Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2010.02.08 Council Workshop Packet AGENDA PASCO CITY COUNCIL Workshop Meeting 7:00 p.m. February 8, 2010 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. ROLL CALL: (a) Pledge of Allegiance. 3. VERBAL REPORTS FROM COUNCILMEMBERS: 4. ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION: (a) Citizen Academy Presentation. (NO WRITTEN MATERIAL ON AGENDA) Presented by Ken Roske, Police Captain. (b) Rental Rehabilitation Program Guidelines(MF# CDBG10.006): 1. Agenda Report from Angie Pitman, Block Grant Administrator dated February 3, 2010. 2. Proposed Resolution. 3. Summary of Rental Rehabilitation Program Guidelines. 4. Rental Rehabilitation Program Guidelines (Council packets only; copy available forpublic review in the Planning office, the Pasco Library or on the city's webpage at htW://www.i)asco-wa.govlwebapj)lcitvcouncilrei)oi-ts). (c) State Grant for Road 40 East Sewer Project: 1. Agenda Report from Robert J. Alberts, Public Works Director dated February 2, 2010. 2. Vicinity Map. 3. Small Communities in Rural Counties Grant Agreement (Council packets only; copy available for public review in the Public Works office, the Pasco Library or on the city's webpage at http://www,Vasco-wa gov/webs P/cit-l-couwilTeppTtsi. (d) Municipal Court Lease Extension: 1. Agenda Report from Gary Crutchfield, City Manager dated February 4,2010. (e) 2009 Community Survey: 1. Agenda Report from Gary Crutchfield, City Manager dated February 2,2010. 2. 2009 National Citizen Survey for Pasco (Council packets only). 5. OTHER ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION: (a) (b) (c) 6. EXECUTIVE SESSION: (a) Potential Litigation (b) (c) 7. ADJOURNMENT REMINDERS: 1. 12:00 p.m., Monday, February S, Pasco Red Lion— Pasco Chamber of Commerce Luncheon Meeting. (Presentation by Kris Watkins, President & CEO,Tri-Cities Visitor & Convention Bureau.) 2. 10:00 a.m., Tuesday, February 9, Senior Center — Senior Citizens Advisory Committee Meeting. (COUNCILMEMBER TOM LARSEN, Rep.; BOB HOFFANN, Alt.) 3. 4:00 p.m., Thursday, February 11, 3416 Stearman Avenue — Solid Waste Advisory Committee Meeting. (COUNCILEMBERS MIKE GARRISON and TOM LARSEN, Reps.; MAYOR JOYCE OLSON and COUNCILMEMBER MATT WATKINS, Alts.) 4. 7:00 p.m., Thursday, February 11, Transit Facility — Ben-Franklin Transit Board Meeting. (COUNCILMEMBER MATT WATKINS, Rep.; MIKE GARRISON, Alt.) 5. 9:30 a.m., Friday, February 12, KONA — KONA Mayor's Report. (MAYOR PRO-TEM MATT WATKINS) AGENDA REPORT FOR: City Council February 3, 2010 TO: Gary Crutchfield, ager Workshop Mtg.: 2/8/10 Rick White, ?—v Regular Mtg.: 2/16/10 Community & Econ mile Development Director FROM: Angie Pitman, Block Grant Administrator SUBJECT: Rental Rehabilitation Program RRP Guidelines (MF# CDBG10-006) I. REFERENCE(S): I. Proposed Resolution 2. Summary of Rental Rehabilitation Program Guidelines 3. Rental Rehabilitation Program (RRP) Guidelines* * (Attachments in Council packets only; copies available for public review in the Planning office, the Pasco Library or on the City's webpage at hitp://www.[)asco- wa.gov/generalinfo/cilycouncilrei)orts). II. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL/ STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: 2/8: DISCUSSION 2/16: MOTION: I move to approve Resolution No. , approving the Rental Rehabilitation Program Guidelines. III. FISCAL IMPACT: NONE IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF: A. On November 7, 2005 Council approved Resolution No. 2908 adopting regulations for the Community Housing Improvement Program (CHIP), a single family dwelling (owner occupied) rehabilitation program. B. On September 8, 2009 Council approved Resolution No. 3188 allocating $297,800 in HOME funds for the RRP Work Plan, C. On November 15, 2009 the Tri-Cities HOME Consortium submitted the 2010 Annual Action Plan in accordance with U,S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) regulations which included the City's allocation for the RRP. V. DISCUSSION: A. Guidelines for administration of the RRP Program are needed to provide criteria for participation in the plan, ensure compliance with Federal, State and City laws governing the program, and provide performance measurement and monitoring goals. The proposed RRP guidelines are based on the existing owner occupied rehabilitation guidelines through the CHIP. B. The requirements of the program guidelines are summarized for Council review and comment, and delineated as to whether it is a Federal/State requirement of the program or local discretion. C. The guidelines are developed to focus on rentals containing 1 to 4 units, which allow HUD "Single Family" Guidelines to be used,reducing administrative costs. D. The RRP guidelines establish priority on rehabilitation of vacant units or units where displacement of tenants will not occur. This eliminates the requirement to provide displacement costs and temporary living quarters for affected renters. 4(b) RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE RENTAL REHABILITATION PROGRAM (RRP) GUIDELINES WHEREAS, the City of Pasco receives through the Tri-Cities HOME Consortium a regular entitlement from the US Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) HOME Investment Partnerships Program for the purpose of improving the availability of affordable housing opportunities in Pasco and establishing private and public partnerships; and WHEREAS, the Pasco City Council approved the Community Housing Improvement Program (CHIP) Single Family Rehabilitation Program regulations by Resolution on November 7, 2005; and WHEREAS, the Rental Rehabilitation Program (RRP) Guidelines have been prepared in conjunction with the Community Housing Improvement Program (CHIP) Single Family Rehabilitation Program; NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PASCO: Section 1. That the Rental Rehabilitation Program (RRP) Guidelines (attached) are hereby approved. PASSED by the City Council of the City of Pasco this day of , 2010 CITY OF PASCO: Joyce Olson Mayor ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: Sandy L. Kenworthy Leland B. Kerr Deputy City Clerk City Attorney SUMMARY RENTAL REHABILITATION PROGRAM REQUIREMENTS x Applicability Pro ram Requirement Goals • Assists rental property owners with health, safety, X security, accessibility and energy improvements ; • Preserves and restore structural integrity, improve X physical quality of rental housing stock; • Improves long-term value and affordability; X • Assists in preservation of neighborhoods. X Eligible Landlord • United States citizen,United States non-citizen national X or qualified alien; • Rents to households falling within the current low- X moderate income guidelines; 0 Makes a minimum contribution of at least 25%of total X project costs toward improvements; • Current property taxes; X • Credit worthy borrower; X 0 Sufficient income to support the primary debt and able to X show evidence of approved funding from primary lender. Real Property • Within Pasco city limits; X • Meets the definition of single family housing at 24 CFR X 92.254(a) (1),rental units having l to 4 units; • Fee Simple Title—the borrower must provide a X preliminary title report that is satisfactory to the City; 0 Meet the definition of affordable,modest housing contained in 24 CFR 92.254(a)(2); X • Property is vacant, or displacement of tenant is not likely X to occur; a After rehabilitation, meet the property standards X contained in 24 CFR 92.251(a)(2); • Free of chipped or peeling paint if the home was built X before 1978, per 24 CFR 92.355; Manufactured Home . In addition to above real property requirements: X • Constructed after June 15, 1976 and in accordance with X standards established under 24 CFR Part 3280; 0 Located on land that is held by the first-time homebuyer, X or the homebuyer has a lease interest in the land for the entire required affordability period; • Meet local building and zoning standards; X • Be fixed to a permanent foundation; X • Be taxed as real property, i.e.title eliminated; and X • Be connected to permanent utility hook-ups. X - 1 - Printed 211!10 es y vl A aay .a � o W a p u ai Applicability Program Requirement Eligible Project • Reasonable and necessary project costs as allowable per X Costs OMB-A87 and 24 CFR 92.602(b)(1) and(3) • Loan to Value Ratio no greater than 103.5%of the sales X price of the home, including required and necessary closing costs. • Health& Safety Rehabilitation Costs X • Structural Rehabilitation Costs X • Weatherization X • Incidental Repairs X • Essential Repairs X Inspections • Meets HUD Housing Quality Standards X Required • Meets Environmental Review requirements X • Meets Lead-Based Paint minimum requirements X • Appraisal X Rehabilitation Loan . Up to $40,000 of direct assistance as silent second X Terms • Three percent interest rate, 10-year term with interest X compounded annually; • $10,000 per unit, maximum of four units per program X year per owner/co-owner. • Lien in no less than 2d position X • Recapture or resale of 100% of HOME investment if X default event occurs during period of affordability (5 years) • Repayment terms for resale or recapture from net X proceeds (pro-rated to return some of owner's investment). • Acceptable primary loan types(conventional loan, fixed X rate, no greater than 30 year term), no adjustable rate or subprime mortgages • Rent to low-moderate income households during period X of affordability • Real property taxes and hazard insurance must be current X at all times • Property kept in good condition, repair and permit no X waste thereof • The home may not be used for any activities prohibited X by law. - 2 - Printed 211110 a a es a°i y $ y .a a O L •'�" 4% 'O d a Applicability Program Requirement a Other Regulations • Fair Housing Act Equal Credit Opportunity Act(ECOA). X Applicable • Real Estate Settlement Practices Act (RESPA) X • Truth in Lending Act(TILA)(Part of federal Consumer X Credit Protection Act) • Right to Financial Privacy Act of 1978 [Codified to 12 X U.S.C. 3401 note) • Title Al of the Personal Responsibility and Work X Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996. Monitoring . City will monitor the landlord via postal mail or other X methods throughout the life of the HOME loan to ensure compliance with residency requirements. - 3 - Printed 2/1110 AGENDA REPORT NO. 4 FOR: City Council February 2, 2010 TO: Gary Crutchfie it %lanager Workshop Mtg.: 02/08/10 FROM: Robert J. Alberts, Public Works Director Regular Mtg.: 02/16/10 SUBJECT: State Grant for Road 40 East Sewer Project I. REFERENCE(S): 1. Vicinity Map 2. Small Communities in Rural Counties Grant Agreement (Council packets only; copy available for public review in the Public Works office,the Pasco Library or on the city's webpage at http://www.Pasco-wa.gov/gcneralinfo/cit�,councilre rts). II. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL/ STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: 02/08: Discussion 02/16: MOTION: I move to accept the grant offered by Washington State Public Works Board in the amount of$550,000 for the Road 40 East Sewer project and, further, authorize the Mayor to sign the contract. III. FISCAL IMPACT: IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF: A) The City Council adopted the 2010-2015 Capital Improvement Program which includes the extension of the East Road 40 sewer pipeline to serve the east side of SR12. V. DISCUSSION: A) The City has received an offer from Washington State Public Works Board for a $550,000 grant for the Road 40 East Sewer project. In accepting the grant, there will be installation of approximately 3,000 feet of 21-inch pipeline, 10 manholes, 300 lineal feet of 30-in bore casing crossing under SR12, connection to the existing system on `A' Street and site restoration. The estimated project cost is 5700,000. Staff recommends Council accept the grant. 4(c) �• }« - ` �,_�§. �r.t 1f�, * ''( .+ -• }qtr k , 1 i'(",- '~, ' �3 l_J i AT oe ' t4i a 110 Stiff• Y I\�_, }R r f .�.`y f' +• �- ate'.:+�� .. , C � `..p�{ ,�� '� g �� � ' L,. ,I f .�+ '•(`1- } � , , � r rte] Lt:l / ., �. �.� - * .ate" ./� i �• - r— {.� hL ko lei M k tsS f .a••r�� y i� ?qk AGENDA REPORT TO: City Council February 4, 2010 FROM: Gary Crutchfi y Manager Workshop Mtg.: 2/8/10 SUBJECT: Municipal Court Lease Extension I. REFERENCE(S): H. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL/ STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: 2/8: Discussion III. FISCAL IMPACT: IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF: A) In 1972, the city entered into a 40-year lease agreement with Franklin County whereby the city paid a portion of the bond debt incurred by the County for construction of the public safety building at the courthouse, , in exchange, the city received a 40-year commitment to occupy municipal court space in the new public safety building. Pasco Municipal Court has operated there ever since and continues to share court space with Franklin County District Court. That agreement will expire at the end of 2012. In order to continue operation of Pasco Municipal Court beyond that date, the city needs to extend the agreement to occupy court space at the courthouse or construct its own court space elsewhere. B) The joint meetings with Franklin County Commission early last year resulted in the mutual conclusion that the common need to expand jail space should also include space for municipal court, at city expense. The Commissioners placed a public safety sales tax issue before the voters, the proceeds of which would have constructed the new jail and municipal court space. Unfortunately, the sales tax ballot issue was not approved by voters last November. V. DISCUSSION: A) Given that the current municipal court agreement will expire in less than three years and construction of a new facility elsewhere will consume most if not all that time period, the city requires a clear indication from Franklin County as to whether or not any extension of the current agreement is possible. Such an extension may first require a decision by the Franklin County Board of Commissioners as to whether or not the sales tax question will be placed before the voters this year. B) Staff requests Council discuss this matter and provide direction as to seeking an extension of the current agreement from Franklin County. 4(d) AGENDA REPORT TO: City Coun February 2, 2010 FROM: Gary Crut f ' ty Manager Workshop Mtg.: 218110 SUBJECT: 2009 Community Survey I. REFERENCE(S): 1. 2009 National Citizen Survey for Pasco (Council packets only) I1. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL / STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: 2/8: Discussion 111. FISCAL IMPACT: None IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF: A) The city contracted with the National Research Center in Colorado in 2005 and 2007 to conduct the "National Citizen Survey" (a trademarked, uniform survey methodology) in Pasco. The survey information has subsequently been used in developing Council goals for the ensuing biennia. B) The National Research Center was again contracted in 2009 to conduct the survey for the city. The attached documents report the results of that survey. V. DISCUSSION: A) The survey reflects a lower response rate (only 244) than the 2005 survey (304 respondents) and the same as for 2007; still, the results are statistically valid with an error factor of 6%. B) Generally, the 2009 survey reflects slightly higher ratings of overall community quality than did the two previous surveys (76% vs. 52% in 2007 and 64% in 2005). The survey reflects about the same percent of the respondents felt the economy was a positive factor in 2009 as in 2007 (25% vs. 23%); however, ratings for both years are lower than in 2005, when 32% viewed the economy as a positive influence. C) Notable positive changes or trends compared to prior year surveys include: • Availability of affordable quality housing - 66% (52% in 2007; 55%in 2005). • Extent of nuisance problems in Pasco - 15% (21% in 2007, 26% in 2005). • Use of the City website in the past 12 months — 53% (38% in 2007, 32% in 2005). D) A few negative trends are also of note: • Reporting of crime (if respondent or household member was a victim of crime in the last 12 months) - 69% (76% in 2007, 87% in 2005). • Percent of respondents feeling "safe" in Pasco downtown after dark — 24% (27% in 2007, 31% in 2005). Positive ratings of code enforcement services — 30% (39% in 2007, 38% in 2005). Note: this is somewhat difficult to understand given the positive trend regarding perception of nuisance problems (paragraph C, above). 4(e) E) The respondents' perception of local government compared to state and federal government remains positive at 69% while the state scored 50%, and federal 49% positive. F) In addition to the standard survey questions, the city included three policy questions designed to gauge the opinion of the community regarding three particular, current issues. The results are as follows: • Recycling Service: To what extent do you support or oppose establishing curbside recycling service, if it requires an increase to your garbage pickup service cost of$4 to $5 dollars per month? o 63% somewhat or strongly support this notion (35% strongly support it); 19% strongly oppose it. • Fluoride: To what extent do you support or oppose the City continuing to add fluoride to the City's drinking water system? o 73% of the respondents somewhat or strongly support this idea (43% strongly support it); and only 16% strongly oppose it. • Regional Centers: A committee, consisting of representatives of the cities of Kennewick, Richland and Pasco, has been studying the feasibility of developing regional centers (e.g„ aquatic center, performing arts center, etc.) that could be used by all residents in the region and considering voter approved sales tax and property tax options to finance them. Because a sales tax would be paid by visitors as well as residents and would be paid in much smaller increments throughout the year, among other reasons, the committee has tentatively concluded that a sales tax increase would be preferable to a property tax increase. To what extent do you agree or disagree with this conclusion? o 77% somewhat or strongly support a sales tax increase vs. a property tax increase to support development of regional centers (30% strongly support it); and only 9% strongly oppose it. G) The survey document will be used by staff in preparing proposals for Council consideration at its Council retreat. The entire survey document will be posted on the city's website after February 10, so that anyone can view the comparative results.