
s
•
Ci
t
y
H
a
l
l
T
o
t
L
o
t
A
D
A
I
m
p
r
o
v
e
m
e
n
t
s
▫
In
s
t
a
l
l
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
r
u
b
b
e
r
i
z
e
d
s
u
r
f
a
c
i
n
g
an
d
a
n
A
D
A
a
c
c
e
s
s
i
b
l
e
p
l
a
y
s
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
e
•
Ma
g
n
o
l
i
a
S
e
n
i
o
r
C
e
n
t
e
r
E
l
e
v
a
t
o
r
Re
f
u
r
b
i
s
h
m
e
n
t
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
▫
Ma
j
o
r
i
t
y
o
f
t
h
e
w
o
r
k
c
o
m
p
l
e
t
e
d
i
n
FY
1
2
-
1
3
w
i
t
h
t
h
e
e
x
c
e
p
t
i
o
n
o
f
a
fe
w
i
t
e
m
s
i
n
F
Y
1
3
-
1
4
No
n
P
r
o
f
i
t
-
o
w
n
e
d
P
u
b
l
i
c
F
a
c
i
l
i
t
i
e
s
•
Bo
y
s
&
G
i
r
l
s
C
l
u
b
▫
De
m
o
l
i
t
i
o
n
a
n
d
r
e
b
u
i
l
d
o
f
a
n
e
x
t
e
r
i
o
r
wa
l
l
a
n
d
p
o
r
t
i
o
n
o
f
t
h
e
r
o
o
f
t
h
a
t
h
a
d
se
v
e
r
e
w
a
t
e
r
d
a
m
a
g
e
a
n
d
m
o
l
d
.
▫
Bo
t
h
t
h
e
C
i
t
y
a
n
d
C
o
u
n
t
y
p
r
o
v
i
d
e
d
fu
n
d
i
n
g
t
o
r
e
b
u
i
l
d
t
h
e
w
a
l
l
a
n
d
r
o
o
f
.
71
Ex
h
i
b
i
t
B
9/24/2014 6
Pu
b
l
i
c
S
e
r
v
i
c
e
s
Or
g
a
n
i
z
a
t
i
o
n
In
d
i
v
i
d
u
a
l
s
Se
r
v
e
d
CD
B
G
F
u
n
d
s
Ba
y
A
r
e
a
L
e
g
a
l
A
i
d
54
He
a
l
t
h
M
o
b
i
l
e
13
5
Jo
h
n
’
s
C
l
o
s
e
t
12
5
Ra
p
e
T
r
a
u
m
a
S
e
r
v
i
c
e
s
10
8
Sa
l
v
a
t
i
o
n
A
r
m
y
1
Si
t
i
k
e
C
o
u
n
s
e
l
i
n
g
C
e
n
t
e
r
2
0
Yo
u
t
h
S
e
r
v
i
c
e
B
u
r
e
a
u
27
Su
b
t
o
t
a
l
47
0
HO
M
E
A
d
m
i
n
F
u
n
d
s
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
S
e
n
t
i
n
e
l
96
To
t
a
l
56
6
72
Ex
h
i
b
i
t
B