Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
KANSAS CITY, MISSOURI’S 2012-2016 CONSOLIDATED PLAN
And 2012 One-Year Action Plan
TABLE OF CONTENTS
CONTENTS Page EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 5 Introduction & Purpose 5
Re-BUILDKC/Neighborhoods: Overview and Framework Major Issues Target Areas Map and Census Tracts Available Funds
Summary of 2012 Funding and Planned Accomplishments 10 SECTION I: MANAGING THE PROCESS (91.200(b)) 11 A. Lead Agency, Subrecipients and Oversight 11 B. Consolidated Plan and One-Year Action Plan Development Process: 13 SECTION II: OUR STRATEGIES - HOUSING AND HOMELESS NEEDS, MARKET ANALYSIS & FIVE-YEAR STRATEGIC PLAN 16 A. Housing and Homeless Needs: 16 Part 1: Housing Needs (91.205) 16 Part 2: Homeless Needs (91.205(c)) 21 Part 3: Non-homeless Special Needs (91.205(d)) 27 Part 4: Lead-based Paint (91.205(e)) 29
B. Housing Market Analysis: 29 Part 1: Market Analysis (91.210) 29 Part 2: Public and Assisted Housing (91.210(b)) 35 Part 3: Homeless Inventory (91.210(c)) and Special Needs and Services 39
(91.210(d)) Inventory of Existing Facilities and Services
Part 4 : Barriers to Affordable Housing (91.210(e) 40
C. 5-Year Strategic Plan: 40 General Priority Needs Analysis and Strategies (91.215(a)) Part 1: Priority Setting (92.215(a)(1)): 40 HUD Table 2A – Priority Housing Needs/Investment Plan (p. 72) HUD Table 2B – Priority Community Development Needs (p. 88)
3
Part 2: Target and Coordination of Assets, Resources and Services: 46 Basis for Allocation of Investments Map of Area Plans and Target Areas (including census tracts) 5-Year Projection of Outputs and Outcomes by Target Area
D. Specific Housing Objectives (91.215(a)(4)): 62
Part 1: Summary of Priorities, Objectives and Outcomes (Table 1C) 62 Priority Housing Needs (91.215(b))
Part 2: Affordable Housing Objectives (91.215(b)): 67 Proposed Objectives, Accomplishments and Outcomes
(Refer to HUD Table 2B, page 88) Description of Resources Use of HOME Funds for TBRA
Part 3: Public Housing Strategies (91.215(c)): 70 Description of Strategies
Part 4: Homeless Strategies (91.215(d)): 77 Description of Strategy for Addressing Homeless and Priority
Needs by Income Group Specific Objectives (91.215) (HUD Table 1C-p. 65)
Part 5: Non-Homeless Special Needs (Refer to HUD Table 1B): 83 Priority Non-Homeless Housing Needs (91.215(e)) Special Needs Objectives (91.215(e)) HUD Table 1C (p. 65)
Part 6: Community Development: 84 Priority Community Development Needs (91.215(f))
(Refer to HUD Table 2B and 2C) Neighborhood Revitalization Strategy Areas (91.215(g)) Strategies to Reduce Barriers to Affordable Housing (91.215(h)) Lead Based Paint Assessment and Strategies (91.215(i)) Antipoverty Strategy (91.215(h)) Institutional Structure (91.215(k)) Low Income Housing Tax Credit Coordination (91.315(k)) Coordinated Approach to Fair Housing Impediments Actions to Eliminate Barriers For People With Disabilities Actions to Eliminate Discrimination in Renting Actions to Reduce the Number of Vacant Structures and Re-use
Foreclosed Properties Part 7: Program Monitoring (91.230): 96 Part 8: Housing Opportunities for People with AIDS (HOPWA): 97
4
SECTION III: 2012 ONE-YEAR ACTION PLAN 99
Application for Federal Assistance, Form 424s Community Development Block Grant Program HOME Investment Partnership Program Emergency Shelter Grant Program Housing Opportunities for Persons with HIV/AIDS Program
2012 Action Plan – Available Funds 112 Annual Action Plan – Executive Summary 113 Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program 119 Statement of Specific Goals and Objectives 2012 Funding and Description of Activities
o Consolidated Plan Target Area Map o Summary of Program Funding and Planned Accomplishments o Low Income Census Tracts Map o Low-moderate Income Census Tracts Map
HOME Investment Partnerships (HOME) Program 137 Statement of Specific Goals and Objectives 2012 Funding and Description of Activities Map of KC Dream Program Service Areas HOME Matching Funds Resale/Recapture Guidelines Affirmative Marketing Activities MBE/WBE Outreach
Emergency Solutions Grant (ESG) Program 142 Statement of Specific Goals and Objectives 2012 Funding and Program Description ESG Match
Housing Opportunities for Persons with AIDS (HOPWA) Program 146 Statement of Specific Annual Goals and Objectives 2012 Funding and Program Descriptions
ATTACHMENTS
A. Grantee Certifications B. Public Participation
• Plan Schedule • Notices • Public Comment • City Council Resolution Approving the Plan
C. Consolidated Plan Listing of Projects (Table 3C) D. Resale & Recapture Provisions
5
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
2012-2016 CONSOLIDATED PLAN And 2012 One-Year Action Plan
Introduction & Purpose: Kansas City, Missouri is a designated entitlement city for the receipt of federal funds from the Department of Housing and Urban Development (H.U.D.). The following is Kansas City’s Five-Year Consolidated Plan for the period 2012 – 2016. The document describes the planning and management process, assesses the city’s housing, community and special needs, identifies policies and strategies over the period to address those needs, and allocates funds from federal and other sources on an annual basis. The four entitlement programs covered by the plan include:
• Community Development Block Grants (CDBG) • Home Investment Partnership (HOME) • Housing Opportunities for Persons with AIDS (HOPWA) • Emergency Solutions Grant (ESG).
A significant reality facing Kansas City and most other major urban centers is the decreasing level of federal and local public funding to address an increasing number of housing, community and special needs of low income residents. Major challenges include over 10,000 foreclosures of mainly single family homes, continuing population loss in the central core, stagnant levels of income and high levels of unemployment, and increasing numbers of persons and families who are homeless. In addition, in 2005 the City’s primary subrecipient, the Housing and Economic Development Financial Corporation (HEDFC), was placed in federal receivership. Over the past seven years the City has worked with HUD and the Receiver to identify and implement solutions to returning or disposing of assets. To guide this effort, in the fall of 2010 the City Manager convened a team of city staff to develop a response to the Court, Receiver, and HUD. The result, reBUILDKC/neighborhoods, approved by City Council Committee Substitute for Resolution No. 100903, on October 28, 2010, is a plan which established the overall framework for:
“…an aggressive, ambitious plan to address Kansas City’s neighborhoods. Starting from the foundation of FOCUS Kansas City and building on the Area Plans resulting from FOCUS, we build a game plan for the future of our neighborhoods.”
6
According to the Court’s Termination Order, issued on January 6, 2011, the Receivership will effectively end on October 31, 2013. The timing of the requirement to develop a new, five-year housing plan provides the City an opportunity to re-define its housing policies, strategies, and governance toward addressing its housing and resource needs. The following Five-Year Strategic Plan adopts the City’s Vision Statement from the FOCUS Kansas City – Strategic and Comprehensive Plan, which is:
We, the people of Kansas City, must work together with the City to provide the stewardship to guide the continued revitalization of the City. Together, we will build on its strengths to make it the most exciting place to live, work and play in the region, creating a viable and charismatic alternative to the suburbs. Home to our most venerable neighborhoods, active commercial centers, significant cultural institutions and the majority of our historical assets, the urban core is the real and symbolic heart of our city. Enhancing its health and vibrancy is critical to the long-term success of our entire Metropolitan Area.
With this vision statement as an overall guide, over the next five years the City will strive to address the following Major Housing and Community Development issues. The strategies to address these issues are shown in Section II. The combined issues and strategic policy responses are shown in Appendix A – Resolution 120159, adopted by City Council on March 8, 2012.
Major Housing and Community Development Issues Public resources and programs at the federal, state and local levels are decreasing and not sufficient alone to address the range of housing development and affordable housing issues. The City has an increasingly high number of foreclosed and vacant single family homes and abandoned vacant lots. Kansas City neighborhoods, the building blocks of the city, are challenged by the loss in population, reduced owner occupancy, increasing number of renter occupied homes owned by absentee owners, and deteriorating housing conditions. The number of homeless persons, veterans, and families with children continues to outgrow resources. As residents live longer and the population ages, creating and providing suitable housing for this group presents ongoing challenges and opportunities. The demand for Section 8 vouchers and services through the Kansas City Housing Authority for very low-income residents remains high, while the supply of vacant, abandoned single-family housing structures also is increasing. Attracting capable, experienced for-profit and non-profit developers to create affordable housing units in-scale within targeted areas is an important need. Even with the progress made in reusing and transferring assets under the Housing and Economic Development Financial Corporation Receivership (HEDFC), significant redevelopment work remains to be done to complete these projects in the affected areas.
7
The primary elements of the reBUILDKC strategy include: 1. Disposal of all non-productive assets in order to release financial resources for more effective
approaches to housing development and support; 2. Assignment of responsibility for asset management to agencies that are most capable of
efficiently and effectively managing those assets; 3. Use of program income, first, to retire Section108 debt and then for the expansion of
neighborhood infrastructure and services; 4. Target resources for maximum impact in selected areas based on the guidelines of Focus
Kansas City and Area Plans, while providing maintenance support in other areas of the City; and,
5. Building of internal and external capacity and partnerships that are essential for an aggressive housing development and support program.
Strategic Target Areas: In response to the scarcity of resources, and the corresponding need to show measureable outcomes by targeting resources to FOCUS area plans and sub-target areas, the Consolidated Plan will use the map shown on page 8 as a guide for setting strategies and funding allocations. The specific maps of each Area Plan are shown in Section II, with one year funding allocations and programs shown in Section III. The census tracts of each specific plan area are shown on page 9. Available Funds: The 2012 One Year Action Plan (Section III) describes the plan’s funding priorities and outcomes, with anticipated H.U.D. funding from each of the following sources: Funding: CDBG Entitlement Funds $7,551,015.00
Program Income from HEDFC $5,350,000.00 Program Income from Loans $ 495,468.00
Total $13,396,483.00 Funding: HOME Entitlement Funds $1,870,946.00
HOME Program Income $2,365,600.00 Reprogrammed Funds $ 900,000.00 Total $5,136,546.00
Funding: 2012 ESG Entitlement Funds $ 662,929.00
Funding: 2012 HOPWA Entitlement Funds $1,115,258.00 TOTAL 2012 SOURCES OF FUNDS $20,311,216.00
8
9
Census Tracts by Targeted Area Plans
Heart of the City
Greater Downtown
Swope Midtown Plaza Hickman Mills Truman Plaza Briarcliff/ Winnwood
37.00 3 75.00 46.00 129.03 6.00 202.01
38.00 11 76.00 51.00 129.04 7.00 202.02
52.00 43 77.00 52.00 129.06 8.00 203.00
53.00 44 78.02 53.00 130.03 9.00 204.00
54.00 152 79.00 63.00 131.00 10.00 205.00
55.00 153 80.00 65.00 132.03 18.00 206.02
56.01 154 87.00 66.00 132.08 19.00 206.03
56.02 157 88.00 67.00 132.10 20.00 206.04
57.00 158 89.00 69.00 174.00 21.00 209.01
58.01 159 90.00 71.00 22.00 209.02
60.00 161 95.00 72.00 23.00 222.00
61.00 162 96.00 73.00 34.00
63.00 221 98.01 74.00 154.00
160.00 75.00 160.00
161.00 167.00 164.00
164.00 168.00
165.00 169.00
166.00 178.00
169.00
171.00
10
Summary of 2012 Program Funding & Planned Accomplishments CDBG Program
Funding Levels Planned Accomplishments
- Public Facilities
1,512,000 3 Facilities - Minor Home Repair Program by CDC's 1,100,000 125 Homes Assisted - Minor Home Repair City-wide by City 540,000 90 Homes Assisted - Targeted Development Activities 701,805 Special Activities in Target Areas - Blight Elimination
100,000 200 Blighting Influences Removed in Commercial Areas
- Public Services
1,335,725 6580 Persons Assisted - Economic Development
75,000 20 Businesses Assisted
- Targeted Code Enforcement 500,000 200 Homes in Target Areas Code Enforced
Total 5,864,530
HOME Program Funding Levels Planned Accomplishments
- City/CDC Partnership Program 2,519,668 49 Single Family Homes Purchased/Rehabbed/Sold or Rented
- KC Dream Program 800,000 60 Homes Sold - Affordable Rental Housing Program 1,500,000 60 Units of Affordable Housing
Total 4,819,668
ESG Program
Subrecipient Funding Levels Outputs
reStart- OES
17,500 90 Community Assistance
10,000 50
Benilde Hall
59,180 375 Synergy
32,000 350
reStart Emergency Shelter 76,001 1200 Rose Brooks
65,881 575
Sheffield
46,002 50 Unallocated Funds
337,821
na
NCSD Administration
18,544
na
Total 662,929
HOPWA Program
Subrecipent Funding Levels Outputs
reStart, Inc.
60,000
75 SAVE, Inc.
985,960
477
Admin./Unallocated Funds
69,298
na
Total 1,115,258
11
Section I: MANAGING THE PROCESS (91.200(b))
A. Lead Agency, Subrecipients and Oversight:
Beginning in May 2012 the City will make several administrative changes which both respond to the directives identified in the October 2010 reBUILD/KC Plan and the need to create a more efficient delivery system due to local and federal funding reductions. The major changes in the City’s delivery of housing and community development services began in 2005 when the City’s primary subrecipient, the Housing and Economic Development Financial Corporation (HEDFC), was placed in federal receivership. Over the past six years the City has worked with H.U.D. and the Receiver to identify and implement solutions to returning or disposing of assets. To guide this effort, in the fall of 2010 the City Manager convened a team of city staff to develop a response to the Court, Receiver, and HUD. The result was reBUILD/KC Plan. The plan has two primary goals: 1. To create a new, aggressive, and productive direction for the redevelopment of Kansas City’s neighborhoods; and
2. To establish effective management control over key assets currently held by HEDFC in order to direct those assets to the enhancement of the City’s neighborhood improvement program. The plan included the following objectives the further defined the above goals: To affirm the City’s current housing policy that was developed with input by neighborhood
stakeholders and was approved by the City Council (see Appendix 1);
To continue the use of all HUD entitlement funds toward existing successful housing and public service programs through a targeted approach;
To create a renewed City and agency/partner relationship and to develop a housing delivery organizational structure for this partnership;
To address the servicing of the loan portfolio, whether by the city or another entity, in order to manage and reduce the portfolio;
To determine which assets will be transferred to the City or to another appropriate agency;
To coordinate with the Receiver over the short-term liquidation of HEDFC properties determined to be non-assets, using approved Area Plans and development plans as the guide for identifying areas of need and programming; and
To coordinate and target existing City programs and activities to re BUILD/KC /Neighborhood projects.
12
The Plan provides a management framework for the use of previously held HEDFC assets and applies recently completed Area Plans to guide housing and development strategies and decision-making over the next five years. The Area Plan maps and priorities provide framework plans, funding, and management according to seven Area Plans.
The administrative structure will also change to create a more responsive overall department. In the spring of 2011 the City Manager named an Assistant City Manager to serve as Interim Director of the Housing & Community Development Department. With this single point of contact in place, the City has made significant progress toward having assets returned from the Receiver and on course to end the receivership according to the Federal Court’s Termination Order. Actions necessary to end the Receivership over the next two-years are:
Transfer of multifamily loan portfolio to Economic Development Corp. May 1, 2012
Transfer of Holy Temple Home Property to EDC. May 1, 2012
Transfer of Beacon Hill Property to EDC or other action as approved May 1, 2012 by the Court.
Pay-off of Beacon Hill Section 108 Loan August, 2012
Receivership to cease daily operations December 31, 2012
Final Order of the Court Dismissing Receiver October 31, 2013
13
Beginning in May 2012 the Department will be merged with the Neighborhood and Community Services Department to create a new department called the Neighborhoods and Housing Services Department (NHSD). The new department will have three primary divisions:
Property Preservation-Dangerous Buildings Division – Code Enforcement and Dangerous Buildings;
Housing and Human Services Division – Housing development, marketing/lending, rehabilitation, community development, and human services; and
Neighborhood Services Division – Neighborhood outreach, tow lot, animal control, etc.;
Administration.
Section II, Part 6, Institutional Structure, page 91, provides a description of the NHSD and agencies involved in the Plan’s implementation. As adopted, the Housing and Human Services Division (HHSD) of the Neighborhoods and Housing Services Department will be the lead agency for overseeing the 2012-2016 Five Year Consolidated and the 2012 One Year Action Plan. The various sub-recipients were all selected through a Request for Proposal process. Staff from HHSD reviewed all CDBG, HOME and ESG responses. The Health Department performed the task for HOPWA and forwarded all recommendations back to the lead agency for continuation of the approval process. The City Council reviewed and approved the 2012 Consolidated Plan (See Attachment B – Committee Substitute for Resolution No.120159) on March 8, 2012, and approves all CDBG/HOME/ESG/and HOPWA contracts in excess of $75,000.
B. Consolidated Plan and One-Year Action Plan Development Process To begin the 2012 planning process, on September 21, 2011, the “Citizen Participation Plan and Guide to Requesting Funding Under the Five Year Consolidated Plan and 2012 Action Plan for CDBG, HOME, ESG and HOPWA” was released. In September and October, 2011, HCDD staff held three public hearings, and one meeting with the Northland Neighborhoods, Inc. Board of Directors, in accordance with H.U.D. requirements to obtain citizen input and comments on the application process and funding priorities. Citizens were encouraged to mail, fax, or e-mail their ideas and comments to the City. In addition, staff held “input-sessions” with the participating agencies and organizations representing three school districts, seven community development corporations, the Local Initiatives Support Corporation (LISC), and two homeless and special needs service providers. The Mayor, City Manager, and City Council played important roles in the planning process. The major issues (shown in Section III) were presented and discussed, the need for targeting resources was stressed, and documentation of accomplishments (outputs and outcomes) were included in each target area.
14
Public information about the application process was posted on the City’s website and notification was placed in September in the Kansas City Star as well as in The Call, Dos Mundos, and Kansas City Hispanic News, three minority newspapers. On February 5, 2012 the Draft 2012 One Year Action Plan was published in the Kansas City Star, The Call and Dos Mundos and placed on the City’s website www.kcmo.org. The Draft 2012 One Year Plan was made available also at the main branch of the Kansas City Public Library. The required 30-day citizen comment period followed prior to submission of the Final Plan to HUD. A full summary of the plan development process and timetable is shown below. The 2012 Draft One Year Action Plan was presented to the City Council’s Plans, Zoning and Economic Development Committee on February 27, 2012, and all applicants for CDBG funds were encouraged to provide comment on that day. At the next week’s hearing on March 7, 2012, applicants for HOME, ESG and HOPWA provided their comments. The full City Council approved the plan, Committee Substitute for Resolution No. 100903 (as shown on March 8th, 2012).
City Council’s public hearings are always shown on Channel 2, the Kansas City Government Cable Channel. Citizens also were able to e-mail their comments and testimony to the City relative to the 2012 Action Plan. A list of commenters is included as part of Attachment B of this document. The following timetable was used for guidance in completing the City's 2012 Consolidated One Year Action Plan:
CITIZEN PARTICIPATION PLANNING & CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL SCHEDULE
August 31, 2011
September 21, 2011
Meeting schedule posted online at www.kcmo.org/housing
Publication of notice in Kansas City Star, The Call and Dos Mundos
2012 Action Plan Application Schedule – Public Informational Meetings
September 29, 2011
October 5, 2011
October 13, 2011
October 22, 2011
November 2, 2011 November 16, 2011
December 2, 2011
Robert J. Mohart Center – 3200 Wayne, 6:00 p.m.
City Hall - 414 E. 12th Street, 6th Floor, 10:00 a.m.
Brush Creek Community Center - 3801 Emanuel Cleaver Blvd., 6:00 p.m.
Citizen Participation Plan Administratively Adopted (30-day review period)
Northland Neighborhood Office – 3015 NE Vivion Road, 6:00 p.m. All 2012 funding requests due to Housing and Community Development Department, City Hall, 11th Floor, by 12:00 noon.
Funding requests reviewed by staff and recommendations completed.
15
December 16, 2011
February 5, 2012 February 29, 2012 March 7, 2012 March 8, 2012 March 30, 2012 June 1, 2012
August 9, 2012 August 31, 2012
Submittal of Action Plan funding recommendations to City Manager.
Draft Action Plan Recommendations published in Kansas City Star, Dos Mundos, The Kansas City Call, Kansas City Hispanic News and available on City’s website, www.kcmo.org/housing. 2012 Action Plan CDBG funding recommendations presented to Planning, Zoning, and Economic Development Committee, public testimony taken; City Council Chambers, 26th Floor, City Hall, 1:30 p.m. 2012 Action Plan HOME, ESG and HOPWA funding recommendations presented to Planning, Zoning and Economic Development Committee, public testimony taken; City Council Chambers, 26th Floor, City Hall, 1:30 p.m. City Council approval of 2012 Consolidated Plan prior to submission to HUD. Consolidated Action Plan submitted to HUD - begins HUD 45–day review period. 2012 Consolidated Action Plan Program Year begins.
Tentative date for Public Hearing on 2011 Consolidated Annual Performance and Evaluation Report (CAPER) 2011 CAPER Submitted to HUD.
16
Section II: HOUSING AND HOMELESS NEEDS
MARKET ANALYSIS & FIVE-YEAR STRATEGIC PLAN
A. Housing and Homeless Needs This purpose of this section is to provide a general description of the housing needs in Kansas City for the next five-year period. Section A includes four parts (Note: Census tracts for each target area are shown on page 9):
• Part 1 - provides information on city demographics derived from the 2009 American Community Survey Data (ACS) according to the following categories:
o Population o Age of Population o Housing Units o Income o Unemployment o Race/Ethnicity
The narrative provides a description on a city-wide basis, and summarizes each according to the primary Area Plans used as a basis for targeting investments in this Consolidated Plan.
• Part 2 – summarizes the nature and extent of homelessness and the need for special facilities and services to address the stated need. The homeless housing need is summarized on HUD Table 1A;
• Part 3 – provides information on the number of persons that are not homeless, but require special housing or supportive services, which include elderly, persons with disabilities, persons with HIV/AIDS, and other special needs. This information is summarized on HUD Table 1B; and
• Part 4 – provides estimates of the number of housing units which may contain lead-based paint hazards.
Part 1: Housing Needs (91.205) Population According to the ACS, the population of Kansas City Missouri is 459,787. This continues a positive trend of increased population for the second time in twenty years. According to the 1990 census, Kansas City’s population was 436,000 and it increased slightly in 2000 to 442,000. It’s projected to reach 473,000 by 2015. This positive trend can be attributed to a renewed interest in city living (downtown revitalization) and changing demographics, including an increase in college age residents and empty nesters.
17
Population Heart of the City 35,338 Downtown 23,177 Swope 32,795 Midtown 40,904 Hickman Mills/Ruskin 30,734 Truman Plaza 47,588 Briarcliff/Winwood 45,553 City 459,787
Age of Population According to the ASC data, of the 459,787 people who live in Kansas City, 51.2% (235,456) fall into the combined 20-54 age grouping, followed by the 0-19 age bracket at 26.7% (122,928). The next highest demographic is the 55 and over group, which is 22.0% (101,423). This data further shows the number of over 55 age group persons residing in designated Area Plan areas total 53,617, or 53% of the total persons city-wide over 55 years of age.
Age of Population 0-19yrs 20-34yrs 35-54yrs 55 - Older Heart of the City 10,295 6,405 9,632 9,006 Downtown 4,561 8,486 6,160 3,970 Swope 9,933 6,685 8,354 7,823 Midtown 7,058 14,985 10,304 8,557 Hickman Mills/Ruskin 9,925 6,430 8,157 6,222 Truman Plaza 16,763 10,832 12,599 7,394 Briarcliff/Winwood 11,986 10,429 12,493 10,645 City 122,928 109,533 125,903 101,423 Income Kansas City has a very diverse income. While on the average, its population is less affluent than the metropolitan area, its median income is actually higher than the State of Missouri. However, while the median income for the City is $44,629 it’s less than that of the region by 17% but compared to 2002, the median household income in Kansas City was $39,230, which represents an increase in income of almost 35%. Inflation has dramatically affected the housing market and the rise in inflation needs to be lower than the rise in income for markets to become stable. However the Consumer Price Index indicates that $50,000 in the year 2000 has the same buying power as $65,800 has currently in 2012. Therefore if income does not grow as fast as inflation, then consumers have less income to spend on housing.
18
Median Income
Minimum Maximum Heart of the City 12,690 30,901 Downtown 16,526 56,613 Swope 15,607 40,383 Midtown 12,690 85,107 Hickman Mills/Ruskin 29,053 62,347 Truman Plaza 16,526 35,881 Briarcliff/Winwood 39,250 83,474 City 44,629 44,629
The maps on page 19 and 20 show Low Income and Low and Moderate Income by census tracts. Unemployment In March 2012 the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported that the Kansas City metropolitan area had the largest one year decline (January 2011 to January 2012) in the unemployment rate of all reporting 372 metro areas. The report found that Kansas City’s rate dropped 2.1 percentage points from 9.3% to 7.2%. According to the “2010 Equality Index,” conducted by the Urban League of Greater Kansas City, in 2009 in Jackson County the unemployment rate for blacks was 15.0% versus 5.4% for whites. Race/Ethnicity Of the total 459,787 people in Kansas City, the largest segment based upon race is White, who comprise 59.2% or 272,193 people. The next largest group is Black who make-up 29.9% of the total population at 137,476. This data reflects a slight decrease from 2000 census where the White population totaled 61% and Blacks made up 31%. However, the Hispanic population has increased from 7% of the city’s population back in 2000, to current data indicating 10% of city-wide population, or 45,978 people. This is a two percent increase in the Hispanic population along with the increase in other minorities as well. Kansas City’s urban core is still dominated by Blacks and Hispanics while Whites are still the majority city-wide. Race/Ethnicity White Black Native Am. Bi-Racial Hispanic Asian Other Heart of the City 7.2% 86.6% 0.4% 3.1% 5.2% 0.2% 2.3% Downtown 47.6% 39.2% 0.7% 3.5% 14.4% 3.3% 5.7% Swope 11.8% 39.2% 0.4% 3.0% 2.7% 0.4% 1.2% Midtown 61.7% 27.3% 0.5% 2.8% 9.1% 3.4% 4.2% Hickman Mills/Ruskin 29.7% 61.4% 0.3% 3.7% 6.5% 1.5% 3.4% Truman Plaza 38.2% 29.2% 0.9% 4.7% 39.0% 4.7% 22.2% Briarcliff/Winwood 80.8% 8.0% 0.6% 3.4% 8.5% 4.2% 2.9% City 59.2% 29.9% 0.5% 3.2% 10% 2.7% 4.5%
19
Low Income Census Tract Map
20
Low/Moderate Income Map
21
Part 2: Homeless Needs (91.205(c)) (Refer to HUD Table 1A – Homeless and Special Needs Populations – page 23) Survey of Homeless Needs in Kansas City1
:
A total of 1,658 surveys were completed. Survey data was entered into an SPSS data base. Survey respondents were provided unique ID codes, which were cross tabbed with gender, ethnicity and age to identify duplicate surveys. Thirty three (33) duplicate surveys (1.99%) were deleted from the data base. The following results were based on the analysis of 1,625 unduplicated respondent surveys.
County in which respondent spent the night on January 24th, 2012
County Jackson
MO Clay MO
Cass MO
Johnson MO
Platte MO
Johnson KS
Wyandotte KS Other
N %
1,578 (97.1%)
8 (0.5%)
0 (0.0%)
14 (0.9%)
1 (0.1%)
4 (0.2%)
17 (1.0%)
3 (0.2%)
Sheltered and Unsheltered
Over two thirds (69.0%) of the persons responding to the Point in Time Count were currently sheltered. Just under one third (31.0%) were unsheltered.
1 Homeless Services Coalition of Greater Kansas City- January Point in Time Survey
69.0%
31.0%
Sheltered and Unsheltered
Sheltered
Unsheltered
22
Individuals and Families Homeless Individuals = 1,261 = 51.8% Homeless Families = 364 Accompanying “other” family members = 809 = 48.2% Total unduplicated Homeless individuals = 2,434
Individuals and Families – Sheltered and Unsheltered
Individuals (51.8%) Sheltered Unsheltered Unknown Total
870 391 0 1,261 Families
Sheltered Unsheltered Unknown Total 252 112 0 364
Accompanying “other” family members Sheltered Unsheltered Unknown Total
563 246 0 809 Total Family Members (48.2%)
Sheltered Unsheltered Unknown Total 815 358 0 1,173
Total Homeless Sheltered Unsheltered Unknown Total
1,685 749 0 2,434 The 2012 Point-in-Time (PIT), conducted by the Homeless Services Coalition of Greater Kansas City, identified 112 unsheltered family households totaling 358 persons. Compared to the 2011, these numbers represent an increase of 104% among family households and 107% among individuals in families. The number of unsheltered single individual’s equaled 391 for an increase of 18% over the prior year count. The total number of people housed equaled 1,685, 793 in emergency shelter and 892 in transitional housing, respectively. The overall percentage of persons housed in 2011 and 2012 remained at over 1/3 of the population. The 2012 PIT count,
51.8% 48.2%
Individuals and Families
Individuals
Members of Families
23
45.0%
50.3%
0.6% 2.9% 1.2%
Emergency Shelter Transitional Housing Domestic Violence Shelter Safe Haven Shelter Permanent Supportive Housing
for the first time, included a count of the number of youth households with one or more children less than 18 years of age equaled 16. Overall, the count shows a 9% increase in homelessness since the 2011 count.
Where Spent Night
Table 1A Homeless and Special Needs Populations
Continuum of Care: Homeless Population and Subpopulations Chart
Point in Time Count January 24, 2012
Part 1: Homeless Population Sheltered Unsheltered Total
Emergency Transitional
Number of Families with Children (Family Households): 106 138 112 356
1. Number of Persons in Families with Children 237 575 358 1170
2. Number of Single Individuals and Persons in Households without children 548 312 391 1251
3. Number of Youth Households with one or more children under 18 years of age—no adults 8 5 0 13
(Add Lines Numbered 1 & 2 & 3 Total Persons) 793 892 749 2,434 Part 2: Homeless Subpopulations Sheltered Unsheltered Total
a. Chronically Homeless 201 129 230 b. Seriously Mentally Ill 442 174 616 c. Chronic Substance Abuse 425 218 643 d. Veterans 186 112 298 e. Persons with HIV/AIDS 19 9 28 f. Victims of Domestic Violence 458 41 499 g. Unaccompanied Youth (Under 18) 13 0 11
24
Other factors impacting homelessness in Kansas City are noted in the following table.
Total Sheltered Unsheltered Individual Family
Loss of Income 728 (44.8%)
505 (45.0%)
223 (44.3%)
590 (46.8%)
138 (37.9%)
Eviction foreclosure
301 (17.5%)
217 (19.3%)
84 (16.7%)
200 (15.9%)
101 (27.7%)
Mental Illness 386 (19.1%)
270 (24.1%)
116 (23.1%)
329 (26.1%)
57 (15.7%)
Substance Abuse
500 (30.8%)
388 (30.1%)
162 (32.2%)
429 (34.0%)
71 (19.5%)
Lack of Income 644 (39.6%)
443 (39.5%)
201 (40.0%)
495 (39.3%)
149 (40.9%)
Kicked out of house
277 (17.0%)
190 (16.9%)
87 (17.3%)
223 (17.7%)
54 (14.8%)
Divorce 92 (5.7%)
61 (5.4%)
31 (6.2%)
74 (5.9%)
18 (4.9%)
Stranded transient
53 (3.3%)
36 (3.2%)
17 (3.4%)
48 (3.8%)
5 (1.4%)
Medical catastrophe / condition
260 (16.0%)
167 (14.9%)
93 (18.5%)
221 (17.5%)
39 (10.7%)
Domestic Violence
265 (16.3%)
228 (20.3%)
37 (7.4%)
147 (11.7%)
118 (32.4%)
Past Incarceration
259 (15.9%)
146 (13.0%)
113 (22.5%)
236 (18.7%)
23 (6.3%)
Other 198 (12.2%)
81 (7.23%)
117 (23.3%)
160 (12.7%)
38 (10.4%)
Priority Homeless Needs The City utilizes several sources of data to establish priority needs, i.e. PIT, Census Data, U.S. Conference of Mayor survey statistic, public school homeless and nutrition data, Housing Inventory Count (HIC) etc. A brief summary from each source is included in the following passages. According to the Missouri Department of Elementary and Secondary Education (DESE), there were more 2,300 homeless children in area school districts living in homelessness during the 2010-2011 school year. Of this number, 1,109 were in the Kansas City, Missouri School District. In addition, the Missouri Department of Health and Senior Services data, shown in Chart 1, reflects a high percentage of children income qualifying for the U. Department of Agriculture, Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) in the Kansas City Missouri area.
Chart 1 - Missouri Department of Health and Senior Services- Nutrition Services
District Enrollment Free Enrollment
Reduced Price
Enrollment
% Free and Reduced Enrollment
NORTH KANSAS CITY 74 19078 6839 1801 45.29% KANSAS CITY 33 18474 13893 872 79.92% HICKMAN MILLS C-1 6294 4766 500 83.67%
25
CENTER 58 2490 1525 234 70.64% RAYTOWN C-2 8727 4008 664 53.54% GRANDVIEW C-4 4367 2591 363 67.64%
The lack of housing is often characterized by underlying contributing causes. According to the 2011 U. S. Conference of Mayors Status Report on Hunger and Homelessness, when cities were asked to identify the three main causes of homelessness among households with children, three-fourths (21) of the cities cited unemployment, 71 percent (20) cited lack of affordable housing, and 57 percent (16) cited poverty. Cited less frequently were domestic violence by 18 percent (five) of the cities, eviction by 14 percent (four) of the cities, and low-paying jobs by 14 percent. Kansas City reported the following in response to the status report:
Homeless Individuals Households with Children FAMILY DISPUTES LACK OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING EMANCIPATION FROM FOSTER CARE
UNEMPLOYMENT
UNEMPLOYMENT POVERTY Homeless persons participating in the 2012 Point in Time (PIT) gave the following top three reasons for homelessness:
Cause Total Sheltered Unsheltered Individual Family
Loss of Income 728 (44.8%)
505 (45.0%)
223 (44.3%)
590 (46.8%)
138 (37.9%)
Lack of Income 644 (39.6%)
443 (39.5%)
201 (40.0%)
495 (39.3%)
149 (40.9%)
Substance Abuse 500 (30.8%)
388 (30.1%)
162 (32.2%)
429 (34.0%)
71 (19.5%)
Respondents to the 2011 PIT reported the same 3 top reasons for their homelessness. Chart 2 shows the next three (3) highest reported contributing factors from the PIT count
Chart 2 - 2012 Point in Time Count
Cause Total Sheltered Unsheltered Individual Family
Mental Illness 386 (19.1%)
270 (24.1%)
116 (23.1%)
329 (26.1%)
57 (15.7%)
Eviction foreclosure
301 (17.5%)
217 (19.3)
84 (16.7%)
200 (15.9%)
101 (27.7%)
Kicked out of house
277 (17.0%)
190 (16.9%)
87 (17.3%)
223 (17.7%)
54 (14.8%)
Chart 3, the Housing Inventory Count of Sheltered and Unsheltered People, reflects changes over a three year period, 2009, 2010, and 2011. The number of people sheltered over the three year period increased while the number of unsheltered showed a dramatic increase.
26
Chart 3 Housing Inventory Chart
Data Analysis, Needs and Priorities Based upon the Homeless Priority need data sources, the City, in collaboration with the local CoC, prioritized investments to target housing for:
Priority 1 Families with Children Priority 2 Unaccompanied Youth Priority 3 Individuals
Though there are more homeless individuals than families, the resources available for individuals are greater than those for families who typically need larger living space, child care, access to public schools, etc. The risk factors are higher for continuing the cycle of homeless due to children and/ or youth being involved. Needs by Income Group Income by group was not available specifically for homeless persons. The Department of Labor provides at least a “snap shot” of unemployment in the Kansas City area. Unemployment rates in Kansas City for the past three years are shown below.
Unemployment Rates Year Rate 2009 9.9% 2010 9.4% 2011 8.5%
Though the level of unemployment may be declining, the rates are much higher for the specific groups than the overall rate for the city as shown in Chart 4. Other data, such as the increasing number of homeless children in school and the rising number of children eligible for free and reduced lunch, coupled with the unemployment statistics reveals the impact of poverty on homelessness. In addition, the census shows alarmingly high unemployment rates when the population is broken down by age, race and ethnicity.
27
Chart 4 Unemployment Demographics (December 2011)
Total Unemployment 8.6%
Men 8.6% Women 8.5%
Both Sexes 16 to 19 years 19.9% White 8.3%
Men 8.2% Women 8.4%
Hispanic / Latino 17.1%
Men 19.3% Women 13.7%
Black/ African American 10.9%
Men 11.9% Women 10.1%
The rate of unemployment among women with families during this period was 12%. These statistics coupled with other significant data noted in the previous passage, supports the priority of targeting families with children as our city’s number one priority. Unemployment for youth between the ages of 16 to 19 tops all the unemployment statistics at 19.9%. The data supports our second priority which focuses on unaccompanied youth. The priority order is based on the assumption also that the larger the family the more resources are needed for placement. Citizens that review the plan should not erroneously come to conclusion that the priorities indicate no need because homelessness, regardless of the population group, is significant in Kansas City. The priorities are more due to the limited resources available to the City of Kansas City to address simultaneously all the need. Part 3: Non-homeless Special Needs (91.205(d)) Table 1B provides an estimate of persons in a subpopulation referred to as being Non-homeless with special needs. These include elderly and frail elderly, those with severe mental illness, disabled persons, persons with alcohol and drug addictions, persons with HIV/AIDS, and victims of domestic violence. While the data and source is included, the City acknowledges that the special needs of elderly persons are much higher than presented below. With over 100,000 persons over 55-years of age, and many of these with lower income and challenged with “aging-in-place” (those elderly persons who choose or must live in their own homes), the special needs of this group alone continues to grow.
28
Another category of concern is victims of domestic violence. The CHAS data (below) shows an unmet need of 41 persons, also acknowledged as unexpectedly low based on in-take numbers from service agencies.
Table 1B Special Needs (Non-Homeless) Populations
SPECIAL NEEDS SUBPOPULATIONS**
Priority Need Level
High, Medium, Low,
No Such Need
Unmet Need
Dollars to Address Unmet Need
Multi-Year
Goals
Annual Goals
Elderly M 44 0
Frail Elderly M unknown 0
Severe Mental Illness M 406 0
Developmentally Disabled M 34 0
Physically Disabled M 25 0
Persons w/ Alcohol/Other Drug Addictions M 294 0
Persons w/HIV/AIDS H 890 0 2760 552
Victims of Domestic Violence M 41 0
Other
TOTAL 1,734
** Source: Missouri Department of Mental Health & KCMO Health Department The City provides services to persons with HIV/AIDS in a 15-county region in Western Missouri and Eastern Kansas. By the end of 2011, a total of 4,241 persons had been reported as HIV+ in the Missouri portion of the transitional grant area (TGA). HIV/AIDS is an impoverishing condition, and the majority of the persons living with the disease continue to be extremely low income, yet housing costs in Kansas City continue to rise. According to the National Low Income Housing Coalition (NLIH), approximately 65% of the people living with HIV/AIDS cite stable housing as their second greatest need, exceeded only by health care. This translates to approximately 2,757 persons living in Kansas City, Missouri who will need housing assistance. Of this number, almost 1900 persons are receiving assistance through various providers.
29
Part 4: Lead-based Paint (91.205(e)) Overview of Need: The need to address lead paint hazards in residences is an integral part of any city housing program. There are federal, state and local laws to protect the public from the hazards of lead paint. Even though, lead paint was banned in 1978, most of the lead paint that was ever used on homes prior to the ban still exists on houses today. The old lead paint may be partially or totally covered by new non-lead paint, but the fact that it remains on homes throughout Kansas City means that care must be taken to protect Kansas Citians from lead paint hazards. Lead in Housing: Local housing data shows the following risk to Kansas City families - of a total 220,969 housing units, 70% or 153,795 units, were built by or before 1979 putting them at risk for containing lead paint. Houses built before 1940 are at highest risk of containing lead paint with the highest percentage of lead within the paint. The age of these houses also puts them at high risk for significant deterioration. Both of these factors combine to make these homes the highest risk for lead paint hazards. Kansas City contains 50,025 (23%) of these very high-risk homes. Lead Poisoning in Children: A primary reason lead paint is a concern is because lead paint in homes is the number one cause of lead poisoning in children. Lead Poisoning can cause permanent brain damage, heart and kidney damage, attention deficit disorders, learning disabilities, and death. While both children and adults can become lead poisoned, children are more likely to become lead poisoned and suffer the most damage from lead poisoning. Women exposed to lead when pregnant may pass the lead to their unborn child. B. Housing Market Analysis (91.210) Section B includes four parts that provide an overall description of the city’s housing market according to supply and demand indicators, the condition of housing, cost, availability by housing types, and responses to those with special needs. Part 1 provides an analysis of the housing market according to the following categories (Note: Census tracts for each target area are shown on page 9): Housing Units and Household Size Homeownership Housing Price to Income Ratio Rental Vacancy Rate Age of Housing Housing Conditions Foreclosed/Vacant Housing
The description is provided on both a city-wide basis and according to the primary Area Plans used as a basis for targeting investments in this Consolidated Plan. The purpose of this targeting of the analysis to smaller geographic areas is to show the range of market conditions from one area to another.
30
Housing Units and Household Size Overall, the Kansas City Housing market remains soft. With a consistently moderate unemployment rate, a rather large inventory of foreclosures and tighter lending standards, many experts predict that a full economic and housing recovery won’t occur for a couple of years. Kansas City has 221,858 total housing units which is an 11.5% increase from the 2000 census data. The housing stock continues on its positive course and has done so since 1980. The average household size of Occupied Housing unit is 2.41 persons compared with the average household size of Owner Occupied Housing units which is 2.55. Like other areas of the country, Kansas City was greatly affected by the national housing crisis and its aftermath, building permits dropped and housing prices decreased.
Households # Units Owner Renter Home Value Range Heart of the City 19,674 6,506 8,104 $48,427 - $80,924 Downtown 13,535 2,850 8,553 $64,016 - $253,013 Swope 15,986 6,441 6,428 $48,982 - $113,669 Midtown 26,707 7,205 14,239 $53,211 - $373,796 Hickman Mills/Ruskin 13,244 6,845 4,940 $74,737 - $117,965 Truman Plaza 20,527 6,802 9,154 $45,485 - $106,338 Briarcliff/Winwood 20,608 11,958 6,936 $100,365 - $212,727 City 221,858 Homeownership Percentages by Area The homeownership rate in Kansas City is 56.2% compared to 67% ownership rate in the metropolitan area. While consistent with the national trend of having more rental properties in urban core areas, the Kansas City homeownership market is less severe than other major cities. New home sales in Kansas City increased in the month of December 2011 by 17% compared to December new home sales in 2010. Also, existing home sales increased 8% in December, which suggests that the market is beginning to slowly turn but still remains low compared to its peak years.
Homeownership Percentage
Heart of the City 44.5% Downtown 25.0% Swope 50.1% Midtown 33.6% Hickman Mills/Ruskin 58.1% Truman Plaza 42.6% Briarcliff/Winwood 63.3% City 56.2%
31
Housing Price Income Ratio The housing price to income ratio in Kansas City is 2.44 as of December 2011. Since 2005 the housing price to income has fluctuated between 2.27 and 2.5 in 2008. The national ratio has consistently been around 3.0 throughout the 1990’s but dramatically increased to 4.6 in 2006. This increase was caused by the increase in housing prices across the country, therefore while nationally the income increases were nominal, housing prices grew exponentially. In Kansas City, incomes increase close to the same pace as housing prices. Housing Price Range Median Home Value Minimum Median Home Value Maximum Heart of the City $48,427 $80,924 Downtown $64,016 $253,013 Swope $48,982 $113,669 Midtown $53,211 $373,796 Hickman Mills/Ruskin $74,737 $117,965 Truman Plaza $45,485 $106,338 Briarcliff/Winwood $100,365 $212,727 City $135,806 Rental Housing Percentages by Area Kansas City’s rental housing market is 43.8% of residential housing units. Multifamily construction declined over the last three years. Since 2005, most of the multifamily development activity has been in downtown and midtown. Nationwide both median rents and median values rose faster than incomes for renters. This creates a detrimental situation, when the rents increase more than incomes, more of a burden is placed on renters to make up the other costs.
Rental Percentage Heart of the City 55.5% Downtown 75.0% Swope 49.9% Midtown 66.4% Hickman Mills/Ruskin 41.9% Truman Plaza 57.4% Briarcliff/Winwood 36.7% City 43.8%
32
Vacancy Rate The vacancy rate is the number of vacant units in comparison to the total number of occupied units. In 2009 the vacancy rate in owner occupied housing had grown to 3.1% which is an increase from 1.9% for the City back in 2000. The national average for owner occupied market was 2.0% and it also increased to 3.1% so our city is aligned with the national average. However, back in 2000, the renter vacancy rate was 8.8% but it increased to 11.9% by 2009.
Vacant Unit Percentage Heart of the City 25.7% Downtown 15.8% Swope 19.5% Midtown 19.7% Hickman Mills/Ruskin 11.0% Truman Plaza 22.3% Briarcliff/Winwood 8.3% City 13.3%
Age of Housing Raw census information cannot adequately describe the physical condition of housing stock. However, the best gauge to measure or presume the condition of a house can loosely be based upon the age of the structure. It is reasonable to assume houses that were built between 50-100 years ago may be in worse condition than a house that was constructed 10-20 years ago. In Kansas City, 70.5% of the existing housing stock was built between 1940 and 1979, however 29% of the existing housing units were built between 1980 - 2010. Therefore, based upon our previous assumption, 45% of our housing inventory is over 50 years old and falls into the category of worse condition.
Age of Housing Before 1940-1959 1960-1979 1980-1999 2000-2010 Heart of the City 13,621 3,093 2,069 897 Downtown 7,590 2,676 1,864 1,410 Swope 10,338 3,880 1,381 386 Midtown 18,764 4,804 2,008 1,136 Hickman Mills/Ruskin 4,693 6,674 1,616 265 Truman Plaza 15,858 3,106 1,266 304 Briarcliff/Winwood 7,010 8,646 3,492 1,464 City 100,816 55,705 42,543 22,840
33
Housing Conditions In 2001, the City initiated a comprehensive housing conditions survey in partnership with the Kansas City Neighborhood Alliance and the University of Missouri at Kansas City. The survey provided a “snap-shot” of the city’s housing conditions on an estimated 82,000 residential parcels from Vivion Road to 85th, State Line to Van Brunt, and in the Ruskin/Hickman Mills Areas. The survey used a model Housing Conditions Needs Assessment Worksheet which surveyed exterior housing rehabilitation needs according to five structural categories: Roofs, Foundations & Wall, Windows & Doors, Porches, and Exterior Paint. The worksheet showed the number of structures in each category by condition, and provides an estimate of funds needed to make the required repairs. The estimated total exterior rehabilitation needs for the five categories ten years ago was $246.9 million. Interior code improvements were not factored into this assessment of housing rehabilitation needs, making the estimate conservatively lower than expected. As the conditions map on page 34 shows, neighborhoods exhibiting the greatest housing condition need were located immediately north and south of the I-70 corridor, with improved conditions outward from this area of greatest conditions need. Areas with “severely” deteriorated housing are shown in “red” while areas determined in “excellent” condition are shown in “blue.” While this survey was intended to be carried-out every ten years, due to funding reductions the survey was not initiated for this planning cycle. The City will consider utilizing the survey model in targeted areas to show progress toward improvements.
34
2000-01 Housing Conditions Survey
35
Vacant and Foreclosed Housing As shown on the Vacant Structures Map, page 36, there are approximately 13,000 vacant structures, defined as those with vacant water meters in excess of 90-days, per records from the City’s Water Services Department. The City continues to face a concentrated number of defaulted mortgage loans and foreclosures in targeted urban core areas, and the negative impact of homeowners vacating and abandoning their homes. Properties in some stage of foreclosure, whether pre or post-foreclosure, increase the financial burden on the City as they contribute to community blight. Four zip codes within Kansas City’s urban core [64127, 64128, 64130 and 64132] had 8% or more of their residential housing stock in serious mortgage delinquency in January 2008, even before the general downturn in the nation’s economy. By 2010, there were thirteen zip codes that met that same threshold, extending south and east well beyond the urban core. In the two years since that point in time, only two of those thirteen zip code areas have been able to stabilize and drop to a range of 4% to 6% of their housing stock in serious mortgage foreclosure [64149 and 64138] and those are further geographically from the urban core. In conclusion, the concentration of the serious mortgage delinquencies remains unabated in the urban core and continues to make demands on our City resources. Vacant structures are associated with higher incidences of crime and fires, creating increased demand on police and fire resources, as well as negative consequences for residents of the surrounding neighborhood (Source: Kelley Edmiston, Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City).
A study performed in July 2011 found that almost 3,000 vacant houses in the Jackson County portion of Kansas City were two or more year’s delinquent in property taxes. These homes have almost certainly been abandoned and are blighting influences. Combined, the economic impact of having 13,000 vacant structures with no water ($50/month), gas and electric ($150/month average) revenues, and 3,000 of these properties having delinquent taxes
($800/year), is estimated at $33.6 million annually. Part 2: Public and Assisted Housing (91.210(b)) The wait lists for HAKC’s Public Housing (PH) and Housing Choice Voucher (Section 8) Programs continue to grow monthly, with the PH wait list as of February 2012 at 7,620 (a 16% increase over the previous year) and the Section 8 wait list at 13,392 (a 9% decrease over the
36
37
previous year). During the past four years of the Recession, the combined waiting list for public housing and Section 8 has more than doubled, but this past year’s decline in the Section 8 waiting list may to some extent be an indication of economic recovery.
Over 90% of the households on the public housing and Section 8 waiting lists are extremely low income. The average annual household income on the public housing waiting list is $4,625, and the average on the Section 8 waiting list is $6,790. 76% of public housing residents and 85% of Section 8 voucher holders are extremely low income (below 30% of AMI). Approximately 35% of those served by public housing or the Housing Choice Voucher program are disabled. 17% of public housing heads of households are elderly.
The Public Housing Program, which consists of properties that are owned, managed and maintained by HAKC, has 1,927 housing units and is currently at 97% occupancy. A list of publically owned developments, location and number of units is shown on the following page. The Section 8 HCV Program administered by HAKC has 7,510 Housing Choice vouchers (including 122 Project-Based Vouchers) with a utilization rate of 97%. Allowing for routine turnover, this is essentially full occupancy and utilization in both programs. HAKC also administers 100 Mainstream vouchers, 29 Shelter-Plus-Care vouchers, and 195 Veteran Administration Supportive Housing (VASH) vouchers.
0
2,000
4,000
6,000
8,000
10,000
12,000
14,000
16,000
18,000
20,000
22,000
2008 2009 2010 2011
4,304 4,863 6,339 7,620
5,607
11,230
15,535 13,392
Num
ber o
f App
lican
ts
Operating Years
Housing Authority of Kansas City, Missouri Housing Assistance Waiting Lists
PH Waiting List Sec 8 Waiting List
38
Inventory of Public Housing Developments
Development PH
Units
Tax Credit Units
Market Rate Units
Home-owner-
ship Total Units
Development Type
Building Type /
Population Developer Property Manager
1 Beacon Park Townhomes
5 30 10 45 Mixed Income / Privately
owned Townhomes
/ Families
Michaels Development
Affiliate of Developer
2 Brush Creek 135 135 Conventional Public
Housing
Highrise / Senior & Disabled
HAKC HAKC
3 Cardinal Ridge 69 60 31 26 186 Mixed Income / Privately
Owned
Apartments and
Townhomes / Seniors &
Families
Michaels Development Company
Affiliate of Developer
4 Chouteau Courts
134 134 Conventional Public
Housing
Apartments / Families
HAKC HAKC
5 Crooked Creek 16 160 176 Mixed Income / Privately
Owned
Apartments / Families
Pedcor Affiliate of Developer
6 Dunbar 65 65 Conventional Public
Housing
Apartments / Senior and
Disabled
HAKC HAKC
7 Guinotte Manor
219 219 Convention Public
Housing
Townhomes / Families
HAKC HAKC
8 Mt. Cleveland 18 52 70 Mixed Income / Privately
Owned
Duplexes / Families
Swope Community Builders
Local Private Agency
9 Willow Glen Apartments
21 35 56 Mixed Income / Privately
Owned
Apartments / Families
Michaels Development Company
Affiliate of Developer
10 Pemberton 120 120 Conventional Public
Housing
Highrise / Seniors
HAKC HAKC
11 Riverview 232 232 Conventional Public
Housing
Townhomes / Families
HAKC Local Private Agency
12 Scattered Sites
428 428 New Construction / Acquisition /
Rehab
Single Family,
Duplexes / Families
The Habitat Company, City of KCMO, HAKC
Local Private Agency
13 T. B. Watkins 210 210 Conventional Public
Housing
Apartments /
Townhomes / Families
HAKC HAKC
14 Villa Del Sol 65 25 30 10 130 Mixed-Income / Privately
Owned
Townhomes / Families
McCormack Baron / Westside Housing
Affiliate of Developer
15 Wayne Miner 74 74 Conventional Public
Housing
Townhomes / Families
HAKC HAKC
16 West Bluff 100 100 Conventional Public
Housing
Townhomes / Families
HAKC HAKC
17 Willow Glen Townhomes
15 18 15 48 Mixed Income / Privately
Owned
Townhomes / Families
Michaels Development Company
Affiliate of Developer
Totals 1926 380 86 36 2428
39
Part 3: Homeless Inventory (91.210(c)) and Special Needs and Services (91.210(d)) The following lists thirty-one area non-profits serving the homeless and a description of their services, and an inventory of agencies in the Continuum of Care Housing Inventory, target populations and available beds.
Non Profits Serving the Homeless Description Affordable Housing Assistance Corporation Kansas City housing assistance Amethyst Place Kansas City transitional housing families Benilde Hall, Inc transitional only (men) Catholic Charities of KC-St. Joseph housing assistance City of Kansas City, Missouri- Health Department housing assistance City Union Mission emergency shelter, transitional housing & services Community Assistance Council rent, mortgage and utility assistance Community LINC transitional housing families Consumer Credit Counseling Services of Midwest Kansas City housing assistance Don Bosco Community Center rent, mortgage and utility assistance Forest Avenue Family Shelter emergency shelter only Goodwill Industries of Western Missouri & Eastern Kansas employment assistance & or training Guadalupe Center rent, mortgage and utility assistance Hope Faith Ministries homeless assistance services Housing Authority of Kansas City housing assistance Greater Kansas City Housing Information Center rent, mortgage and utility assistance Kansas City Community Kitchen employment assistance & or training Kansas City Rescue Mission emergency shelter only Mid America Assistance Coalition homeless data mgmt Missouri Department of Mental Health housing assistance New Horizons Assistance Corporation Kansas City homeless assistance services New Life Evangelistic Center transitional housing families Newhouse domestic violence shelter Renaissance West homeless assistance services reStart, Inc. emergency shelter, transitional housing & services Rose Brooks Center, Inc. domestic violence shelter SAVE, Inc. housing assistance Sheffield Place transitional housing families Swope Health Services health care services & housing services Synergy Services, Inc domestic violence shelter The KC Metropolitan Lutheran Ministry housing assistance The Salvation Army transitional housing families Truman Medical Center, Inc. housing assistance & mental health United Services Community Action Agency transitional housing families Veronica’s Voice homeless assistance services
40
Part 4: Barriers to Affordable Housing (91.210(e))
There are a variety of factors affecting the development of affordable housing in Kansas City. These factors include policies on property taxes, land use and zoning ordinances, building codes, building fees and charges, and subdivision regulations. These factors serve an important function in controlling the type and quality of growth in Kansas City. The City has chosen to require that developments within the city adhere to specific regulations. The imposition of these rules and regulations has not impaired the ability of the City to create affordable housing stock while at the same time allowing the City to ensure orderly and compatible community growth. However, Kansas City is sensitive to the effects that public policies have on the cost of housing, or how they serve to discourage development of affordable housing. While some of the barriers to the cost of producing affordable housing are beyond the control of local government, the goal is that City policies do not create more barriers. The City works to establish positive marketing strategies and program criteria increasing housing choices for households with limited income, to provide geographical choice in assisted housing units, and to improve the physical quality of existing affordable housing units. The City has identified regulatory, transportation and financing issues as barriers to affordable housing. Additionally, the large volume of foreclosed and abandoned properties coming onto the housing market has, to some degree, obviated the need for creating significant amounts of new affordable housing as these prices have proved to be well within the means of low-income homebuyers. C: Five-Year Strategic Plan – General Priority Needs Analysis and Strategies (91.215(a)) Part 1: Priority Setting (92.215(a)(1)): This part provides important decision-making approaches to address the city’s housing, community and special needs. The major issues identified from the information provided in the previous parts of this section are:
• Overall, the city is growing, but there are areas where population is decreasing at alarming rates;
• City-wide household income has remained steady, and unemployment rates decreasing metro-wide, there remain marked increases in the level of poverty, and number of households paying more that 30% of their income on housing in concentrated urban core areas causing an increased need for public and subsidized housing;
• The condition of single family housing in central city neighborhoods is becoming worse due to decreasing disposable income for maintenance purposes by owner occupants, and increased number of absentee owners of rental property;
• There are an estimated 2,800 homeless persons and families without permanent housing; • The population is aging, causing increasing needs for special housing types and services;
and • An estimated 13,000 foreclosures, and over 5,000 vacant lots, are causing major negative
impacts to the livability of surrounding residences and neighborhoods.
41
This information is provided from a range of date sources in Section II, and according to required HUD Tables as listed below and shown on the respective page of this Plan: HUD Table 1A – Homeless and Special Needs Populations Page 23 HUD Table 1B – Special Needs (Non-Homeless) Page 28 & 83 HUD Table 1C – Summary of Special Housing/Community Page 63
Development Objectives HUD Table 2A – Priority Housing Needs/Investment Plan Page 69 HUD Table 2B – Priority Community Development Needs Page 85 HUD Table 2C - Summary of Specific Housing/Community Page 86
Development Objectives
The City’s ability to confront these and other housing and community improvement needs is challenged by decreasing federal, state and local funding. Nevertheless, the City will continue to aggressively work, within its financial limits, to achieve its housing goals. A particular emphasis will be to partner with private lending institutions and foundations to assist in reaching these joint housing and community improvement goals. With a scarcity of resources, and increasing community needs, it is more important than ever to develop a series of goals, policies and implementation strategies which maximize the impact of funding and program decisions. The following Five-Year Strategic Plan adopts the City’s Vision Statement from the FOCUS Kansas City – Strategic and Comprehensive Plan, which is:
We, the people of Kansas City, must work together with the City to provide the stewardship to guide the continued revitalization of the City. Together, we will build on its strengths to make it the most exciting place to live, work and play in the region, creating a viable and charismatic alternative to the suburbs. Home to our most venerable neighborhoods, active commercial centers, significant cultural institutions and the majority of our historical assets, the urban core is the real and symbolic heart of our city. Enhancing its health and vibrancy is critical to the long-term success of our entire Metropolitan Area.
With this vision statement as an overall guide, over the next five years the City will strive to address the following major housing, community, and economic issues according to the corresponding strategic policy responses.
2012-2016 Major Issues and Strategic Policy Responses
Major Issue - Public resources and programs at the federal, state and local levels are decreasing and not sufficient alone to address the range of housing development and affordable housing issues. Strategic Policy Responses:
42
• The City shall strategically target its limited resources to leverage housing, community and economic development in ways that maximize outcomes for neighborhoods and leverages private investments;
• The City’s annual recommendations for allocating federal funding should be focused upon targeted neighborhoods;
• The City should cooperate and coordinate all available resources and programs from partnership agencies such as the Economic Development Corporation, Land Clearance for Redevelopment Authority, Planned Industrial Expansion Authority, and the Missouri Housing Development Commission;
• Encourage property owners, developers and lenders to actively invest in the existing housing stock in urban core neighborhoods; and
• The City should partner with non-profit, private organizations and foundations to seek additional funding support for the purpose of increasing the leveraging of public funds.
Major Issue - The City has an increasingly high number of foreclosed and vacant single family homes and abandoned vacant lots. Strategic Policy Responses:
• The City shall develop an aggressive housing foreclosure acquisition, rehabilitation and sale or rent program strategically targeted toward areas of greatest need;
• Assure that vacant, deteriorated housing structures are properly secured, and that prompt action is taken by owners to rehabilitate the property to code, demolish dilapidated structures, and maintain vacant lots;
• Partner with local lenders and neighborhoods to reduce the number of vacant single family homes caused by foreclosures, including creating workflow processes to address banks’ REO portfolios and pending foreclosures;
• Continue to partner with community development corporations in the identification and funding of purchase/rehab/sale/rent programs, such as the Neighborhood Stabilitation Program and the new Partnership Purchase Rehab Program;
• Improve the image and reduce maintenance costs of vacant lots by re-using vacant land for community betterment purposes and transferring lots to adjacent property owners;
• Implement the recommendations of the Housing SubCommittee on Foreclosures to institutionalize the Kansas City, Missouri Homesteading Authority (KCMHA) as a working land bank for foreclosed homes and abandoned vacant lots;
• Support the work of the Housing SubCommittee on Foreclosures; and • Enhance foreclosure prevention programs as part of the overall strategy to reduce the
number of foreclosures. Major Issue – Kansas City neighborhoods, the building blocks of the city, are challenged by the loss in population, reduced owner occupancy, increasing number of renter occupied homes owned by absentee owners, and deteriorating housing conditions. Strategic Policy Responses:
43
• Emphasize housing policies that support the stabilization and rehabilitation of neighborhoods, and the design of neighborhoods with a sense of community;
• Implement affordable and market rate housing programs that support both homeowner and rental properties through repair, energy conservation, public housing, multi-family housing through coordinated efforts with housing partners;
• Target homeownership assistance programs to “areas of strength” and aggressively market their availability and use;
• Encourage the acquisition and rehabilitation of vacant homes by “good” landlords who will manage the property in a manner which benefits the neighborhood; and
• Focus property maintenance code enforcement strategies to neighborhood conditions and coordinate these strategies with other conservation efforts in the neighborhoods.
Major Issue – The number of homeless persons, veterans, and families with children continue to outgrow resources. Strategic Responses:
• Support the goals and objectives of the Continuum of Care; • Provide increased housing opportunities for all homeless persons, with targeted programs
and projects to homeless veterans and families with children; Major Issue – As residents live longer and the population ages, creating and providing suitable housing for this group presents ongoing challenges and opportunities. Strategic Responses:
• Develop plans and strategies for senior housing in all areas of the City along transit corridors, and in close proximity to health care, retail, recreational facilities;
• Partner with the Kansas City School District to identify a select number of vacant school building to be re-used as affordable, senior housing; and
• Support “aging in place” programs, especially for the disabled. Major Issue – The demand for Section 8 vouchers and services through the Kansas City Housing Authority for very low-income residents remains high, while the supply of vacant, abandoned single-family housing structures also is increasing. Strategic Responses:
• Create a renewed partnership with the Housing Authority of Kansas City (HAKC) to increase the number of publically owned housing units and other affordable housing units for very low and low income residents;
• Align demand of HAKC clients for housing with the over-supply of single-family vacant homes;
44
• Assist in the development of the Choice Neighborhood Initiative Plan and the implementation of the approved Choice Neighborhood Initiatives Plan; and
• Support the goals and objectives of the Housing Authority that are consistent with the City’s Consolidated Housing Plan and other City initiatives.
Major Issue – Attracting capable, experienced for-profit and non-profit developers to create affordable housing units in-scale within targeted areas is an important need:
Strategic Responses:
• Provide leveraged financing for affordable rental projects using federal funds, as needed; • The City’s annual recommendations for allocating federal funding and Low Income
Housing Tax Credits (LIHTC) should be driven by the Consolidated Plan and focused upon targeted neighborhoods;
• Ensure that staff capacity is trained and able to assess and determine project feasibility; • Participate and outreach as needed to identify developers with the skills and resources to
initiate and complete significant projects, including encouraging joint development relationships; and
• Partner with the Kansas City School District to identify a select number of vacant school buildings to be re-used as affordable and market rate housing.
Major Issue – Even with the progress made in reusing and transferring assets under the Housing and Economic Development Financial Corporation Receivership (HEDFC), significant redevelopment work remains to be done to complete these projects in the affected areas. Strategic Policy Responses:
• Use the framework described in the “reBUILDKC/Neighborhoods Plan,” adopted by City Council on October 28, 2010, for re-using assets transferred from the HEDFC to create a new, comprehensive and collaborative housing initiative.
• Create a new, aggressive and productive administrative direction for the redevelopment of Kansas City’s neighborhoods;
• Implement processes for developing affordable rental new construction and rehabilitation that includes the following threshold criteria: sustainability of the project, consistency with existing neighborhood/area plan, compliance with accepted design standards, contract performance measure, proven organizational capacity of subrecipient, compliance with Federal Section 3 requirements, leveraging of additional resources and maximize ongoing investment, access to public transportation and/or employment opportunities and need and demand for the housing as supported by an independent market study;
• Establish a process to review applications for available resources whereby evaluations shall use a point system based (at a minimum) upon these criteria: within target neighborhoods, community support of project, percentage of existing home ownership in the neighborhood, concentration/mix of income levels, availability/accessibility of transportation, availability/accessibility of jobs appropriate to neighborhood residents,
45
neighborhood condition survey, capacity of neighborhood organization, public safety conditions, availability of private funding;
• Provide a framework plan for improving neighborhood conditions by using established, resident and City Council approved Area Plans. The Area Plan approach was first proposed as an implementation strategy of FOCUS Kansas City. This Five-Year Consolidated Plan returns to this planning and targeting strategy by naming eight areas as primary target areas. While the City will continue to provide some public support for housing initiatives throughout the City, the lack of sufficient resources requires that a concentrated effort be made to target resources and administrative efforts on these eight targets according to the guidance provided by each Area Plan; and
• Have the City Manager provide the Council with an annual report regarding the implementation of the housing policies, administrative actions taken and progress made toward the achievement of the success measures identified in the policy.
The primary elements of the reBUILDKC strategy include:
• Disposal of all non-productive assets in order to release financial resources for more effective approaches to housing development and support;
• Assignment of responsibility for asset management to agencies that are most capable of efficiently and effectively managing those assets;
• Use of program income, first, to retire Section108 debt and then for the expansion of neighborhood infrastructure and services;
• Target resources for maximum impact in selected areas based on the guidelines of Focus Kansas City and Area Plans, while providing maintenance support in other areas of the City; and
• Building of internal and external capacity and partnerships that are essential for an aggressive housing development and support program.
The proposed actions to implement the strategy are described in each respective area plan’s five-year strategy, with annual actions described in the Annual Action Plan, Section III. The proposed Area Plan targeting strategy is the primary approach toward a more comprehensive housing and neighborhood development strategy for the City. In addition to the planning decision-making approach, the City will use a quantitative approach using 2010 Census data. This approach applies a range of demographic information, such as market analyses, special needs data, and housing conditions data on a city-wide basis, and aggregates the data according to each area plan, for the purpose of assisting in identifying priority needs and development and delivery of services according to the following categories:
1.) HOUSING SUPPLY ISSUES: Where a neighborhood has a higher incidence (relative to the city as a whole) of dilapidated units or units in need of major repair, and a high incidence of homes in foreclosure, the City will consider the use of programs for selective and sustainable demolition, new construction, or substantial rehabilitation are recommended. The choice between rehabilitation and new construction alternatives are based upon both the relative costs involved, and the impact the development would have in terms of neighborhood self-improvement, stability, and marketability. Where a neighborhood has a higher incidence of units
46
in sound condition or needing only minor repair, programs for repair and moderate rehabilitation are recommended along with programs to assist in the purchase of existing housing. 2). HOUSING DEMAND AND AFFORDABILITY ISSUES: Where the incomes of a neighborhood are very low or where the affordability index is relatively high, the City will consider the use of programs where a higher level of subsidy is provided. These programs include repair grants and rehabilitation rebates for owners. Where the income levels and affordability index suggest that only minimal financial assistance is needed to improve affordability and conditions, then programs such as low-cost loans and closing cost assistance for homeowners will be considered. 3). HOUSING DEMOGRAPHIC ISSUES: Where the population is declining more rapidly, attempts will be made to stabilize the population by providing special assistance to existing homeowners. This strategy might also include rehabilitation assistance. Where the population is stabilizing, the programs will be provided for owners and renters who fit the needs of the population indicated in categories 1 and 2. Part 2: Target and Coordination of Assets, Resources and Services The following 5-Year Priority Target Areas provide the basis for a Strategic Funding Plan for the period from 2012 through 2016, and provides a decision-making framework for how the City proposes to address its increasing improvement needs with limited and restricted federal, state and local housing improvement resources. For these reasons the City will target programs to the following Target Areas (See Target Area Plan Map on page 48) with available resources allocated according to the Annual Action Plan Budget and Accomplishments Sheets, which include annual outputs and outcomes (also shown in Section III). This “targeting of allocations” approach differentiates between those areas of greatest need and requiring full, 5-year housing and community development strategies, and those areas characterized by newer housing, improving economic conditions, and higher household income. The City will continue to provide appropriate housing and community development strategies and programs in the all areas of the city through a range of City services.
47
48
City-wide Map of Target Areas
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
Heart of the City Target Area Outputs Over 5-Year Period
Sub-Target Area/Project/Activity/Agency: 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 2016-17 Total Outcomes Vineyard Sub-Target Area
St. Michaels Veterans Center - a reBUILDKC Project
- Housing Phase I Priority LIHTC - 9% 58 50 50 12
170 Increases Housing Opportunities for Veterans
- Infrastructure
Bond Funds Complete
Targets Public Infrastructure Improvements
- Public Facility & Supportive Services 2013 PF
Provides Public Facility in Target Area
(2013 Commitment for $625,000)
Provides Direct Supportive Services to Veterans
Priority Project
Seven Oaks Replacement Housing - a reBUILDKC Project 50
50
- Oak Pointe Site Priority LIHTC Project
Increases # of Affordable Housing Units
- Seven Oaks School-to-Housing Project
Increases # of Affordable Housing Units for
Seniors
Priority LIHTC Project
HEDFC HOME PI Funds
CDC Partnership Program
- Purchase/Rehab/New Construction
4 4 4 4 4 20 Addresses Foreclosed Housing in Target Area
Assets Transfer from HEDFC - a reBUILD/KC Project
- Vacant Lots
30 20
50 Addresses High Number of Vacant Lots
23rd to 28th/Garfield to Montgall Sub-Target Area
Crime Prevention Facility
- 2011 CDBG Recapture Funds - $3,000,000 65 Hshlds.
Provides Targeted Acquisition/Relocation
Assistance
CDC Partnership Program
- Purchase/Rehab/New Construction 6 6 6 6 6 30 Addresses Foreclosed Housing in Target Area
Assets Transfer from HEDFC - a reBUILD/KC Project
- Brooklyn Corridor Projects 16
16 Addresses High Number of Vacant Lots
Morningstar Family Life Center X X X
Provides Public Facility in Target Area
57
Action Planning
Planning for Housing Imp.
Benton Corridor - 27th to Linwood Blvd. - a reBUILDKC Project
- Lots Transferred from HEDFC
- Community Improvement Projects 24
24 Addresses High Number of Vacant Lots
City/CDC Partnership Program in Santa Fe Historic District
- Purchase/Rehab/New Construction 6 6 6 6 6 30 Addresses Foreclosed Housing in Target Area
Linwood Shopping Center - a reBUILDKC Project
- Market Study and Pre-Development Activities X
Creates Economic Development Opportunities
Vine Street Place (aka Old Ballpark Site) - a reBUILDKC Project
- Build and Marketing for New Homes 6
8 8 6 28 Increases # of New Housing Units in Target Area
- Landscape Improvements 1
1
18th & Vine Street Redevelopment Area
- Housing & Commercial Development
Project Planning
Green Impact Zone - Sustainable Development Area
- Employment and Training Programs
- City/CDC Partnership Program 4 6 6 6 6 28 Addresses Foreclosed Housing in Target Area
Purchase/Rehab/New Construction
- Demolition of Dangerous Bldgs. 10
10 Eliminates Blighting Influences
- Public Safety and Community Services
- Energy and Water Conservation
- Infrastructure Improvements
Redevelopment Activities 40 40 40 40 40 Provides Redevelopment Assistance in Target
Area
-
58
Bruce R. Watkins - Area of Impact
- Concentrated Code Enforcement 50 50 50 50 50 250 Provides Code Enforcement in Target Area
All Heart of City Area
- Minor Home Repair by INC 30 30 30 30 30 150 Provides Minor Housing Repairs for
low-income households
- KC Dream Program 8 8 8 8 8 40 Increases Homeownership in Target Area
Downtown Area Plan Sub-Target Area/Project/Activity/Agency: Outputs Over 5-Year Period
Beacon Hill Redevelopment Area - a reBUILD/KC Project
2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 2016-17 Total Outcomes
- Colonnade Apts along 27th Street - funded in 2011 30
30
Increases # of Affordable/Market Rate Housing Units
- Tracy Avenue Infill New Construction
5 7 10 6
28 Increases # of Market Rate Housing In Target
Area
- NW Quadrant - Green Infrastructure Complete
Builds Sustainable Infrastructure In Target Area
- Student Housing - UMKC/Private 250
250 Increases Housing In Target Area
- Grocery Store at 27th & Troost
Creates Economic Development Opportunities
- 22nd and Tracy/Forest
15 15 30 Increases # of Market Rate Housing In Target
Area
Westside Area
CDC Partnership Proram
- Purchase/Rehab/New Construction 4 4 4 4 4 20 Addresses Foreclosed Housing in Target Area
- West School Redevelopment - a reBUILD/KC Project 76
76 Planning forRe-Use of Vacant School
Priority 9% LIHTC Project
Columbus Park
Assets Transfer from HEDFC - a reBUILD/KC Project
- Vacant Lots
2
2 Addresses High Number of Vacant Lots
Choice Community Planning Area - HAKC
Planning for Neighborhood Housing Improvements
All Downtown Area
- Minor Home Repair by Westside Housing Org. 10 10 10 10 10 50 Provides Minor Housing Repairs for low -
Income Households
59
- Business Assistance Program by HEDC 20 20 20 20 20 100 Businesses Assisted
- KC Dream Program 5 5 5 5 5 25 Increases Homeownership in Target Area
Swope Area Plan Sub-Target Area/Project/Activity/Agency: Outputs Over 5-Year Period
2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 2016-17 Total Outcomes
Washbash Village Subtarget Area
CDC Partnership Proram
- Purchase/Rehab/New Construction
4 6 6 6 6 28
Increases # of New Housing Units in Target Area
- Blue Hills Community Center
Provides Public Facility in Target Area
Woodland Highlands Subdivision
CDC Partnership Program
- Purchase/Rehab/New Construction 3 2
5
Increases # of New Housing Units in Target Area
Mt. Cleveland Estates Subtarget Area
CDC Partnership Program
- Purchase/Rehab/New Construction 3 5 5 5 5 23
Increases # of New Housing Units in Target Area
Bruce R. Watkins - Area of Impact
- Concentrated Code Enforcement 50 50 50 50 50 250 Provides Code Enforcement in Target Area
Middle Blue River - Sustainable Development Area
Implementation of Green Infrastructure Solutions and On-site Stormwater
Improvements
All Swope Area
- Minor Home Repair by Blue Hills Comm. 30 30 30 30 30 150 Provides Minor Housing Repairs for low
Income Households
- KC Dream Program 8 10 10 10 10 48 Increases Homeownership in Target Area
60
Midtown Area Plan Sub-Target Area/Project/Activity/Agency: Outputs Over 5-Year Period
2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 2016-17 Total Outcomes Plaza-Westport SF Core Subtarget Area
- Purchase/Rehab 4 5 5 5 5 24 Increases # of Market Rate Housing In Target
Area
- Minor Home Repair by Westside Housing Org. 5 5 5
15 Provides Minor Housing Repairs for low Income Households
- KC Dream Program 4 4 4
12 Increases Homeownership in Target Area
RAMP Program - Housing Rehabilitation
Partner with Agencies for the Use of Housing Resources in Target Areas for Increased
Reinvestments
Coordinated City Services
Hickman/Ruskin Area Plan Sub-Target Area/Project/Activity/Agency: Outputs Over 5-Year Period
2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 2016-17 Total Outcomes Ruskin Subtarget Area
- Purchase/Rehab 6 5 5 5 5 26 Addresses Foreclosed Housing in Target Area
- KC Dream Program - Primary Asst. Area 4 5 5 5 5 24 Increases Homeownership in Target Area
All Areas
- Minor Home Repair by City 10 10 10 10 10 50
Provides Minor Housing Repairs for low Income Households
- KC Dream Program 8 5 5 5 5 28 Increases Homeownership in Target Area
Briarcliff-Winnwood Area Plan Sub-Target Area/Project/Activity/Agency: Outputs Over 5-Year Period
2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 2016-17 Total Outcomes Winnwood Subtarget Area
CDC Partnership Proram
- Purchase/Rehab/New Construction 5 5 5 5 5 25 Increases # of Affordable Housing Units in Target Area
Vivion Rd. - Area of Impact
- Code Enforcement and Ext. Home Improvement Demo. 20 20 20 20 20 20 Provides Code Enforcement & Exterior Impr.
in Target Area
61
All Areas
- Minor Home Repair by NNI 45 45 45 45 45 225 Provides Minor Housing Repairs for low
Income Households
- KC Dream Program 6 6 6 6 6 30 Increases Homeownership in Target Area
Truman Plaza Target Area Sub-Target Area/Project/Activity/Agency: Outputs Over 5-Year Period
Ashland Park Sub-Target Area - 17th to I-70, I-70 to Van Brunt
2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 2016-17 Total Outcomes
- Minor Repair Projects - By City 20 20 20 20 20 100 Provides Emergency and Targeted Minor
Housing Repairs for Low Income Households
Choice Community Planning Area - HAKC
- Planning Phase
Complete Planning for Improved Housing
St. John & Truman Corridor
- Concentrated Façade Improvements X
Supports Economic Development Opportunities
- CDC Partnership Program Along Truman Corridor X
Increases # of Affordable Housing Units in Target Area
- Blight Elimination X
200 Blighting Influences Removed in Commercial Areas
Minor Home Repair - By Westside Housing Org 5 5 5 5 5 25 Provides Minor Housing Repairs for low
Income Households
I-70 - Area of Impact
- Concentrated Code Enforcement 30 30 30 30 30 150 Provides Code Enforcement in Target Area
KC Dream Program 5 5 5 5 5 25
Increases homeownership in Target Area
City-Wide Housing & Community Services 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 2016-17 Total Outcomes
- Emergency & Targeted Minor Home Repairs 90 90 90 90 90 450 Provides Emergency and Targeted Housing
Repairs for Low Income Households
- Code Enforcement in Areas of Impact 150 150 150 150 150 750 Improves Neighborhood Stability
- Affordable Rental Housing
10 10 10 10 10 50 Increases Affordable Housing
- Public Service Activities
6580
Provision of Public Services to Very Low & Low Income Persons and Families
- KC Dream Program (HQS Inspection Incl.) 10 10 10 10 10 50 Increases Homeownership City-wide
62
D. Specific Housing Objectives (91.215(a)(4)):
Part 1: Summary of Priorities, Objectives and Outcomes (Table 1C) The continuing decrease in public funding from local, state and federal sources is a major factor in the City’s ability to adequately address the range of unmet housing and special needs identified in this plan. For the 5-Year Plan period, Table 2A prioritizes housing needs, shows the estimated level of unmet needs, and the continuation Table 2A projects goals by need for each of the five years. For renters the goal is to provide increased levels of affordable housing for 470 households, and for owners the goal is 779 households. The projected assistance levels for homeless individuals and families are 13,175, and for persons with HIV/AIDS the goal is to assist 2,660 persons. The Housing Market Analysis, beginning on page 29, provides a range of data showing an increasingly unstable housing market, which is largely concentrated in neighborhoods with the lowest incomes and highest number of homes in either poor condition or vacant due to foreclosures or other economic reasons. As stated, the economic and social costs are also high, requiring aggressive strategies by the City, partnering entities and neighborhood residents. The following strategies set the framework for how the City’s housing challenges will be addressed over the next 5-year and beyond:
• Create: “…an aggressive, ambitious plan to address Kansas City’s neighborhoods” (excerpt from the reBUILD/KCneighborhoods Plan);
• Create a re-energized, professional institutional structure for the creation of new programs and the effective delivery of housing and services and the complete recovery of all assets from the HEDFC Receivership;
• Forge active funding and program implementation partnerships with community development corporations, private developers, agencies, financial institutions, and local, State and federal governments; and
• Evaluate the results of these programs and make necessary changes to maximize benefits to Kansas City residents.
As shown in Section III – One Year Action Plan – CDBG and HOME funds are targeted to seven Area Plan areas. For housing and public facility projects, the two funds combine to provide $10.7 million and leverage nearly $130 million in other public and private funds. Major projects include:
• Colonnade Apartments - $6.9 million, • Highland Avenue Apartments - $5 million, • St. Michaels Veterans Center - $10.6 million (Phase I), • East Patrol/Crime Lab - $56 million (over three year schedule), • Seven Oaks School and Oak Pointe - $15 million, • Acquisition and rehabilitation of single family homes - $2.7 million, and • Single family and Student Housing Development of Beacon Hill - $30 million
In addition, CDBG funds for the provision of public services will assist 6,580 persons, the ESG Program will assist 2,690 homeless persons, and the HOPWA Program will help 552 persons.
63
Transition Table 1C Summary of Specific Housing/Community Development Objectives
(Table 1A/1B Continuation Sheet)
Obj.# Specific Objectives
Sources of Funds
Performance
Indicators
Expected Number
Actual
Number
Outcome/ Objective*
Homeless Objectives
SL-1.6 SL-1.42
Benilde Hall
ESG CDBG Homeless
350 SL-1
DH-1.2 Community Assistance Council ESG Homeless
50 DH-1
SL- 1.20 Guadalupe Center ESG Homeless 110 SL-1
DH-1.18 Guadalupe Center Housing Counseling
CDBG Households
550 DH-1
DH-1.7 Housing Information Center CDBG Households
1900 DH-1
SL-1.17
SL-1.39 reStart Homeless Services Drop-In Center (essential services)
ESG
CDBG Homeless
375 SL-1
SL-1.18 reStart Homeless Shelter 918 E. 9th
ESG Homeless 1200 SL-1
SL-1.9 Rose Brooks Center ESG Homeless
575 SL-1
SL-1.14 Salvation Army ESG Homeless
60 SL-1
SL-1.10 SL-1.32 Sheffield Place
ESG Homeless
60 SL-1
SL-1.11 Synergy Services ESG Homeless
400 SL-1
Special Needs Objectives
DH-1.12 Save, Inc. HOPWA Persons with HIV/Aids 477 DH-1
DH-1.13 reStart HOPWA Persons with HIV/Aids 75 DH-1
Other Objectives Continuum of Care
SL
Permanent Supportive Housing SAVE Inc.
CoC SHP 299,483
Provide PSH housing for individuals living with AIDS
43
SL-1
SL Permanent Supportive Housing
SAVE Inc.
CoC SHP 201,153
Provide housing for chronically homeless individuals with AIDS.
8
SL-1
SL Permanent Supportive Housing
reStart, Inc. A New Start Program
CoC SHP 206,817
Provide housing for chronically homeless individuals with mental illness.
19
SL-1
64
SL
Permanent Supportive Housing reStart, Inc.
CoC SHP 124,915
Provide housing for chronically homeless individuals with mental illness.
12
SL-1
SL
Transitional Housing reStart, Inc
CoC SHP 226,306
Provide transitional housing for homeless families with children.
363
SL-1
SL Transitional Housing reStart Convent Transitional Housing Project (City of KCMO)
CoC SHP 48,300
Provide housing for single individuals or families.
41
SL-1
SL
Permanent Supportive Housing reStart, Inc. Housing Solutions Center (City of KCMO)
CoC SHP 199,399 New Conversion Project. Not awarded yet as of 1/31/12
Provide permanent supportive housing for individuals or families.
280
SL
SL
Permanent Supportive Housing Mental Health Association of the Heartland—Heartland Housing
CoC SHP 64,099
Provide housing for chronically homeless or mentally ill or disabled individuals.
8
SL
SL
Permanent Supportive Housing Benilde Hall
CoC SHP 51,350
Provide housing for men with substance abuse.
12
SL
SL
Transitional Housing Benilde Hall
CoC SHP 100,380
Provide transitional housing for individual men recovering from substance abuse.
250
SL
SL
Transitional Housing The Salvation Army Linwood Supportive Housing
CoC SHP 236,698
Provide transitional housing for families, single women.
39
SL
SL
Transitional Housing Sheffield Place
CoC SHP 163,079
Provide housing for single women with children.
63
SL
SL
Transitional Housing NewHouse, Inc. (City of KCMO)
CoC SHP 32,935
Provide transitional housing for individuals.
30
SL
SL
Safe Haven - Transitional Housing Truman Medical Center: Access House
CoC SHP 518,157
Provide transitional housing for 10 seriously mentally ill, homeless individuals at any point in time.
10
SL-1
SL
Transitional Housing Community LINC
CoC SHP 110,058
Provide transitional housing for 12 families or single individuals at any point in time
48
SL-1
SL
Transitional Housing Community LINC (City of KCMO)
CoC SHP 125,890
Provide transitional housing for 12 families or single individuals at any point in time
48
SL-1
SL
Permanent Supportive Housing
CoC SHP 133,891 New Conversion
Provide permanent supportive housing for families or single individuals
45
SL-1
65
United Services Community Action Agency (City of KCMO)
Project. Not awarded yet as of 1/31/12
SL
Supportive Services Swope Health Services
CoC SHP 185,281
Provide supportive services through Health Care Outreach to homeless individuals
150
SL-1
SL
Supportive Services Swope Health Services
CoC SHP 114,450
Provide supportive services through Health Care Outreach to homeless individuals
1538
SL-1
SL
Permanent Supportive Housing Metro Lutheran Ministry - Project Care
CoC SHP 213,515 New Conversion Project Not awarded yet as of 1/31/12
Provide intensive supportive services for housing placement to individuals and/or families.
252
SL-1
SL HMIS Mid America Assistance Coalition
CoC SHP 43,358
Provide HMIS support to area CoC.
SL-1
SL
Homeless Housing Counseling GKC Housing Information Center
CoC SHP 24,857
Provide supportive services, housing counseling to individuals.
74
SL-1
SL
Supportive Services Job Assistance Helping Hand of Goodwill (City of KCMO)
CoC SHP 36,131
Provide supportive services, job search services to individuals.
390
SL-1
SL
Permanent Supportive Housing Rental Assistance Vouchers Mo Dept. of Mental Health
CoC S+C 917,496
Provide permanent supportive housing for chronic, disabled homeless.
174
SL-1
SL
Permanent Supportive Housing Rental Assistance Vouchers Mo Dept. of Mental Health
CoC S+C 275,940
Provide permanent supportive housing for chronic, disabled homeless.
35
SL-1
SL
Permanent Supportive Housing Rental Assistance Vouchers Mo Dept. of Mental Health
CoC S+C 477,348
Provide permanent supportive housing for chronic, disabled homeless.
64
SL-1
SL
Permanent Supportive Housing Rental Assistance Vouchers Mo Dept. of Mental Health
CoC S+C 237,240
Provide permanent supportive housing for chronic, disabled homeless.
51
SL-1
SL
Permanent Supportive Housing Rental Assistance Vouchers Mo Dept. of Mental Health
CoC S+C 1,522,500
Provide permanent supportive housing for chronic, disabled homeless.
292
SL-1
SL
Permanent Supportive Housing Rental Assistance Vouchers Mo Dept. of Mental Health
CoC S+C 235,440
Provide permanent supportive housing for chronic, disabled homeless.
54
SL-1
66
SL
Permanent Supportive Housing Rental Assistance Vouchers Mo Dept. of Mental Health
CoC S+C 74,448
Provide permanent supportive housing for chronic, disabled homeless.
16
SL-1
SL
Permanent Supportive Housing Mo Dept. of Mental Health
CoC S+C 164,244
Provide permanent supportive housing for chronic, disabled homeless.
21
SL-1
SL
Permanent Supportive Housing Mo Dept. of Mental Health
CoC S+C 102,492
Provide permanent supportive housing for chronic, disabled homeless.
13
SL-1
SL Permanent Supportive Housing Mo Dept. of Mental Health
CoC S+C 64,752
Provide permanent supportive housing for chronic, disabled homeless.
8
SL-1
SL Permanent Supportive Housing Mo Dept. of Mental Health
CoC S+C 102,312
Provide permanent supportive housing for chronic, disabled homeless.
12
SL-1
SL Shelter + Care KC Housing Authority
CoC S+C 110,376
Provide rental subsidies for chronic disabled homeless.
15
SL-1
SL Shelter + Care KC Housing Authority
CoC S+C 118,260
Provide supportive housing to the mentally ill individuals.
17
SL-1
SL Shelter + Care SPC KC Health Department
CoC S+C 313,824
Provide supportive housing to persons with HIV/Aids.
56
SL
Transitional Housing Rose Brooks Center
CoC SHP 207,967
Provide transitional housing for individuals or families.
76
SL-1
SL
Permanent Supportive Housing Community Service League
CoC SHP 126,505 New PH Bonus Project Not awarded yet as of 1/31/12
Provide permanent supportive housing for individuals or families.
37
SL-1
SL
Permanent Supportive Housing Don Bosco Community Center
CoC SHP 81,505 New PH Bonus Project Not awarded yet as of 1/31/12
Provide permanent supportive housing for individuals or families.
25
SL-1
SL
Permanent Supportive Housing Synergy Services, Inc.
CoC SHP 275,000 New PH Bonus Project Not awarded yet as of 1/31/12
Provide permanent supportive housing for individuals or families (particularly youth).
27
SL-1
SL
Permanent Supportive Housing Catholic Charities of Kansas City-St. Joseph
CoC SHP 235,206/year Two year PH Bonus Project Awarded in April 2011
Provide permanent supportive housing for veteran households (mix of singles and families)
36
SL-1
67
*Outcome/Objective Codes
Availability/Accessibility Affordability Sustainability Decent Housing
DH-1
DH-2
DH-3
Suitable Living Environment
SL-1
SL-2
SL-3
Economic Opportunity
EO-1
EO-2
EO-3
Part 2: Affordable Housing Objectives (91.215(b)) Primary Housing and Special Need Delivery Programs: For the Five-Year Plan period the City will develop, administer and implement the following housing programs:
• Home Weatherization Program; • Home Rehabilitation;
- Minor and Emergency Rehabilitation Grant Program – from $1,000 to $7,500 per structure; - Moderate Rehabilitation Loan Program – from $7,500 to $20,000 per structure; and - Major Rehabilitation Loan Program – from $20,000 to $50,000 per structure;
• City/CDC Partnership Program (Acq./Rehab./or New Home Construction) – A revolving construction loan program in target areas;
• KC Dream Program – 2nd mortgage to <80% income households up to $20,000 in Primary Target Areas, up to $12,000 in Secondary Target Areas, and up to $8,000 in Areas Outside Targeted Areas; and down-payment assistance in targeted areas; and
• Multi-family Rental Housing – Identification and procurement of developers using HOME funds, tax abatement, and prioritization of Low Income Housing Tax Credits on targeted projects.
HUD Table 2A shows priority housing programs by funding source and goals over the five-year plan period. HUD Table 2C, on page 86, summarizes housing and community development objectives by program, source of funds, performance indicators, outputs and outcomes. Description of Resources: The City of Kansas City, Missouri uses a variety of resource tools to assist or facilitate with the development or rehabilitation/preservation of affordable, moderate income housing. These include: Low Income Housing Tax Credit Program - This program, administered by the Missouri Housing Development Commission, provides a federal tax credit to investors in affordable
68
housing. The credit can be used each year for 10 years and is allocated to the owner of a development. Investors take an ownership interest in order to utilize the tax credits, thereby generating equity to construct or acquire and rehabilitate the development. The City is currently utilizing this program on projects throughout the urban core including:
• The Highland Place Apartments – 22 unit historic renovation project - $5 million, • Colonnades in Beacon Hill – 30 unit historic renovation and new construction project -
$6 million, • Friendship Village Apartments – 149 units, • St. Michaels Veterans Center (on former Holy Temple Home site) – 58 units - $10.6
million in Phase I, • Bancroft School Apartment Redevelopment – 50 units.
69
Table 2A Priority Housing Activities
Priority Need 5-Yr. Goal
Plan/Act
Yr. 1 Goal
Plan/Act
Yr. 2 Goal
Plan/Act
Yr. 3 Goal
Plan/Act
Yr. 4 Goal
Plan/Act
Yr. 5 Goal
Plan/Act
CDBG Acquisition of existing rental units
Production of new rental units
Rehabilitation of existing rental units
Rental assistance Acquisition of existing owner units
Production of new owner units
Rehabilitation of existing owner occupied units 1075 215 215 215 215 215
Homeownership assistance
HOME
Acquisition of existing rental units
Production of new rental units 470 70 100 100 100 100 Rehabilitation of existing rental units
Rental assistance Acquisition of existing owner units
Production of new owner units 50 10 10 10 10 10 Rehabilitation of existing owner occupied units 309 39 50 50 70 100
Homeownership assistance 420 60 80 80 100 100
HOPWA
Rental assistance
Short term rent/mortgage utility payments
Facility based housing development
Facility based housing operations
Supportive services
70
Historic Tax Credit program - Since 1976, federal law has provided tax incentives for historic preservation. A state tax incentive has been available since Jan. 1, 1998. The availability of the federal and state tax credits has encouraged investment in historic resources – in urban cores, residential neighborhoods throughout the state. The City currently is using this program in Beacon Hill and in the Historic 18th & Vine Jazz District with the rehabilitation of the Apartments at Highland Place. T.I.F./R.A.M.P. program – This housing rehabilitation program is designed to sustain home ownership, which is instrumental in stabilizing individual neighborhoods, in a designated area from 25th to 47, the Paseo to State Line. TIF housing programs provide financial assistance through self-amortizing loan/grants to qualified single-family homeowners for primarily exterior improvements to residential properties. Post-grant award residency of five (5) years is required, and the loan/grant funds are written off 20% per year for five years. Repayment is required for the prorated amount if the residency period is not achieved. Loan/grants may require matching funds, dependent upon applicant’s income. The City, through the Economic Development Corporation, is currently operating this program in the Beacon Hill Neighborhood Revitalization Strategy Area. Land write down – This method of encouraging new development in a redevelopment area by offering land at lower than “market value.” The lowering of land prices by the city occurs when the city assumes part of the acquisition, demolition, and improvement costs and is used as an incentive for development. This approach was utilized with projects where the city donated the land or assisted with the acquisition costs in the Jazz District with the Highland Place Apartments, the proposed St. Michael’s Veterans Center at the former Holy Temple Homes site, and on the Oak Pointe Site (a.k.a. Seven Oaks Apartments).
Tax Abatement - Chapter 353 Tax Abatement is a program that has a 100% abatement of new property taxes resulting from new construction or rehabilitation that may be available for 10 years, with 50% abatement available during the following 15 years. Land Clearance for Redevelopment Authority (LCRA) incentives are designed to encourage investment and assist in the removal of blight and blighting conditions within urban renewal areas. The program provides up to 100% real property tax abatement freeze on property improvements for up to 10 years. Again the City is capitalizing on these tools with various projects including Beacon Hill. Use of HOME Funds for Tenant Based Rental Assistance (TBRA): In 2011, the City programmed HOME funds for a demonstration tenant based assistance program focused on persons and families transitioning from homeless shelters. The program will be implemented in 2012-13 with the goal of assisting approximately 110 households. Due to reductions in the City’s HOME entitlement future, allocations for the TBRA Program are not anticipated. Part 3: Public Housing Strategies (91.215(c)):
HAKC continues to work through sharp reductions in its major funding sources including the public housing operating fund and the public housing capital fund. HAKC obtained two key
71
grants from HUD – a Choice Neighborhoods planning grant to plan for the replacement of Chouteau Courts, and a grant to hire a full time Section 3 Coordinator. HAKC selected an energy services company (ESCO) and completed energy assessments of all its properties. HAKC continues to take action to address the need for affordable housing by working in partnership with private developers and other public and non-profit agencies to provide housing with supportive services to low-income families, seniors and disabled residents. HAKC completed and occupied Beacon Park Townhomes and Pemberton Park for GrandFamilies in 2011. These projects are discussed further below.
A. 2011 Accomplishments - HAKC completed the following activities to encourage family self-sufficiency and increase the supply and quality of the City’s affordable housing stock in 2011:
• Choice Neighborhoods - HAKC obtained a Choice Neighborhoods Initiative planning grant in the amount of $250,000 from HUD. The purpose of the grant is to prepare a Transformation Plan for the replacement of Chouteau Courts, and redevelopment of the surrounding neighborhood in Northeast Kansas City. The City of KCMO, Local Initiative Support Corporation (LISC) and the Kansas City University of Medicine and Biosciences (KCUMB) were key partners in obtaining the grant.
• Pemberton Park for GrandFamilies – HAKC, through its non-profit affiliate, worked with Cougar Capital, LLC to complete construction in 2011 this new 36-unit development for “grand-families.” Grand-families consist of grandparents who are raising their grandchildren. The development was built on four acres of vacant land owned by HAKC near the intersection of Blue and Swope Parkways. Supportive services will be provided through Phoenix Family Services.
• Beacon Park Townhomes – HAKC, through its non-profit affiliate, and in partnership with Paseo Baptist Church, and Michaels Development completed construction and occupancy of this new mixed-income 45-unit townhome development for families. The site is located in the Beacon Hill Redevelopment District between 25th and 27th Streets, Paseo and Vine.
• St. Joseph Place – HUD 202 Development for Seniors – Construction was completed on 47 units of independent – living apartments for seniors utilizing vacant land located on the Wayne Miner public housing site. Funding in the amount of $5.5 million was provided by the HUD 202 program. Catholic Charities sponsored the project, and leased the land from HAKC. The Yarco Company developed and manages the site.
• Homeownership – 6 Section 8 voucher holders and public housing residents successfully purchased homes in 2011 as a result of their enrollment in the HAKC Public Housing and Section 8 homeownership programs. Currently there are 18 Section 8 voucher holders receiving mortgage assistance through the Section 8 Homeownership Program.
• Section 3 – HAKC was successful in obtaining a Section 3 Coordinator Grant from HUD. This will enable HAKC to hire a full-time Section 3 coordinator for two years,
72
revise its Section 3 Plan, and implement a skills bank for referral of public housing residents to construction jobs using public funding.
• Public Housing Maintenance and Capital Improvements – HAKC completed $3,821,221 in capital improvements for existing public housing developments in 2011. This amount included both Public Housing Capital Funds and remaining ARRA stimulus funds.
• Public Housing Work Order Completion – HAKC has successfully maintained an average work order completion time of 7.49 days, which is a grade “A” under the HUD Public Housing Assessment System (PHAS).
• Public Housing Energy Performance Contract – HAKC procured an energy services company (ESCO) and completed energy assessments of every HAKC public housing site, administrative office and community center. A preliminary energy improvement plan has been completed calling for over $12 million in energy conserving improvements. A loan through HUD will provide financing which is paid annually with utility savings. The plan sets out to complete projects that were initially slated to use capital funds now using ESCO funding. The freed up capital funds as a result of the implementation of the ESCO allows for other modernization improvements.
• Housing Choice Voucher Program – HAKC achieved “High Performer” status through the Section Eight Management Assessment Program (SEMAP) achieving a score of 100 out of 100 possible points.
• Columbus Park / Phase III – HAKC continued to work with the Land Clearance for Redevelopment Authority (LCRA) and Columbus Park Developers to prepare plans for the redevelopment of twenty-one acres in the Columbus Park neighborhood, including seven acres of vacant land owned by HAKC. HAKC received approval for disposition of the seven acres from HUD.
• Shelter-Plus-Care Program – HAKC continued work with the Homeless Services Coalition and the local Continuum of Care to implement two Shelter-Plus-Care grants. The grants provide supportive housing for formerly homeless clients who are also receiving drug and alcohol rehabilitation or suffering from mental disability. HAKC partners in providing case management and supportive services for this project include the KC VA Medical Center, Swope Health Services, and Truman Behavioral Health Network. Five of the units are occupied by veterans. Supportive services will include programs directed toward employment and self-sufficiency.
• YouthBuild Program – HAKC began its fourth year of the YouthBuild program. A total of 133 urban core youth have participated in the program to date. Four YouthBuild trainees were hired as painters and masonry laborers on the Beacon Park construction site and paid prevailing wage as part of the Section 3 Program. Four youth are enrolled in college.
• Impact of Housing and Services on Homeless Families Study - Up to 64 vouchers are being provided to homeless families to provide evidence to help federal policy makers, community planners, and local practitioners prioritize the use of resources and structure local homeless assistance programs.
73
• HUD Veterans Affairs Supportive Housing (VASH) - HAKC continues to provide Housing Choice Voucher (HCV) rental assistance for homeless veterans with case management and clinical services provided by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA). The VA provides these services for participating veterans at VA medical centers (VAMCs) and community-based outreach clinics. HAKC was awarded an additional 25 VASH Vouchers in 2011.
• Job Readiness Program – 113 public housing and HCV families completed the Job Readiness Program offered by United Services Community Action Agency and the Housing Authority Service Coordination staff.
• Self-Sufficiency Program – 26 participants graduated from the HAKC Family Self-Sufficiency program in 2011. 234 current participants in the program have established escrow savings accounts, with an aggregate balance of over $800,000. Residents may apply these accounts to debt reduction, education, transportation, or home purchases. In addition 552 public housing residents and area low-income households took part in the KC Cash tax assistance program. Two hundred of these households received the Earned Income Tax Credit.
• HAKC/COMBAT Drug Prevention Resource Center at Clymer Center. This Resource Center offers a computer lab, life skills and job readiness training, and provides resource and referrals to families who live in the community. Capacity building programs for the public housing residents and youth programs are also offered.
• FDIC Money Smart Program - 117 public housing residents and Section 8 voucher holders graduated from the 10-week Money Smart financial education program developed by the FDIC. 230 individuals attended at least one Money Smart Program module in 2011. In addition, a Money Smart for Youth program was implemented in 2011 with 28 public housing residents in attendance.
• Welfare to Work - In 2011, the Housing Authority Resident Services Department entered into a contract with the KC LINC, Inc. organization to provide case management services under the Missouri Work Assistance Program to the TANF clients who lived in public housing and surrounding areas. 225 clients were provided services that included job readiness classes, career exploration, and job placement. There were three HAKC case managers working with TANF families who reside in public housing, Section 8 and in the community working on assisting the families in removing barriers to employment
• HAKC Computer Labs – 885 adults were provided computer training, job skill training, job readiness programs, and literacy programs, including online tutoring for the GED test or high school diploma. There were 870 youth visits for tutoring and homework assistance. The YouthBuild Program incorporated computer-based training into their GED preparation using the PLATO self-tutoring software program. They also created Power Point presentations as part of the career exploration activities.
74
• HAKC Tutoring Program –55 students from Riverview, Clymer Center and Guinotte Manor received tutoring five days a week, two hours daily. These services were provided by the Learning for Today organization in partnership with a local sorority.
• HAKC Wayne Miner LINC Site – 120 public housing and community children are served by LINC in their before/after school and summer full day program at Wayne Miner.
• Nutrition Program – Approximately 10,000 meals were provided to children and disabled residents who reside in the public housing family developments during 8 weeks of the summer months and during the academic year to supplement the free and reduced lunch program.
B. 2012 Goals – The Housing Authority of Kansas City, Missouri has the following goals for 2012 to encourage family self-sufficiency and increase the supply and quality of its affordable housing stock:
• Performance - Achieve the status of “High Performer” in HUD’s Public Housing Assessment System (overall score of 90+) and maintain “High Performer” in HUD’s Section Eight Management Assessment Program.
• Occupancy - Maintain Public Housing occupancy and Section 8 utilization at 97% or higher.
• Capital Improvements – Complete improvements at public housing developments and scattered site units utilizing Capital Grant funds. This work will include: replacement of major systems, roofing, safety improvements, and rehabilitation of older scattered site housing.
• Agency-Wide Energy Performance Contract – Obtain HUD approval of the energy performance plan and begin implementation of the energy conservation improvements under Energy Services Company (ESCO) contract developed in 2011. Financing for the improvements is paid with utility cost savings. HAKC staff and residents will receive training in energy conservation equipment, materials, and techniques.
• Pemberton Park for Grandfamilies - Complete occupancy of the 36-unit development and establish the supportive services program for resident grandfamilies in partnership with Phoenix Family Services.
• Columbus Park Redevelopment – Approve the Columbus Park redevelopment plan, execute a property transfer agreement for the seven acres of ground owned by HAKC, and begin construction.
• Choice Neighborhoods Initiative – Complete the Chouteau Courts / Paseo Gateway Transformation Plan with input from public housing and neighborhood residents. Identify sites and financing for replacement housing for Chouteau Courts. Prepare a submission to HUD for a Choice Neighborhoods Implementation Grant.
• Homeownership - Graduate 7 first-time homebuyers through the public housing and Section 8 Homeownership Programs. The Housing Authority is working with the
75
Green Zone to coordinate a home fair to educate the families about homeownership opportunities available through Neighborhood Stabilization Funds. The fair will consist of participation in a Homes Tour and information from the five agencies that received NSP funds and provide home financing.
• Section 3 – Hire a full time Section 3 Coordinator. Update the HAKC Section 3 Plan. Establish a skills bank for referral of public housing residents to construction projects. Develop partnerships with the Section 3 programs of the City of Kansas City, Missouri and the Missouri Housing Development Commission.
• Shelter Plus Care - Continue implementation of HAKC’s two Shelter-Plus-Care grants and provide 29 vouchers for supportive housing for clients of HAKC’s partners including the KC VA Medical Center, Swope Health Services, and Truman Behavioral Health Network.
• YouthBuild - In 2012 the HAKC will begin its fifth year of the YouthBuild program with funding provided by the U.S. Department of Labor. The staff will recruit 37 new trainees. Construction of the new Platinum LEED – Certified home at 5307 Wayne will be completed, and two public housing homes will be rehabilitated. Nine participants will earn their GED and will enroll in post-secondary education.
• Job Readiness - 100 residents will complete a Lifeskill Curriculum developed and facilitated by the Family Self-Sufficiency Program case managers and community volunteers.
• Family Self-Sufficiency - There will be 30 graduates from the HAKC Family Self-Sufficiency program. There will be 412 total participants with 235 escrow savings accounts with an aggregate balance over $600,000.
• FDIC Money Smart Program - 100 public housing residents and Section 8 voucher holders will graduate from the 10-week Money Smart financial education program developed by the FDIC.
• HAKC Computer Labs - Despite major cuts in funding, HAKC staff will maintain the computer lab three days a week with sessions in the morning and evening.
• LINCWORKS Program – The Housing Authority Resident Services Department will continue to partner with The Greater KC LINC, INC organization to provide case management services to TANF families under the Missouri Work Assistance Program. There are approximately 250 families on the TANF program in public housing.
C. Long-range Goals - HAKC long range goals for 2012-2016 include:
• High Performance - Annually achieve and maintain “High Performer” status per HUD’s Public Housing Assessment System (PHAS) and Section Eight Management Assessment Program (SEMAP).
• Property Management - Continue to maintain effective property management to uphold high occupancy rates, maintain property appearance, and resident safety.
76
• Choice Neighborhoods – Obtain a Choice Neighborhoods Implementation Grant from HUD to implement the Paseo Gateway Transformation Plan, and replace Chouteau Courts with new and rehabbed mixed-income developments.
• Columbus Park Redevelopment - Work with the City to oversee the successful implementation of the Columbus Park Redevelopment Plan including the seven acres of Phase III of Guinotte Manor set aside per the Cooperative Agreement. The Plan will include a Section 3 requirement and an affordable housing component for first time homebuyers.
• Agency-Wide Energy Performance Contract – Complete over $12 million in energy conserving improvements on HAKC properties under the ESCO program approved by HUD. Utilize utility savings to pay all costs of the project.
• Homeownership - Provide training and financial assistance to help at least 15 Public Housing and Section 8 families become first time homebuyers each year.
• Housing Counseling - Provide financial literacy and debt management training to 100 urban-core families through certification as a HUD-sponsored Housing Counseling Agency.
• Homelessness – Continue to coordinate with service providers assisting the homeless to identify and implement measures to reduce and eliminate chronic and other forms of homelessness.
• Family Self-Sufficiency - Maintain funding for Family Self-Sufficiency and supportive services including employment training and youth activities by seeking out non-traditional sources in partnership with local service agencies.
• Capital Improvements – Make effective use of all available HUD capital funds to improve and maintain existing public housing developments and scattered sites.
• Affordable Housing Development – Coordinate with the Missouri Housing Development Commission, and the City of Kansas City, Missouri to address the need for affordable housing, and redevelopment of the urban core.
• Joint Ventures for Affordable Housing - Continue to form partnerships with CDC’s, non-profit service agencies, and for-profit developers to increase the availability of affordable housing and supportive services for low-income residents of Kansas City, Missouri.
• Youth Services - Continue to provide youth academic support and recreation programs at the Clymer, Wayne Miner, Riverview, Chouteau Courts, Guinotte Manor and West Bluff Community Centers.
77
Part 4: Homeless Strategies Description of Homeless Strategies (91.215(d)), Coordination Between Housing Providers (91.215(l)) and Strategies to Help Prevent Homelessness for Families with Children The strategy to end homelessness in Kansas City involves a governance structure that establishes local policy characterized by consistent implementation over time. The process engages citizens, the business, non-profit, and philanthropic communities to create a coordinated action plan for addressing homelessness and factors that contribute to homelessness. This coordinated plan must address short and long-term investments needs, and have measurable outcomes that support sustainability. The Mayor and Council adopted a new vision and six (6) goals for the City of Kansas City. The vision statement states, “The mayor, council and staff, together with community partners strive to achieve a common vision to make Kansas City the best. We employ innovative strategies to: effectively and efficiently provide customer-focused services; improve public safety; and develop sustainable, healthy communities where all prosper. We lead by inspiring, collaborating, measuring progress, and celebrating successes.” Our homeless strategy incorporates the relevant parts of this vision and seeks to facilitate the coordination of internal and external resources (people and assets). The six priority areas are: 1.) Governance, 2.) Economic Growth, 3.) Healthy Community, 4.) Neighborhood Livability, 5.) Public Safety, and 6.) Public Infrastructure. The table below reflects current governance policies and proposed actions to address the remaining priorities over the 5 Year Plan. Chart 1 summarizes priorities.
Chart 1
City Goals and Priorities
Goal Priority Governance Public Policy
i. Homeless Taskforce (HTF)- Resolution No. 090788 established a 60 member taskforce to: 1) identify the issues related to homelessness; 2) develop a plan to include immediate and long term strategies, funding options, and 3) to make recommendations as to how the Council may best partner with governmental entities, private businesses and the community to end homelessness in the Kansas City. Resolution, No. 110302 sanctioned HTF’s transition to Mid America Regional Council (MARC) to facilitate regional planning.
ii. Food Policy- Resolution No. 120046 supports improved healthy food access in Kansas City, Missouri, and the Greater Kansas City Food Policy Coalition; and directing the City Manager to assign staff to work with this coalition to achieve our shared goals.
78
iii. Mayor’s Budget FY2013 Budget Memo (abridged)
a. Build Partnerships business, philanthropic, and community
b. City Entrepreneur foster and encourage small business start ups
c. Adopt Business Model Two simple considerations i. Keeping Current Customers Happy through efficient basic services, effective public safety, world class amenities, and livable, sustainable, healthy neighborhoods and a strong urban core ii. Creating an environment to attract new customers
d. Target Resources Realizing impact by targeting services in a strategic, holistic approach
e. Engage at All Levels Responsibility and accountability must engage City leadership, all levels of staff, the business and philanthropic communities and citizens to make a better Kansas City
f. KC Stat focus on data to measure progress toward goal attainment
i. Generate consistent, reliable, and accurate Homeless Management Information System (HMIS) data
Neighborhood Livability
1. Enhance Neighborhood Capacity and Accountability Targeting resources (people and assets) to most impoverished communities
a. Commitment to neighborhood youths b. Improve the accuracy and reliability of homeless data c. Establish performance standards based on targeted goals d. Improve the quality, effectiveness, and efficiency of
services delivered to participants e. Establish Certification of Consistency Standards for
Missouri COC-604 Economic Growth
1. Invest in the Urban Core Outreach to homeless assistance non profits to build capacity create jobs for homeless persons a. Target innovative projects that employ youth and
homeless adults 2. Create and Implement the City’s Economic Development
Strategic Plan a. Market procurement requests for bid to nonprofit
organizations for inclusion of homeless citizens to support innovative entrepreneurial projects for basic services delivery
Healthy Community
1. Reduce illegal dumping and littering a. Educate project participants on how to maintain housing
79
b. Connect to neighborhood associations & groups c. Solicit community driven innovative project to assist
with reduction in illegal dumping and littering- (One man’s trash is another man’s treasure concept)
Public Safety
1. Reduce crime and homicide rates a. Address underlying causes
i. Unemployment/underemployment ii. Lack of affordable housing
iii. Poverty b. Establish a discharge policy plan for Kansas City c. Expansion of Bridges Project and continued
implementation of the Intercept Model in collaboration with Jackson County—a) Court ordered participation, b) service provision, c) housing options, and employment options
Public Infrastructure
1. Develop a strategic plan for public transit a. Provide a vehicle for users and providers to have input in
the strategic planning process 2. Develop a comprehensive funding plan for infrastructure
a. Identify potential non-federal resources to rehabilitate vacant properties for housing homeless persons
b. Conversion- Transform shelter spaces to usable permanent- Single Room Occupancy (SRO) units with enriched services
The governance direction established by City of Kansas City aligns with the United States Inter Agency Council (USIAC) on Homelessness- National Policy Initiative to end homelessness. USIAC mission is to coordinate the federal response to homelessness and to create a national partnership at every level of government and with the private sector to reduce and end homelessness in the nation while maximizing the effectiveness of the Federal Government in contributing to the end of homelessness. The vision is a simple one:
No one should experience homelessness No one should be without a safe, stable place to call home.
Their mission was codified into law under the Homeless Emergency Assistance and Rapid Transition Housing (HEARTH) Act of 2009. Consistent with the priorities as identified above, the strategy to end homelessness will incorporate federal, state and local initiatives without losing sight of the overall general needs specific to the Kansas City community. Kansas City’s structure for addressing homelessness on a community-wide basis includes: The Homelessness Taskforce, under the management of Mid America Regional Council (MARC); the Kansas City Continuum of Care, the City of Kansas City, and a specific partnership with Jackson County for inmate services.
80
Council Resolution No. 110302 sanctioned the Homelessness Task Force transition from an entity of the City of Kansas City, Missouri to the Mid-America Regional Council (MARC) to facilitate regional planning and coordination on homeless issues. The MARC board includes representatives from Missouri and Kansas counties—Missouri counties Cass, Clay, Jackson, Platte, Ray and Kansas counties of Johnson, Leavenworth, Miami County. Municipal involvement includes the cities of Independence, Missouri, Kansas City, Missouri, Lee’s Summit, Missouri, Olathe, Kansas, Overland Park, Kansas and the Unified Government of Wyandotte County/ Kansas City, Kansas. CoC representatives from MO-604, KS-501 and KS 505 are also active members of the Taskforce. The HTF works to develop regional (meaning multi-county, city and bi-state) approaches to ending homelessness. Members also represented include City of Kansas City, Missouri; City of Kansas City, Kansas; Johnson County, Platte County, and Clay counties; nonprofit organizations serving the homeless, citizens, business, educational institutions, law enforcement and judicial representatives. The following list represents a few of the subcommittee and project teams along with a brief summary of current activities:
Children and Youth Project Team-Identify the level of need (demand for housing for families with children and unaccompanied youth) and potential resources for addressing the need. Support the adoption of discharge policies to address the problem of youth being discharged from hospitals and other facilities and programs without ensuring housing options.
Law Enforcement and Judiciary Subcommittee- Work with Jackson County and other area counties/ cities to adopt the Intercept model in use in Johnson County and continued use in Kansas City/Jackson County to divert homeless persons from the expensive criminal justice system through effective case management. Address panhandling and liquor control ordinance issues.
Responsive Services Project Team- Develop and adopt a common (universal) intake form for use at multiple locations to improve service access. Identify and deliver training for case workers to improve services for homeless persons and families.
Permanent Housing Project Team- Develop affordable housing inventory and determine system to keep it maintained and accessible; work to increase access to subsidized housing resources by homeless persons and families; work to increase the supply of affordable housing in the region; and support a 100,000 homes campaign to allow faith-based organizations and other community groups help homeless persons and families into permanent housing.
Employment Project Team- Create an inventory of employment assistance and training programs across the continuum that specifically target homeless persons and increase coordination between workforce development system, employers and agencies that serve homeless persons and families.
The jurisdiction of the City of Kansas City, Missouri works in partnership with the Homeless Services Coalition of Greater Kansas City, the City’s designated agency representing the CoC (MO-604). The CoC makes recommendations, conducts the annual Point in Time count (PIT),
81
prepares the Housing Inventory Count (HIC), and the Annual Homeless Assessment Report (AHAR). CoC representatives have also sat on the City’s Emergency Shelter Grant review panel since 1996. Plan funds targeted to assist homelessness will include HOME Investment Partnership (Tenant Based Rental Assistance Program), the Emergency Solutions Grant Program as established by the Homeless Emergency Assistance and Rapid Transition Housing (HEARTH) Act of 2009, Community Development Block Grant, and Housing Opportunities for Persons with Aids and Continuum of Care funding. Within the current structure, the City’s Neighborhoods and Housing Services Department works on a division level to coordinate service responses to homelessness through the Human and Special Services Section. Inter-departmental relationships include Health, Police, and the Municipal Court System. Consistent engagement of community in the process over the past years readies the City of Kansas City for implementation of HEARTH which redefines the definition of homelessness, places greater emphasis on permanent housing, and requires broad community-wide participation planning in addressing homelessness. Specific Objectives (91.215): Analysis of Needs and Determination of Priorities (provides local data on which priorities are based) The need for the homeless population can be classified as including 1) housing units, 2) available public transportation to serve those units, 3) available employment for those housing units as required by the occupants, available connections to 4) neighborhood services and available connections to 5) individualized social services for those housed in the units. This list identifies the priorities that surround the person(s) in their environment and will allow their needs to be met. It cannot be stressed strongly enough that all of the City departments that support the community as a whole must be involved in the One Year Action Plan to begin to address homelessness in our community. When the City as a political entity crafts its goals and policies, allocates its resources and develops its plans of action for accomplishing effective governance on behalf of the community as a whole, it must recognize that homeless persons’ needs are no different in terms of needed tangible supports than the rest of the community. What is critically different is that homeless persons do not have the same reservoir of personal resources that the rest of the community has and that this deeper need is at the heart of the City’s needs analysis and priorities determination. The 2012 Point in Time count identifies 2,434 homeless citizens in Kansas City. That is the priority to be addressed by the One Year Action Plan; no community can address the priority need of the homeless population in its totality and so the incremental program described below
82
could be the first effort of our community to begin to reduce to the lowest level possible, its homeless numbers.* *The National Alliance to End Homeless (NAEH) provides the most reliable national statistical analysis for each states homeless demographics; NAEH has determined that there will always be a small residual population of homeless persons who do not accept housing resources due to a combination of circumstances (mental health issues, alcoholism, substance abuse, etc.). They estimate a 7-10% of a community’s numbers represent that residual core; Kansas City could expect 190-218 persons unsheltered when enough housing is available to house all citizens needing affordable and accessible units. Gaps Narrative The Housing Inventory Chart Unmet Needs document demonstrates the gap between transitional, permanent supportive and permanent market rate housing for the total homeless population. The gap includes the 1,685 sheltered and 749 unsheltered family members identified in the 2012 Point in Time Count. The gap between transitional housing and permanent supportive/permanent market rate housing is documented in the 2012 Point in Time Count. Date collected indicates that
Twenty percent (45%) of the families are in Emergency Shelter, waiting to move to transitional housing
Fifty-eight percent (50%) are in transitional housing; Agencies report that the lack of affordable permanent supportive/permanent market rate
housing keeps those families in transitional housing 3-6 months longer than they need to be.
There are current targeted HUD programs for the other subpopulations listed in Table 1A and while there are never enough resources to serve any group at a 100% level, these subpopulations have experienced reductions in their numbers as a result of HUD targeting from 2007-2010. Gaps Narrative (Continuum of Care and HTF Responsive Services Subcommittee) The Homeless Services Coalition of Greater Kansas City (HSCGKC) determines the Gap in housing needs in Kansas City, with 2818 homeless persons, to be a total of a minimum of 500 affordable housing units distributed across the homeless demographic; 250 units for individuals, 100 units for couple and 150 for families. The issue of a gaps analysis is that the homeless population is fluid and so each community needs to start by using a number of units that can be added to the current inventory and adjusted as the population increases, decreases or if the demographic has a significant shift from individuals to families or vice versa. Consolidated Plan Resource and Other Resource Investment The 5 Year Consolidated Plan takes a coordinated, holistic approach to target resources to the three (3) priority areas. The City will roll out an investment plan for the 5 year period during the substantial amendment process to accept the new Emergency Solutions Grant. The plan will
83
identify investment amounts, service levels and other resources (federal and non federal) targeted to three priority areas and include a revised Table 1 A based on the 2011 PIT count. Section III shows the allocation of CDBG and ESG funds for the 2012 Action Plan period. Part 5: Non-Homeless Special Needs Strategies: HUD Tables 1B below (also on page 28) and 1C (on page 64) show the City’s strategies for addressing the persons having special housing needs.
Table 1B Special Needs (Non-Homeless) Populations
SPECIAL NEEDS
SUBPOPULATIONS**
Priority Need Level
High, Medium, Low,
No Such Need
Unmet Need
Dollars to Address Unmet Need
Multi-Year
Goals
Annual Goals
Elderly M 44 0
Frail Elderly M unknown 0
Severe Mental Illness M 406 0
Developmentally Disabled M 34 0
Physically Disabled M 25 0
Persons w/ Alcohol/Other Drug Addictions M 294 0
Persons w/HIV/AIDS H 890 0 2760 552
Victims of Domestic Violence M 41 0
Other
TOTAL
** Source: Missouri Department of Mental Health & KCMO Health Department Priority strategies to address the needs of special populations include the following:
• Continued funding for individuals living with HIV/AIDS with HOPWA funding by SAVE, Inc.; housing for homeless persons with mental illnesses with CDBG and ESG funding by reStart, Inc.;
• Transitional housing for men recovering from substance abuse with CDBG and ESG funds by Benilde Hall;
• Special housing and services to women with CDBG and ESG funds by Sheffield Place and Rose Brooks Center; and
84
• Housing repair services to the elderly and persons with accessibility needs with CDBG funds by the City’s Minor/Emergency Repair Program.
The primary obstacle toward meeting underserved needs is the lack of funding for low and very low income households. Many of the persons needing special need services are on fixed incomes and unable to make periodic improvements to their homes due to other individual expenses. Part 6: Community Development (91.215(f)): Priority community development needs, and 5-Year and annual goals and objectives, are shown in the following Tables 2B and 2C. The highest priority activities (as listed) include:
• Code Enforcement; • Public Facility Improvements for homeless persons and families, youth and veterans; and • Public Services for seniors, youth, homeless prevention, and child care.
The City continues to plan, develop, and fund special public facility projects over multi-year periods. Examples include the Blue Hill Community Service Center at 5008 Prospect (2011-12), the St. Michaels Veterans Center at 39th and Emanuel Cleaver II Blvd (2012-13), and the Morningstar Family Life Center at 27th and Prospect (2012-13). The multi-year funding approach is necessary due to the challenges of raising other private and public funds to construct the facilities in a single budget period. However, the programmed funds provide an important leverage for other funders. This leveraging approach is exemplified on the One-Year Strategy and Budget Sheets shown in Section III. Funding programmed in the One-Year Action Plan from CDBG and HOME funds total $10,733,445.00, leveraging $125,936,272.00 in funding from other public and private sources. The combination of these funding sources is projected to create nearly 8,000 outputs of service and housing units.
85
Table 2B Priority Community Development Needs
Priority Need
Priority Need Level
Unmet Priority Need
Dollars to Address Need
5 Yr Goal
Plan/Act
Annual Goal
Plan/Act
Percent Goal
Completed Acquisition of Real Property L Disposition M Clearance and Demolition M X 1,000,000 200 90 Clearance of Contaminated Sites L Code Enforcement H X 2,500,000 1,000 200 Public Facility (General) M Senior Centers M Handicapped Centers M Homeless Facilities H X 2 0 Youth Centers H X 500,000 3 1 Neighborhood Facilities H X 1,125,000 7 2 Child Care Centers M Health Facilities L Mental Health Facilities L Parks and/or Recreation Facilities L Parking Facilities L Tree Planting L Fire Stations/Equipment L Abused/Neglected Children Facilities M X 1 0 Asbestos Removal M Non-Residential Historic Preservation M Other Public Facility Needs L Infrastructure (General) L Water/Sewer Improvements L Street Improvements L Sidewalks L Solid Waste Disposal Improvements L Flood Drainage Improvements L Other Infrastructure L Public Services (General) M Senior Services H X 1,250,000 560 112 Handicapped Services M Legal Services M Youth Services H X 1,750,000 22,150 4,430 Child Care Services H X 1,000,000 3,350 670 Transportation Services L Substance Abuse Services L Employment/Training Services L Health Services L Lead Hazard Screening M Crime Awareness M Fair Housing Activities M Homeless Prevention H X 2,000,000 19,750 3,950 Other Services M Economic Development (General) L C/I Land Acquisition/Disposition L C/I Infrastructure Development L C/I Building Acq/Const/Rehab L Other C/I L ED Assistance to For-Profit L ED Technical Assistance M Micro-enterprise Assistance M X 375,000 40 8 Other M Transit Oriented Development M Urban Agriculture L
86
Transition Table 2C Summary of Specific Housing/Community Development Objectives
(Table 2A/2B Continuation Sheet)
Obj #
Specific Objectives Sources of
Funds Performance
Indicators Expected Number
Actual Number
Outcome/ Objective*
Rental Housing Objectives
DH 2.34 Rental Housing Production HOME Hsg. Units 60 DH-2
Owner Housing Objectives
DH-2.21 DH-2.5 DH-2.19 DH-2.17 DH-2.20
Minor Home Repair CDBG Hsg. Units 215 DH-2
DH-2.34 CHDO Housing (15%Set Aside) HOME Hsg. Units 10 DH-2
DH-2.33 City/CDC Partnership Purchase/Rehab HOME Hgs. Units 39 DH-2
DH-2.6 KC Dream HOME Program HOME Homebuyers 60 DH-2
Community Development Objectives
SL-3.1 Community Assistance Council CDBG People 1500 SL-3
SL-3.37 Graffiti Removal CDBG Blighted Sites Remediated 200 SL-3
SL-3.38 Redevelopment Activities (clearance & demolition) CDBG Blighted Sites
Remediated 90 SL-3
SL-3.3 Systematic Code Enforcement CDBG Blighted Properties Remediated
200 SL-3
SL-3.39 KC Community Gardens CDBG Gardens Tilled 550 SL-3
Public Facilities Objectives
SL-1.27 Blue Hills Community Services Ctr. CDBG Area Benefit 1 SL-1
SL-1.29 Morning Star Family Life Center CDBG Area Benefit 1 SL-1
SL-1.30 St. Michaels Veteran’s Center CDBG Area Benefit 1 SL-1
Public Services (Homeless Objectives)
SL-1.6
SL-1.42 Benilde Hall
ESG
CDBG Homeless 350 SL-1
DH-1.2 Community Assistance Council ESG Households 50 DH-1
DH-1.18 Guadalupe Center Housing Counseling CDBG Households 550 DH-1
87
DH-1.7 Housing Information Center CDBG Households 1900 DH-1
SL-1.31 Niles Home for Children CDBG Homeless 1500 SL-1
SL-1.17
SL-1.39
reStart Homeless Services Drop-In Center (essential services)
ESG
CDBG Homeless 375 SL-1
SL-1.18 reStart Homeless Shelter 918 E. 9th ESG Homeless 1200 SL-1
SL-1.9 Rose Brooks Center ESG Homeless 575 SL-1
SL-1.10 SL-1.32 Sheffield Place
ESG
ESG Homeless 60 SL-1
SL-1.11 Synergy Services ESG/CDBG Homeless 400 SL-1
Special Needs Objectives
DH-1.12
Save, Inc. HOPWA Persons with HIV/Aids
477 DH-1
DH-1.13 reStart HOPWA Persons with HIV/Aids
75 DH-1
Public Services Objectives
SL-1.14 Boys & Girls Clubs of Greater KC CDBG Youth 750 SL-1
EO-1.6 Guadalupe Center Child Care Services CDBG Children 185 EO-1
SL-1.12 Mattie Rhodes (Northeast) CDBG Youth 300 SL-1
E0-1.1 Operation Breakthrough Childcare CDBG Children 520 EO-1
SL-1.24 Palestine Senior Center CDBG Seniors 112 SL-1
SL-1.31 Somali Foundation CDBG Youth 115 EO-1
EO-1.5 United Inner City Services (St. Marks) CDBG Children 150 EO-1
SL-1.23 Urban Rangers CDBG Youth 65 SL-1
SL-1.26 W.E.B. DuBois Learning Center CDBG Youth 3,200 SL-1
Economic Development Objectives
EO-1.12 Hispanic Economic Dev. Corp CDBG Microenterprises 8 EO-1 *Outcome/Objective Codes
Availability/Accessibility Affordability Sustainability
Decent Housing
DH-1
DH-2
DH-3
Suitable Living Environment SL-1 SL-2 SL-3
Economic Opportunity EO-1 EO-2 EO-3
88
Neighborhood Revitalization Strategy Areas (91.215(g)): Within the CDBG program, a participating jurisdiction can designate specific areas or neighborhoods as Neighborhood Revitalization Strategy Areas (NRSA). The NRSA allows greater flexibility in the use of CDBG funding that would promote the revitalization of those designated areas. NRSA designations will allow the City’s CDBG funds to be coordinated and used in a more strategic manner with local partnerships. The City of Kansas City has had four areas with NRSA designation—Columbus Park, Northeast, Beacon Hill and Westside. At this time there is no change in the strategy for each of the areas, although the City intends to continue to evaluate the effectiveness of utilizing this approach as a way of encouraging development and addressing conditions that have caused the neighborhoods to decline. Despite the efforts of the City, in cooperation with neighborhood organizations, housing agencies and other stakeholders, these NRSA neighborhoods continue to struggle with abandoned and ill-maintained property. While efforts have been made to maintain and rehabilitate old houses, as well as build new ones, the existing housing stock continues to age and deteriorate simply because many owner-occupants do not have the resources to keep their homes up. Additionally, many investor-owned rental properties suffer from disinvestment and lack of maintenance. However, each of these neighborhood areas has an opportunity to experience an expanding residential population due to their strategic location within the city. These areas have the potential for mixed-use development that has proved popular elsewhere in the city. The NRSA designations will help target public investment and encourage private investment in areas that need an extra push, which can lead to the revitalization of the entire area. The City will attempt to increase the concentration of its efforts to generate viable communities, provide decent and affordable housing, and develop a more effective social and cultural safety for those residents. The progress of each strategy will chronicled annually in the Consolidated Annual Performance Evaluation Report (CAPER). All four neighborhoods are primarily residential in use and contain a percentage of low- and moderate-income residents well in excess of 51 percent. At this time, the City of Kansas City plans to take advantage of the following benefits an NRSA offers:
• Public Services carried out pursuant to the strategy by a Community Based Development Organization (CBDO) will be exempt from the public services cap.
• Housing units assisted under this strategy may be considered to be part of a single structure for purposes of applying the low- and moderate-income national objective criteria, thus providing greater flexibility to carry out housing programs that contribute to the revitalization of a neighborhood.
Housing Objectives:
89
As part of its attempt to upgrade housing and increase the relative competiveness of these areas, the following housing activities will be pursued:
• Preservation of the housing stock through repair, improvement and rehabilitation of existing buildings.
• Encouragement of limited amounts of new construction based upon current market conditions. The KC Dream program will provide a maximum amount of down payment assistance to prospective home buyers in these areas.
• Assisting households by encouraging residents to invest in the upkeep and improvement of their homes. The City will also support foreclosure prevention counseling to help retain present owners and avoid vacant properties.
• Targeted code enforcement activity intended to prevent the further decline and debilitating effects of deteriorating properties.
Although these principles are applicable citywide, they are particularly relevant to the NRSA neighborhoods. Strategies to Reduce Barriers to Affordable Housing (91.215(h)): For the five years covered by this plan, the City may undertake the following strategies and actions to support the removal of barriers for increasing affordable housing production:
• Establish a citizens committee to identify barriers to affordable housing. • Explore the possibility of creating density bonuses, inclusionary zoning, and other
incentives to encourage the development of affordable housing. • Consider modifications to the pricing structure for rezoning application fees, building
permits, and inspection fees when being used for developing affordable housing. • Consider integrating affordable housing objectives into economic development incentive
programs such as tax increment financing. • Consider the use of expedited development review and permitting processes for
affordable housing developments. • Support the use of housing and vacant properties owned by the City/s newly created land
bank for affordable housing purposes by creating new affordable homeownership products, which are described in Section III of this Plan.
In addition, as part of the recently completed regional Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice the study concluded that the participating “jurisdictions need to improve some aspects of their public sector development and housing practices.” The NHSD and Human Relations Department will continue to cooperate and coordinate programs which enhance the provision of services and production of affordable housing. Lead Based Paint Assessment and Strategies (91.215(i)):
Protecting Families: The City has a number of plans in place to protect residents from lead paint hazards. Federal, state and local laws require people who work with lead paint and those who might encounter lead paint when doing their regular work (such as maintenance workers) to have
90
special training to keep themselves and others safe from lead paint and dust. There are also inspectors who work for the City, State and Federal government who routinely inspect homes where construction and renovation is being performed to make sure the people doing the work have the appropriate training and licenses. When the City performs housing work, precautions are taken to make sure homeowners are not exposed to lead paint hazards. The City, through the Health Department, also has a Lead Poisoning Prevention Program (CLPPP). This program provides free blood lead testing for children and pregnant women. The CLPPP also has educational information and can provide advice to people who have questions about lead poisoning, removing lead paint safely and other lead related topics. CLPPP lead risk assessors provide free home inspections for families with lead poisoned children. These risk assessors can provide advice to property owners about how to safely repair lead paint hazards. CLPPP nurses and risk assessors also provide case management services to families with severely lead poisoned children. Case management involves a nurse and risk assessor coming to the families’ home, determining how the child became lead poisoned, educating the family and property owner about what they can do to help the lead poisoned child and other children in the family, and providing resources to help improve the health of the lead poisoned child and prevent lead poisoning in the other children who are living in the home. Lead risk assessors also enforce the City’s lead ordinance and can write General Ordinance Summons (tickets) if a property owner refuses to repair lead hazards. In addition, the CLPPP has free supplies to help families with lead poisoned children fix hazards in their homes. These supplies include: plastic sheeting, paint, paint brushes, vacuums, and cleaning supplies. Free or low cost removal of lead paint hazards is available through the CLPPP Lead Safe KC Program. This program is available to low income families with children under six years of age and to rental property owners who agree to give priority to low income families with young children after the lead hazards are removed from their property. The Lead Safe KC Program (LSKC), is funded by a Housing and Urban Development Lead Hazard Control Grant. Using these funds, the program plans to remove lead hazards in approximately 70 homes this fiscal year. The LSKC Program also provides free and low cost training (1-2 classes each per year), for lead abatement supervisors and workers as well as Renovation Repair and Painting Rule (RRP) Training (6 classes per year). The CLPP Program works closely with other City and community housing programs to maximize home repair resources, coordinate housing programs and enforce Local, State and Federal laws in order to address the housing needs of Kansas City families.
Antipoverty Strategy (91.215(h)): Kansas City’s strategy to reduce poverty is multi-faceted. As the central-city in a large metropolitan area of 1.5 million people, efforts to create a positive economy for all persons include, but are not limited to regional and targeted job creation using a range of economic development incentives, on-going implementation of MBE/WBE and Section 3 programs, business development financing, and a renewed emphasis on the part of policy-makers to address business and job creation issues. While the unemployment rate of Kansas City has decreased more than any other U.S. city, there is still the need to improve the unemployment rate of minorities and youth. One important objective of the funding provided through this consolidated plan is to identify projects and contractors who can aggressive build and rehabilitate housing and
91
public facilities, with the goal of getting as much funding as possible into the local economy. For 2012-13 the goal is nearly $137 million of contraction contracts. Institutional Structure (91.215(k)): The structure for implementing the 2012 Consolidated Plan will be changing from previous years due to the merger of the Housing and Community Development Department and the Neighborhood and Community Services Department into a single department called the Neighborhoods and Housing Services Department (NHSD). This was necessitated due to continuing federal budget reductions and the need to coordinate amongst department sections to provide increased levels of public services. The new NHSD will have an Assistant City Manager as the department’s director, with four functional divisions and sections as shown below.
• Neighborhood Services Division: o Animal Control Section o Towing Section o Regulated Industries Section o Neighborhood Engagement Section
• Property Preservation-Dangerous Buildings Division: o Property Code Enforcement Section o Dangerous Building Section o Administrative Section o KCMO Homesteading Authority/Maintenance Reserve Program
• Housing and Human Services Division: o Planning and Major Project Development, Marketing and Lending Section o Compliance, Monitoring and Document Management Section o Project Implementation Section o Housing Rehab/Repair Section o Human-Special Services Section
• Administration Division: o Financial o Human Resources o Grants Management.
An example of opportunities for coordination will occur between the following NHSD sections as programs and projects are implemented:
Project Implementation Section→Neighborhood Engagement Section
Housing Rehab/Repair Section→ Property Code Enforcement Section
KCMO Homesteading Authority/Maintenance Reserve Program→ Housing Rehab/Repair Section
92
Property Code Enforcement Section→ Project Implementation Section→ Neighborhood Engagement Section
Compliance, Monitoring and Document Management Section→All CDBG/HOME/ESG contracts
For 2012 Action Plan activities the following sections will be responsible for implementation:
• Planning and Major Project Development, Marketing and Lending Section: - Model Block Planning, - Major Project Planning/Oversight/Development – St. Michaels Veterans Center, Oak Point, Highland Place, Monarch Manor, Colonnades, Seven Oaks School, reBUILD/KC Projects and contracts, - Marketing, - Single-family and multi-family development lending, - Homeownership assistance, and - Tenant Based Assistance Demonstration.
• Project Implementation Section: - City/CDC/Private Partnership Program, - Beacon Hill, - Neighborhood Stabilization Program, - Seven Oaks/Vineyard Developments, - Public Facilities, - Economic Development;
• Housing Rehab/Repair Section - Minor/Moderate and Major Housing Rehabilitation, - Weatherization Program, - Special Programs, and - Graffiti Removal;
• Human-Special Services Section: - CDBG Public Service Contracts, - ESG Operating – Prevention and Essential Services Contracts, - Special Human Service Projects;
• Health Department – HOPWA Program.
93
A significant role and responsibility of NHSD staff is to coordinate with other agencies and residents to implement housing, community and economic activities. The “2012-2016 Major Issues and Strategic Policy Responses,” beginning on page 41, stress the need to coordinate resources to better address the needs of Kansas City residents. Example of these joint coordination and implementation efforts are: Green Impact Zone; The Neighborhood Initiative Program – from 22nd to 51st, Troost to BRW Highway (71
Highway); East Patrol/Crime Lab Target Area from 25th to 28th, Garfield to Montgall; Joint Bank/City Partnerships to Address Foreclosed Housing; and Cooperation and funding of active community development corporations.
Low Income Housing Tax Credit Coordination (91.315(k)):
For 2012 the City prioritization and coordination process for low income housing tax credits follows a Mayor and City Council approved process as part of this 2012 Plan. First, applicants to the Missouri Housing Development Commission (MHDC) for the Low Income Housing Tax Credit program are asked to demonstrate local support for their development project and receive a certification of consistency with housing strategies and goals in the 5-Year Consolidated Plan. For 2012 applications for the April and November cycles, projects for 4% tax credits identified as being “reBUILDKC/neighborhoods” projects (those projects which the City is required by HUD to implement) are named in the One Year Action Plan and included in the project’s financing.
For 4% projects not identified by the City as priority projects, and all 9% tax credit projects the Mayor will be making prioritization recommendations to City Council, for consideration by the Missouri Housing Development Commission for Kansas City, Mo. To assist the Mayor in making his recommendations and to determine the overall consistency of the proposed development with the housing strategies and adopted Major Issues and Target Area in the 5-Year Consolidated Plan, Mayor James’ office welcomes letters of introduction and background information on proposed projects. Actions to Eliminate Barriers for People with Disabilities The Civil Rights Section continues to get inquiries and complaints regarding compliance with accessibility guidelines from people with disabilities. These inquiries and complaints include problems with existing housing stock, as well as non-compliance with accessibility guidelines in newly constructed housing. Although many more housing providers are now in compliance with the guidelines due to the education efforts of the civil rights agencies, there is still a problem in Kansas City in that many providers still lack a thorough understanding of the requirements of providing equal opportunity for housing for people with disabilities. The most efficient method of uncovering discrimination against persons with disabilities is through testing. In the past we have partnered with agencies such as The Whole Person and
94
Legal Aid of Western Missouri to conduct accessibility reviews of apartment complexes in Kansas City. Our intent in the coming years is to seek out more opportunities to develop partnerships with agencies that aid persons with disabilities. These agencies can be valuable in conducting tests, and in alerting us to housing providers that continue to discriminate against or fail to provide reasonable accommodations for persons with disabilities. Actions to Eliminate Discrimination in Renting
According to the AI, the complaint data gathered and the survey of stakeholders provide evidence that residents in Kansas City experience housing discrimination. The Civil Rights Division enforces the fair housing provisions of the city ordinance. The ordinance prohibits discrimination in housing based on a person’s race, color, religion, sex, disability, familial status, national origin, sexual orientation and gender identity. The Section receives cases based on its outreach activities, as well as through referrals from HUD. Discrimination in renting occurs for a number of different reasons. Most of the rental cases, roughly 50 percent, involve discrimination against persons with disabilities. Race and national origin discrimination cases make up approximately 33 percent of the investigations. Other discrimination cases investigated include those based on familial status and sexual harassment. During the next five years the Civil Rights Division will undertake the following actions to eliminate discrimination in renting:
• Continue to vigorously investigate cases of discrimination that are filed in our office. • Conduct fair housing testing to uncover those apartment complexes that continue to
discriminate even though formal complaints have not been filed against them. In those cases where the tests show discrimination the City will file complaints.
• Step up our education and outreach to improve citizens’ abilities to detect discrimination and to know what to do when it is detected.
• Work closer with other fair housing agencies in the area (i.e. Missouri Commission on Human Rights, HUD, etc.) to coordinate fair housing enforcement strategies.
Actions to Reduce the Number of Vacant Structures and Re-use Foreclosed Properties To address the increasing number of foreclosures and vacant properties in Kansas City the Housing Policy Group was formed. The Group is chaired by the City’s Manager’s Office and City Council members, and consists of over twenty stakeholders from banking, community development corporations, academic, trade unions, legal aid, and neighborhoods. The major role of the Group was to identify the scope of the foreclosure problem and identify appropriate strategies. The following is a list of issues, implementation strategies and accomplishment (shown in italics):
• Creation, implementation and administrative support of a Purchase-Rehabilitation Loan Fund for the purpose of stimulating market activity. The fund would provide: 1) working capital loans to community development corporations (“CDCs”) and small builders to acquire and renovate deteriorated single-family home in the City’s economically and physically distressed neighborhoods, and 2) specialized mortgages for
95
low- and moderate-income homebuyers to fund the purchase of the renovated single-family homes by addressing the gap between the cost of acquisition, rehabilitation and the as improved appraised value. The focus of such fund’s efforts will be in geographical areas identified in the City’s 2012-2016 Consolidated Plan. The fund would be based upon a partnership with the Greater Kansas City LISC, Neighborhood Housing Services of Missouri, not-for-profit corporations, including CDCs, for-profit developers and the City. This rehab/sale product is one of five being developed for use by families and investors;
• Revitalizing and strengthening the Kansas City Missouri Homesteading Authority KCMHA, a 501(c) (3) entity, to essentially serve as a land bank for vacant and abandoned properties, obtained by a variety of means. Creation of the statutory requirements for a Land Bank are underway and pending passage in the Missouri State Legislature;
• Developing a process of systematically evaluating properties for viability and taking control of such properties, undertaking the renovation, and re-use and occupancy of such properties. These procedures have been established by the NHSD and are being used on donated properties;
• Negotiations with lenders and other financial institutions who are failing to take prompt foreclosure actions upon vacant and abandoned properties, including allowing them the option of divestiture into the Authority, through assignment of loans and transfer of interests. Bank of America and the KCMHA have entered in a memorandum of agreement for the donation of properties and grant funds for demolition or rehabilitation;
• Collaboration in the creation, implementation and maintenance of a multi-jurisdictional data base to identify areas and properties vulnerable to continuing decline due to vacant and abandoned housing and other types of properties, so that the City’s resources can be used more effectively in accordance with trends identified by such data base, and allowing public access for such information for encouragement of investment in areas in need of support.
• Enhancement of property maintenance and nuisance code enforcement to support receivership actions to acquire vacant and abandoned properties.
• Demolition of properties deemed not viable for rehabilitation, and determining short-term and long-term re-use of the resulting vacant lots, targeting those properties that are within the areas of emphasis under this Consolidated Plan. Use of enforcement of demolition liens against the properties so demolished to gain control of such properties and divest the prior owners of their interests, if any, in the property, and transitioning title into the Authority for the purpose of holding the same for the purpose of assemblage of land or for a public purpose.
• Creation, implementation and maintenance of a regulation process for entities, for-profit and not-for-profit, serving as landlords, and heightened scrutiny of entities acquiring and then abandoning properties. For this purpose, entities trying to evade landlord designation through contract for deeds would also be regulated.
96
Part 7: Agency & Sub-recipient Program Monitoring (91.230): The City of Kansas City has established a Compliance Management Division to implement mandatory administrative guidance for the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG), Home Investment Partnership (HOME) programs and Emergency Solutions Grant (ESG). This division serves as a check and balance to program managers, other City departments, non-profit agencies, and for-profit organizations. The objectives of the Monitoring and Compliance Plan are:
• Reduction and elimination of issues of noncompliance. • Ensure uniformity and efficiency in the administration of Entitlement funds. • Ensure compliance with Federal, State and local statutory and regulatory requirements for
the CDBG, HOME, and ESG programs. • To enhance the administrative and management capacities of program managers, other
departments, and sub-recipients through training and technical assistance.
Agency & Sub-recipient Monitoring Procedures
Monitoring is an ongoing process that begins with contract execution and continues until a project is complete and meets its affordability period or national objective. Program managers conduct technical assistance, desk audits and on-site monitoring visits. Monitoring addresses the following:
• Contract performance and progress • National objectives/eligibility • Overall management systems • Financial management • Program Income Accountability • Allowable costs and cost principles
• Procurement • Record Retention • Davis Bacon and related Acts • Section 3 and MBE/WBE • Other Cross-cutting Federal
regulations
Staff will perform a technical assistance visit with sub-recipients and agencies during the execution of the contract, written agreement or commitment of funds. The technical assistance will provide the contractor and overview of the contract requirements, necessary documentation, program objectives and eligibility, records retention, environmental review, Davis Bacon, and all other applicable regulations. Desk audits of sub-recipients include reviewing reimbursements requests for eligible expenditures, tracking the process of the contract, and ensuring the contractor is collecting and submitting the appropriate documentation. At minimum, there will be one on-site monitoring review for all sub-recipients. An on-site monitoring review is an in-depth look at the sub-recipient’s financial, operational, and personnel policies and procedures. The program manager will review the audit, procurement policies and records, equipment and property inventory, record retention, and the status of the scope of work. All monitoring concerns will result in written communication of the issue, recommendations for compliance and an estimated date of compliance.
97
Because many compliance issues with sub-recipients result directly from a lack of internal capacity or awareness of HUD regulations, the City will require sub-recipients to attend any applicable HUD or City provided training opportunities during the program year.
The ESG on-site monitoring reviews include, but are not limited to the following:
• Eligibility • Intake and assessment • Established goal plan • Regular client contact and notes
related to the goal plan
• Entries in HMIS • General recordkeeping as required
by the grant • Health and safety inspections
More than one monitoring visit may take place based upon a risk assessment. Risk assessment factors include, but are not limited to the following:
• Significant change in program guidance • Change in significant staff working on grant • Failure to submit request for payment timely or repeated errors observed • Reports submitted late or inaccurately • No services recorded in HMIS
Housing Opportunities for Persons with AIDS (HOPWA) Monitoring Process All HOPWA Project Sponsors will receive an on-sight monitoring visit during the contract year with the following key goals:
• Ensure accountability • Ensure effective and efficient use of resources • Help assess response to community needs
Programmatic and fiscal monitoring is performed for each Project Sponsor, as well as, monthly invoice oversight. Ten percent of client files are reviewed for the following information:
• Intake/Assessment form • Release of Information form • HIV Verification • Household Income Verification • Landlord Rental Agreement
• Housing Inspection Performed • Grievance/Termination Policy • Household Rent Calculation
Worksheets
Project Sponsors will receive written verification of the results of these monitoring visits. Part 8: Housing Opportunities for Persons with AIDS (HOPWA) The Housing Opportunities for Persons with AIDS Program was authorized by the AIDS Housing Opportunities Act in 1992 to provide support for housing assistance and supportive services to low-income persons with HIV/AIDS and their families. HOPWA funds are awarded to the Kansas City, Missouri-Kansas Metropolitan Statistical Area (MKMSA), which includes a fifteen-county area in western Missouri and eastern Kansas, on a formula basis determined by
98
the area exceeding a threshold of persons affected with the HIV virus. The City of Kansas City, Missouri is the designated grantee for the Metro-area. The services to address the needs of persons with HIV/AID have included, but are not limited to:
• Housing Information Services - includes, but is not limited to, counseling, information, and referral services to assist an eligible person to locate, acquire, finance and maintain housing;
• Resource Identification Services - coordinate, establish and develop housing assistance resources for eligible persons;
• Short-term rent, mortgage, and utilities payments to prevent the homelessness of the tenant, or to pay mortgages of a dwelling or to assist with utility payments that support the habitability of the dwelling;
• Supportive Services including, but not limited to, health, mental health, assessment, permanent housing placement and counseling, day care, personal assistance, and nutritional services; and
• Operating costs for housing including maintenance, security, operation, insurance, utilities, furnishings, equipment, supplies, and other incidental costs.
Section III, the 2012 One Year Action Plan, continues to provide a recommendation of HOPWA funding for transitional housing and rental assistance.
99
Section III:
2012 ONE-YEAR ACTION PLAN
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
AVAILABLE FUNDS FOR 2012-13 ACTION PLAN
Community Development Funding Block Grant Funds Recommendation Section 108 Debt Repayment $5,922,657 Administration 1,609,296 Public Services 1,142,725 Public Service Activity by CBDO in NRSA 193,000 Public Facility Improvements 1,512,000 Economic Development 75,000 Housing Rehabilitation 1,640,000 Targeted Redevelopment Activities 701,805 Code Enforcement 500,000 Blight Elimination – Graffiti Removal 100,000
CDBG TOTAL $13,396,483
HOME Investment Partnership Funds Administration $274,878 Housing Quality Inspections 42,000 CHDO Activity (TBD) 280,642 Down payment/closing cost assistance 800,000 Rental housing development 1,500,000 Housing development activity 2,239,026
HOME TOTAL $5,136,546
Emergency Solutions Grant Funds Administration $18,544 Operating Costs 271,063 Prevention Services 10,000 Essential Services 25,501 Unallocated Funds 337,821
ESG TOTAL $662,929
Housing Opportunities for Persons with AIDS Funds Administration 33,457 Transitional Housing 60,000 Rental Assistance 985,960 Unallocated Funds 35,841
HOPWA TOTAL $1,115,258 2012 Consolidated Action Plan Recommended Total $20,311,216
113
2012 ANNUAL ACTION PLAN
Executive Summary
As an “entitlement” community, the City of Kansas City, Missouri is qualified to receive annual financial assistance awarded on a formula grant basis (population, characteristics of population, age of housing, etc.) from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). To receive these entitlement grants, the City must develop and submit to HUD its Consolidated Plan which is both a comprehensive planning document and an application for funding under the four formula grant programs—Community Development Block Grant (CDBG), HOME Investment Partnerships (HOME), Emergency Solutions Grant (ESG), and Housing Opportunities for Persons with AIDS (HOPWA). The current Consolidated Plan, covering the period from 2012-2016, is a five-year road map that identifies housing, homeless, community and economic development needs and establishes a strategic plan for addressing these needs. The City of Kansas City’s 2012 Consolidated Action Plan fiscal year runs from June 1, 2012 through May 31, 2013. The 2012 Plan addresses the first year of the new Consolidated Plan. The City’s lead agency responsible for the Plan’s development is the Neighborhoods and Housing Services Department (NHSD). NHSD coordinates all Consolidated Planning initiatives of the City, including plan preparation with citizen participation and community collaboration, and directly manages all projects and activities funded through the CDBG and HOME grants except for HOPWA activities which are managed by the City’s Health Department. In the Consolidated Plan, the City states how it intends to utilize its HUD entitlement funds in the areas of housing and community development, public service and administration. The Plan ties HUD grant-funded spending to other funding initiatives in the City that benefit the City’s low- and moderate-income residents. The 2012 Annual Action Plan, as well as prior Action Plans and the 5-Year Consolidated Plan, can be viewed in their entirety on the City’s website at www.kcmo.org/housing. While the Consolidated Plan documents the proposed use of funds, the Consolidated Annual Performance and Evaluation Report (CAPER) will identify the progress and performance of projects, programs and services funded during the prior program year. These reports are completed in accordance with the Citizen Participation Plan. Preparation of the 2012 Annual Action Plan began with an initial public meeting on September 20, 2011 to review the CAPER for the 2010 program year. A second public notice on the availability of the CAPER for review and comment was published on December 23, 2011 with comments accepted until January 21, 2012. In both instances, no questions or comments from the public were received. All of the public meetings carried out as part of the process for preparation of the Annual Plan were advertised in conformance with the approved Citizen Participation Plan. In order to create program budgets for submission to HUD, the City invites funding applications (proposals) in late fall. Information about the process was posted on the City’s website and
114
notification was placed in September in the Kansas City Star as well as in The Call, Dos Mundos,and Kansas City Hispanic News, three minority newspapers. Four public informational meetings were held to discuss instructions for submitting applications. Requests for funding were required to be submitted to the Housing and Community Development Department no later than noon, November 16, 2011. Applications received by the deadline were distributed to the following City departments for evaluation, scoring and recommendation for funding:
CDBG (non public service) and HOME Housing and Community Development CDBG public service Neighborhood and Community Services ESG Neighborhood and Community Services HOPWA Health This year the formula grant entitlement amounts for the Consolidated Plan grant projects/programs were available during the planning process; therefore, subrecipient and developer allocations will not have to be adjusted subsequent to submission of the Action Plan to HUD. The Planning, Zoning and Economic Development Committee of the City Council held two public hearings on the proposed budget and then the Council approved the Plan and a budget which will be submitted to HUD prior to March 31, 2012. Once HUD approves the Plan, grant agreements between the City and HUD will be signed. The City will then complete environmental reviews of all projects, after which project implementation can begin.
2012 Estimated Action Plan Resources
Program Repro- Program Federal Income grammed Total CDBG $7,551,015 $5,845,468 -0- $13,396,483 HOME $1,870,946 $2,365,600 $900,000 $ 5,136,546 ESG $ 662,929 $ 662,929 HOPWA $1,115,258 $ 1,115,258
TOTALS $11,200,148 $8,211,068 $900,000 $20,311,216
HUD Tables 3A – Summary of Specific Annual Objectives, and 3B - Annual Affordable Housing Completion Goals are provided beginning on page 115.
The federal grant awards for the 2012 Action Plan year total $11,200,148, which is 5.2% less than the 2011 level of grant funding; however, a major decrease was contained in the HOME program
115
where the 2012 grant was approximately $809,000 or 30% below last year’s amount. This is the second consecutive year of CDBG and HOME grant reductions because of reduced Congressional appropriations. Because of these cuts, the programs and projects funded by CDBG and HOME, and the number of residents served by these activities have been cut as well. These reductions have affected the City’s strategic outlook for community and business development, public service and affordable housing for the most vulnerable citizens of Kansas City.
Table 3A Summary of Specific Annual Objectives
2012 Action Plan Year
Obj. # Specific Objectives Sources of
Funds Performance
Indicators Expected Number
Actual Number
Outcome/ Objective*
Rental Housing Objectives
DH 2.34 Rental Housing Production HOME Hsg. Units 70 DH-2
Owner Housing Objectives
DH-2.21 Blue Hills Community Services Targeted Minor Home Repair
CDBG Hsg. Units 30 DH-2
DH-2.34 CHDO Housing (15%Set Aside) HOME Hsg. Units 10
DH-2
DH-2.33 City/CDC Partnership Purchase/Rehab HOME Hgs. Units 39 DH-2
DH-2.5 Emergency Home Repair CDBG Hsg. Units 90 DH.2
DH-2.19 Ivanhoe Neighborhood Council Targeted Minor Home Repair
CDBG Hsg. Units 30 DH-2
DH-2.6 KC Dream HOME Program HOME Homebuyers 60 DH-2
DH-2.17 Northland Neighborhoods Targeted Minor Home Repair
CDBG Hgs. Units 45 DH-2
DH-2.20 Westside Housing Organization Targeted Minor Home Repair
CDBG Hsg. Units 20 DH-2
Homeless Objectives
SL-1.6 Benilde Hall ESG/CDBG Homeless 350 SL-1
DH-1.2 Community Assistance Council ESG Households 50 DH-1
SL- 1.20 Guadalupe Center ESG Homeless 110 SL-1
DH-1.18 Guadalupe Center Housing Counseling CDBG Households 550 DH-1
116
DH-1.7 Housing Information Center CDBG Households 1900 DH-1
SL-1.17
SL-1.39
reStart Homeless Services Drop-In Center (essential services)
ESG CDBG
Homeless 375 SL-1
SL-1.18 reStart Homeless Shelter 918 E. 9th ESG Homeless 1200 SL-1
SL-1.9 Rose Brooks Center ESG Homeless 575 SL-1
SL-1.14 Salvation Army ESG Homeless 60 SL-1
SL-1.10 SL-1.32 Sheffield Place
ESG ESG
Homeless 60 SL-1
SL-1.11 Synergy Services ESG/CDBG Homeless 400 SL-1
Special Needs Objectives
DH-1.12
Save, Inc. HOPWA
Persons with
HIV/Aids
477
DH-1
DH-1.13 reStart HOPWA Persons with HIV/Aids
75 DH-1
Community Development Objectives
SL-3.1 Community Assistance Council CDBG People 1500 SL-3
SL-3.37 Graffiti Removal CDBG Blighted Sites Remediated
200 SL-3
SL-3.38 Redevelopment Activities (clearance & demolition)
CDBG Blighted Properties Remediated
90 SL-3
SL-3.3 Systematic Code Enforcement CDBG Blighted Properties Remediated
200 SL-3
SL-3.39 KC Community Gardens CDBG Gardens Tilled 550 SL-3
Public Facilities Objectives
SL-1.27 Blue Hills Community Services Ctr. CDBG
Area Benefit 1
SL-1
SL-1.29 Morning Star Family Life Center CDBG Area Benefit 1 SL-1
SL-1.30 St. Michaels Veteran’s Center CDBG Area Benefit 1 SL-1
SL-1.31 Niles Home for Children CDBG Public Facility 1 SL-1
Public Services Objectives
SL-1.14 Boys & Girls Clubs of Greater KC CDBG Youth 750 SL-1
EO-1.6 Guadalupe Center Child Care Services CDBG Children 185 EO-1
SL-1.12 Mattie Rhodes (Northeast) CDBG Youth 300 SL-1
117
E0-1.1 Operation Breakthrough Childcare CDBG Children 520 EO-1
SL-1.24 Palestine Senior Center CDBG Seniors 112 SL-1
SL-1.31 Somali Foundation CDBG Youth
115 EO-1
EO-1.5 United Inner City Services (St. Marks) CDBG Children 150 EO-1
SL-1.23 Urban Rangers CDBG Youth
65 SL-1
SL-1.26 W.E.B. DuBois Learning Center CDBG Youth
3,200 SL-1
Economic Development Objectives
EO-1.12 Hispanic Economic Dev. Corp CDBG Microenterprises 8 EO-1
Other Objectives
*Outcome/Objective Codes
Availability/Accessibility Affordability Sustainability
Decent Housing
DH-1
DH-2
DH-3
Suitable Living Environment
SL-1
SL-2
SL-3
Economic Opportunity
EO-1
EO-2
EO-3
118
Table 3B Annual Affordable Housing Completion Goals
Grantee Name: City of Kansas City, Missouri Program Year: 2012-13
Expected Annual Number of Units To Be Completed
Actual Annual Number of Units
Completed Resources used during the period
CDBG
HOME
ESG
HOPWA
BENEFICIARY GOALS
(Sec. 215 Only)
Homeless households 0
Non-homeless households 384
Special needs households 552
Total Sec. 215 Beneficiaries* 936
RENTAL GOALS
(Sec. 215 Only)
Acquisition of existing units
Production of new units 60
Rehabilitation of existing units
Rental Assistance 552
Total Sec. 215 Affordable Rental 612
HOME OWNER GOALS
(Sec. 215 Only)
Acquisition of existing units
Production of new units 10
Rehabilitation of existing units 254
Homebuyer Assistance 60
Total Sec. 215 Affordable Owner 324
COMBINED RENTAL AND OWNER GOALS (Sec. 215 Only)
Acquisition of existing units
Production of new units 70
Rehabilitation of existing units 254
Rental Assistance 552
Homebuyer Assistance 60
Combined Total Sec. 215 Goals* 936
OVERALL HOUSING GOALS (Sec. 215 + Other Affordable Housing)
Annual Rental Housing Goal 612
Annual Owner Housing Goal 324
Total Overall Housing Goal 936
119
Community Development Block Grant Program (CDBG) Statement of Specific Goals and Objectives
CDBG programs and activities described under this Plan are designed to address one of the national objectives of CDBG. These are (a) principally benefit low- and moderate-income residents; and/or (b) eliminate slums and blight. In addition, a project must also be an eligible activity under the Federal regulations of the CDBG program. These activities include acquisition of property, relocation of occupants of acquired property, rehabilitation and preservation of property, construction of or improvements to public facilities, clearance and demolition, public services, economic development, and removal of architectural barrier. CDBG funds in Kansas City will continue to be used to support neighborhood revitalization, housing rehabilitation and development, public facility construction and improvements and services such as homeless prevention, child care and youth services, economic development and code enforcement and blight elimination. The City’s entitlement grant that it will receive from CDBG in 2012 is $7,551,015. Additionally, the City also expects to have available for allocation in 2012, $5,350,468 in program income earned by the Housing and Economic Development Financial Corporation (HEDFC) as well as $495,468 in program income generated from HEDFC mortgage loans transferred to the City. Housing Rehabilitation In the area of affordable housing, the City will continue to make intensive use of the existing housing stock of housing through rehabilitation. The retention of the existing housing stock provides the best and most cost effective opportunity for affordable housing in light of current economic conditions and the high rate of foreclosed properties, while supporting neighborhood stability and the efficient use of existing infrastructure. Funding for minor home repair activities will continue through awards to four community development corporations. The City will also reactivate its owner-occupied emergency and minor home repair program for the coming year and extend it to include removal of architectural barriers for disabled persons. Both efforts which provide financial assistance to low-income owner occupants have proved extremely popular and successful in prior years. The City hopes to maximize the impact from the use of entitlement grant funds by seeking opportunities to leverage other sources of funds. The City has recently received a commitment of $500,000 from the Iowa Federal Home Loan Bank for an owner-occupied minor home repair program. Program repairs include roofing, plumbing, painting, electrical systems, furnaces, driveways, doors and windows and handicap ramps. Rehabilitation activities will be focused on three neighborhoods—Blue Hills, Washington-Wheatley and Ruskin—where other neighborhood conservation efforts are also underway. Funds must be expended before November 1, 2012. Public Facility Improvements In the 2012 Plan, the City is proposing to focus heavily on the targeting of funds in order to optimize the return on its investment of limited community development resources. Allocations for construction of or improvements to three public facilities will be limited to facilities in specific target areas where other major revitalization efforts are already underway.
120
Blight Elimination Throughout much of the inner city as well as certain portions of south Kansas City, a significant increase in the amount of vacant housing has occurred. Many of these structures could be rehabilitated, but some owners are reluctant to take action to repair the houses so they can be reoccupied. Their failure to act responsibly results in a vacant house that continues to deteriorate structurally and presents a blighting influence on the neighborhood. Ultimately, the property may need to be demolished. As part of this year’s activity, code enforcement will be focused on the several target areas included in the Plan. A new effort at combating the spread of blight in these target areas will be launched through a graffiti removal program. Targeted Redevelopment In an effort to return to the targeting strategy outlined in reBUILD KC/Neighborhoods, the City will also undertake a variety of redevelopment activities designed to eliminate blight and improve conditions in many of the designated target areas shown on the map following the 2012 proposed CDBG funding. While the nature of these activities will vary by the needs of the area, they include such things as-- land acquisition, house moving, housing rehabilitation, and economic development. Neighborhood Stabilization Program The City has been a direct grantee of special CDBG funding known as Neighborhood Stabilization Program (NSP) funds. Under the first round of funding which was part of the Housing and Economic Recovery Act of 2008, the City received $8,486,731. The goal of NSP is to provide cities and states funding to address the effects of abandoned and foreclosed upon homes and residential properties. The U.S. Congress provided another round of funding in 2010 as part of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of which the City received $1,823,888. The City determined that the latter funds would be limited to use in the Green Impact Zone and three census tracts in the Ruskin area. Both of these neighborhoods are included as target areas for activities in the 5-Year Consolidated Plan. As of the end of 2011, the program has generated more than $2 million in program income through the sale of foreclosed properties that have undergone extensive renovation. These funds will be recycled into the acquisition and rehabilitation of additional properties.
121
2012 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT FUNDING
AND DESCRIPTION OF ACTIVITIES
Resources 2012 Entitlement 7,551,015 Program Income from HEDFC 5,350,000 Program Income from Mortgage Loans 495,468 Total Resources……………………………………………………..………………..$13,396,483 Allocations Section 108 Loan Repayment to HUD Beacon Hill 5,350,000 18th and Vine 572,657 Section 108 Subtotal…………………………………………………………………...$5,922,657 Planning and Administration Housing Planning and Administration 993,085 Funds Neighborhoods & Housing Services Department for staff and other costs associated with administration of grants. Homeless Services Coalition 125,000 Funds planning, service provision, grant management and monitoring services of continuum of care agencies. Section 3 and Labor Standards Monitoring 50,000 Provides staffing and support cost for Human Relations Dept. to monitor compliance with Federal requirements. Loan Servicing 26,453 Servicing of mortgage loans transferred to City from HEDFC. Social Services Administration 345,000 Provides staffing and support to Human & Services Division of the Neighborhoods and Housing Services Department to administer public service programs. Legal Services 69,758 Funds portion of one position in Law Department to provide legal services in conjunction with program activities. Planning and Administration Subtotal……………………………………………..1,609,296 Public Facilities Morningstar Development Corp. 450,000 Funding for development of family life center in vicinity of 27th and Prospect.
122
St. Michael’s Veterans Center 625,000 Funding for development of veterans’ supportive services center as part of Holy Temple Homes project (E. 39th Street and Emmanuel Cleaver Parkway). Blue Hills Community Services Corp. 437,000 Funding for rehabilitation of community services center at 5008 Prospect. Public Facilities Subtotal…………………………………………………………..…$1,512,000 Public Services Housing Counseling and Homeless Prevention Kansas City Housing Information Center 177,208 Funds for homeless prevention services. Community Assistance Council 193,630 Assist eligible families who are on the verge of homelessness. Services include housing, food, clothing and utility assistance along with job search assistance. restart, Inc. 70,000 Funds for homeless prevention activities. Benilde Hall 32,914 Fund housing counseling services for veterans and homeless males. Child Care United Inner City Services 78,057 Provision of child development training. Operation Breakthrough, Inc 117,000 Provision of day care services. Youth Services W.E.B. DuBois Learning Center 125,000 Provision of educational and youth services. Boys and Girls Clubs of Greater Kansas City 100,345 Funds to support youth development programming at the J & D Wagner Club - 2405 Elmwood. Urban Ranger Corps 44,406 Funding for community service training for at-risk youth. Mattie Rhodes Center 47,487 Fund youth crime prevention programming. Somali Foundation 20,678 Provision of youth services.
123
Niles Home for Children 25,000 Counseling for high risk youth. Synergy Services 25,000 Services for homeless and troubled youth. Senior Services Palestine Senior Citizen Activity Center 51,000 Funding to support the provision of luncheon meals for senior citizens. Social Services Kansas City Community Gardens 35,000 Funding to assist low-income households in the production of food from garden plots. Public Services Subtotal………………………………………………………………$1,142,725 Public Services NRSA Activities Provided by a CBDO Guadalupe Centers, Inc. 93,000 Provision of funds will be used to provide child care services for low-income working families. Guadalupe Centers, Inc. 100,000 Provide funds for housing counseling and referral, emergency assistance to improve housing and economic situation and other supportive services. Public Services NRSA/CBDO Subtotal……………………………………………...…$193,000 Housing Repair Services City Emergency Home Repair Program 540,000 Provision of emergency, minor home repair and accessibility improvements for low-income owner-occupants. Blue Hills Community Services Corp. 275,000 Provision of minor home repairs for low- and moderate- income owner-occupants in Swope Neighborhood Strategy Area. Ivanhoe Neighborhood Council 275,000 Provision of minor home repairs for low- and moderate- income owner-occupants in Heart of the City Neighborhood Strategy Area (Ivanhoe portion). Northland Neighborhoods Inc. 275,000 Provision of minor home repairs for low- and moderate- income owner-occupants in Briarcliff/Winnwood Neighborhood Strategy Area.
124
Westside Housing 275,000 Provision of minor home repairs for low- and moderate- income owner-occupants within Downtown Neighborhood Strategy Area. Housing Repair Subtotal………………………………………………..………….....$1,640,000 Economic Development Hispanic Economic Development Corp. 75,000 Funds will support staff and program expenses associated with the delivery of bilingual, bicultural education and business development services to low- and moderate- income residents of NRSA’s. Economic Development Subtotal………………………………………………..…......$ 75,000 Blight Elimination Code Enforcement-Systematic housing inspection program 500,000 enforcement activities in target neighborhoods. Graffiti Removal 100,000 Removal of graffiti from private property in target neighborhoods. Blight Elimination Subtotal………………………………………………………….…$600,000
Neighborhood Redevelopment The City will undertake a variety of activities that will contribute to the upgrading of target neighborhoods. These may include land acquisition, demolition, house moving, and economic development. Neighborhood Redevelopment Subtotal……………………………………………….$701,805
TOTAL CDBG ALLOCATIONS………………………………………...$13,396,483
125
CONSOLIDATED PLAN TARGET AREAS MAP
126
Heart of the City Target Area 2012 Funding & Sources Level of Effort and Accomplishments
Sub-Target Area/Project/Activity/Agency: CDBG HOME Public/Private Total Outputs Outcomes Vineyard Sub-Target Area
St. Michaels Veterans Center Project- a reBUILDKC Project
- Housing Phase I Priority LIHTC - 9%
10,991,898 10,991,898 58 Increases Housing Opportunities for Veterans
- Infrastructure
Bond Funds
2,000,000 2,000,000 Complete Targets Public Infrastructure Improvements
- Public Facility & Supportive Services 625,000
4,207,774 4,832,774 2013 PF Provides Public Facility in Target Area
(2013 Commitment for $625,000)
Provides Direct Supportive Services to Veterans
Priority Project
17,199,672 17,824,672
Seven Oaks Replacement Housing - a reBUILDKC Project 1,300,000 7,600,000 8,900,000 50
- Oak Pointe Site Priority LIHTC Project
Increases # of Affordable Housing Units
- Seven Oaks School-to-Housing Project
Increases # of Affordable Housing Units for Seniors
Priority LIHTC Project
HEDFC HOME PI Funds
CDC Partnership Program
- Purchase/Rehab/New Construction
200,000 250,000 450,000 4 Addresses Foreclosed Housing in Target Area
Assets Transfer from HEDFC - a reBUILD/KC Project
- Vacant Lots
10,800 10,800 30 Addresses High Number of Vacant Lots
23rd to 28th/Garfield to Montgall Sub-Target Area
Crime Prevention Facility
- 2011 CDBG Recapture Funds - $3,000,000
56,000,000 56,000,000 65 Hshlds. Provides Targeted Acquisition/Relocation
Assistance
CDC Partnership Program
- Purchase/Rehab/New Construction
300,000 300,000 600,000 6 Addresses Foreclosed Housing in Target Area
Assets Transfer from HEDFC - a reBUILD/KC Project
- Brooklyn Corridor Projects
128,000 128,000 16 Addresses High Number of Vacant Lots
127
Morningstar Family Life Center 450,000
450,000
Provides Public Facility in Target Area
Action Planning X
Planning for Housing Imp.
Benton Corridor - 27th to Linwood Blvd. - a reBUILDKC Project
- Lots Transferred from HEDFC
- Community Improvement Projects
104,000 104,000 24 Addresses High Number of Vacant Lots
City/CDC Partnership Program in Santa Fe Historic District
- Purchase/Rehab/New Construction
299,686 600,000
899,686 6 Addresses Foreclosed Housing in Target Area
Linwood Shopping Center - a reBUILDKC Project
- Market Study and Pre-Development Activities
X x X Creates Economic Development Opportunities
Vine Street Place (aka Old Ballpark Site) - a reBUILDKC Project
- Build and Marketing for New Homes
150,000
400,000
550,000 6 Increases # of New Housing Units in Target Area
- Landscape Improvements
150,000
150,000 1
18th & Vine Street Redevelopment Area
- Housing & Commercial Development X
X
Project Planning
Green Impact Zone - Sustainable Development Area
- Employment and Training Programs
- City/CDC Partnership Program
150,000
200,000
400,000 4 Addresses Foreclosed Housing in Target Area
Purchase/Rehab/New Construction
- Demolition of Dangerous Buildings X
X 10 Eliminates Blighting Influences
- Public Safety and Community Services
128
- Energy and Water Conservation
- Infrastructure Improvements
Redevelopment Activities 701,805
701,805
Provides Redevelopment Assistance in Target Area
Bruce R. Watkins - Area of Impact
- Concentrated Code Enforcement X
50 Provides Code Enforcement in Target Area
All Heart of City Area
- Minor Home Repair by INC 275,000
275,000 30 Provides Emergency Housing Repairs for Very
Low Income
- KC Dream Program
160,000
560,000
720,000 8 Increases Homeownership in Target Area
Coordinated City Services
Total for 2012-13 $2,051,805
$2,559,686
$100,702,144 $105,988,635 303 Total Outputs
Downtown Area Plan Funding & Sources Level of Effort and Accomplishments
Sub-Target Area/Project/Activity/Agency: 2012 CDBG 2012 HOME Public/Private Total Outputs Outcomes Beacon Hill Redevelopment Area - a reBUILD/KC Project
- Colonnade Apts along 27th Street - funded in 2011
6,200,000 30
Increases # of Affordable/Market Rate Housing Units
- Tracy Avenue Infill New Construction
6,200,000 825,000 5 Increases # of Market Rate Housing In Target
Area
- NW Quadrant - Green Infrastructure
1,500,000 1,500,000 Complete Builds Sustainable Infrastructure In Target Area
- Student Housing - UMKC/Private
30,000,000 30,000,000 250 Increases Housing In Target Area
- Grocery Store at 27th & Troost
TBD TBD Creates Economic Development Opportunities
- 22nd and Tracy/Forest
TBD TBD
Increases # of Market Rate Housing In Target Area
129
Westside Area
CDC Partnership Program
- Purchase/Rehab/New Construction 150,000 250,000
400,000 4 Addresses Foreclosed Housing in Target Area
- West School Redevelopment - a reBUILD/KC Project
Planning for Re-Use of Vacant School
Priority 9% LIHTC Project
Columbus Park
Assets Transfer from HEDFC - a reBUILD/KC Project
- Vacant Lots
10,800
10,800 2 Addresses High Number of Vacant Lots
Choice Community Planning Area - HAKC
Planning for Neighborhood Housing
Improvements
All Downtown Area
- Minor Home Repair by Westside Housing Org. 137,500
137,500 10 Provides Housing Repairs for Low Income
Households
- Business Assistance Program by HEDC 75,000
75,000 20 Businesses Assisted
- KC Dream Program 60,000 540,000
600,000 5 Increases Homeownership in Target Area
Coordinated City Services
Total for 2012-13 $212,500
$210,000 $39,325,800
$39,748,300 326 Total Outputs
Swope Area Plan Funding & Sources Level of Effort and Accomplishments
Sub-Target Area/Project/Activity/Agency: 2012 CDBG 2012 HOME Public/Private Total Outputs Outcomes Washbash Village Subtarget Area
CDC Partnership Program 150,000 250,000 400,000 4 Increases # of New Housing Units in Target Area
- Purchase/Rehab/New Const. - Blue Hills Community Center
437,000
437,000
Provides Public Facility in Target Area
130
Woodland Highlands Subdivision
CDC Partnership Program
- Purchase/Rehab/New Construction
50,000
200,000
250,000 3 Increases # of New Housing Units in Target Area
Mt. Cleveland Estates Subtarget Area
CDC Partnership Program
- Purchase/Rehab/New Construction
500,000
500,000 1,000,000 3 Increases # of New Housing Units in Target Area
Bruce R. Watkins - Area of Impact
- Concentrated Code Enforcement X
50 Provides Code Enforcement in Target Area
Middle Blue River - Sustainable Development Area
X
Implementation of Green Infrastructure Solutions and On-site Stormwater Improvements
All Swope Area
- Minor Home Repair by Blue Hills Comm. 275,000
275,000 30
Provides Housing Repairs for Low Income Households
- KC Dream Program
160,000
560,000
720,000 8 Increases Homeownership in Target Area
Coordinated City Services
Total for 2012-13
$712,000
$860,000
$1,510,000
$3,082,000 98 Total Outputs
Midtown Area Plan Funding & Sources Level of Effort and Accomplishments
Sub-Target Area/Project/Activity/Agency: 2012 CDBG 2012 HOME Public/Private Total Outputs Outcomes
Plaza-Westport SF Core Subtarget Area
- Purchase/Rehab
400,000 400,000 4 Increases # of Market Rate Housing In Target
Area
- Minor Home Repair by Westside Housing Org. 68,750
68,750 5
Provides Housing Repairs for Low Income Households
- KC Dream Program
48,000 432,000
480,000 4 Increases Homeownership in Target Area
131
RAMP Program - Housing Rehabilitation
X
Partner with Agencies for the Use of Housing
Resources in Target Areas for Increased Reinvestments
Coordinated City Services
Total for 2012-13
$68,750
$48,000
$832,000
$948,750 13 Total Outputs
Hickman/Ruskin Area Plan Funding & Sources Level of Effort and Accomplishments
Sub-Target Area/Project/Activity/Agency: 2012 CDBG 2012 HOME Public/Private Total Outputs Outcomes
Ruskin Subtarget Area
- Purchase/Rehab 250,000 400,000
650,000 6 Addresses Foreclosed Housing in Target Area
- KC Dream Program - Primary Asst. Area X
X 4 Increases Homeownership in Target Area
All Areas
- Minor Home Repair by City 50,000
50,000 10
Provides Housing Repairs for Low Income Households
- KC Dream Program
160,000 560,000
720,000 8 Increases Homeownership in Target Area
Coordinated City Services
Total for 2012-13
$50,000
$410,000
$960,000
$1,420,000 28 Total Outputs
Briarcliff-Winnwood Area Plan Funding & Sources Level of Effort and Accomplishments
Sub-Target Area/Project/Activity/Agency: 2012 CDBG 2012 HOME Public/Private Total Outputs Outcomes
Winnwood Subtarget Area
CDC Partnership Program
- Purchase/Rehab/New Construction 400,000 500,000
900,000 5 Increases # of Affordable Housing Units in Target Area
Vivion Rd. - Area of Impact
- Code Enforcement and Ext. Home. Impr. Demo.
20 Provides Code Enforcement & Exterior Impr. in
Target Area
132
All Areas
- Minor Home Repair by NNI 275,000
275,000 45
Provides Housing Repairs for Low Income Households
- KC Dream Program
72,000 648,000
720,000 6 Increases Homeownership in Target Area
Coordinated City Services
Total for 2012-13
$275,000
$472,000
$1,148,000
$1,895,000 76 Total Outputs
Truman Plaza Target Area Funding & Sources Level of Effort and Accomplishments
Sub-Target Area/Project/Activity/Agency: CDBG HOME Public/Private Total Outputs Outcomes
Ashland Park Sub-Target Area - 17th to I-70, I-70 to Van Brunt
- Minor Repair Projects - By City X
X
20 Provides Emergency Housing Repairs for Very
Low Income
Choice Community Planning Area - HAKC
- Planning Phase
150,000 150,000 Complete Planning for Improved Housing
St. John & Truman Corridor
- Concentrated Façade Improvements TBD TBD TBD X Supports Economic Development Opportunities
- CDC Partnership Program Along Truman Corridor TBD TBD TBD X
Increases # of Affordable Housing Units in Target Area
- Blight Elimination 100,000
100,000
200 Blighting Influences Removed in Commercial Areas
I-70 - Area of Impact
- Concentrated Code Enforcement X
30 Provides Code Enforcement in Target Area
KC Dream Program
60,000
540,000
600,000 5 Increases Homeownership in Target Area
All Areas
Westside Housing Organization Minor Home Repair 68,750
68,750
Provides Housing Repairs for Low Income Households
Coordinated City Services
Total for 2012-13 $ 168,750 $60,000 $690,000 $918,750 55 Total Outputs
133
City-Wide Housing & Community Services CDBG HOME Public/Private Total Outputs Outcomes
- Emergency & Targeted Minor Home Repairs $490,000
$490,000 80
Provides Emergency & Targeted Housing Repairs for Low Income Households * $50,000 and 10
units in Hickman Mills/ Ruskin NSA not included in this Budget Line Item
- Code Enforcement in Areas of Impact $500,000
$500,000 200
Improves Neighborhood Stability
- Affordable Rental Housing
$200,000 $800,000
$1,000,000 10
Increases Affordable Housing
- Public Service Activities
$1,335,725
$1,335,725 6580
Provision of Public Services to Very Low & Low Income Persons and Families
- KC Dream Program (HQS Inspection Incl.)
$42,000 $800,000
$1,220,000 10 Increases Homeownership City-wide
Section 108 Loan Repayment $5,922,657
CDBG/HOME Admin $1,609,296 $274,878
Total for 2012-13 $9,857,678 $516,878 $800,000 $3,325,725 6880 Total Outputs
2012 All Sources Summary
CDBG HOME Public/Private Total
$13,396,483
$5,136,564 $125,936,272 $144,469,319
Summary of 2012 Program Funding Levels & Accomplishments
CDBG
Funding Levels Planned Accomplishments
CDBG Administration
1,609,296
-Section 108 Repayment
5,922,657 Beacon Hills & 18th & Vine Section 108 Repayment
- Public Facilities
1,512,000 3 Facilities
- Minor Home Repair Program by CDC's
1,100,000 125 Homes Assisted
134
- Minor Home Repair City-wide by City
540,000 90 Homes Assisted
- Targeted Development Activities
701,805 Special Activities in Target Areas - 40 Dilapidated Structures Removed
- Blight Elimination
100,000 200 Blighting Influence/Site Removed in Targeted Commercial Areas
- Public Services
1,335,725 6590 Persons Assisted
- Economic Development
75,000 20 Businesses Assisted
- Targeted Code Enforcement 500,000 200 Homes in Target Areas Code Enforced
Total $13,396,483
HOME Program Funding Levels Planned Accomplishments
HOME Administration
274,878 HOME Program Administration
HQS
42,000 HOME Rental Monitoring and KC DREAM Homeownership Inspections
CHDO 15% Set Aside
280,642 Community Housing Development Organization (CHDO) Housing Projects
- City/CDC Partnership Program
2,239,026 49 Single Family Homes Purchased/Rehabbed/Sold or Rented
- KC Dream Program
800,000 60 Homes Sold
- Affordable Rental Housing Program 1,500,000 60 Units of Affordable Housing
Total $5,136,546
ESG
Subrecipient
Funding Levels Outputs Projected Outcomes/Accomplishments
reStart- OES
17,500 90 No of clients to exit into transitional housing and or permanent housing
Community Assistance
10,000 50 No of individuals will receive rent and/ or utility assistance
Benilde Hall
59,180 375 80% clients (homeless vets) will remained housed
Guadalupe Center
14,780 110 No. of homeless families will obtain transitional housing reStart Emergency Shelter
76,001 1200 No of unduplicated homeless that will access shelter
Rose Brooks
65,881 575 75% of clients will complete action steps for obtaining housing
Sheffield
46,002 50 75% of families will exit into permanent housing
135
Synergy
32,000 350 95% of clients will report feeling safe in shelter
The Salvation Army
31,000 50
70% of clients discharged will obtain and maintain housing for 1 year
Unallocated
292,041
NCSD Administration 18,544
Total $662,929
HOPWA Program
Funding
Projected Outcomes/Accomplishments Subrecipent
Levels Outputs
Save, Inc.
985,960 477
No of clients served into TBRA, STRUMU, Supportive Services and Permanent Housing Placement
No. of clients served into Transitional Housing Assistance reStart, Inc. Unallocated Funds
60,000
35,841
75
HD Administration
33,457
Total $1,115,258
136
Summary of 2012 Program Funding & Planned Accomplishments CDBG Program
Funding Levels Planned Accomplishments
- Public Facilities
1,512,000 3 Facilities
- Minor Home Repair Program by CDC's 1,100,000 125 Homes Assisted
- Minor Home Repair City-wide by City 540,000 90 Homes Assisted
- Targeted Development Activities 701,805 Special Activities in Target Areas
- Blight Elimination
100,000 150 Blighting Influences Removed in Comm. Areas
- Public Services
1,335,725 6580 Persons Assisted
- Economic Development
75,000 20 Businesses Assisted
- Targeted Code Enforcement 500,000 200 Homes in Target Areas Code Enforced
Total 5,864,530
HOME Program Funding Levels Planned Accomplishments
- City/CDC Partnership Program 2,519,668 49 Single Family Homes Purchased/Rehabbed/Sold or Rented
- KC Dream Program 800,000 60 Homes Sold
- Affordable Rental Housing Program 1,500,000 100 Units of Affordable Housing
Total 4,819,668
ESG Program
Subrecipient Funding Levels Outputs
reStart- OES
17,500 90 Community Assistance
10,000 50
Benilde Hall
59,180 375 Synergy
32,000 350
reStart Emergency Shelter 76,001 1200
Rose Brooks
65,881 575 Sheffield
46,002 50
Unallocated Funds
337,821
na NHSD Administration
18,544
na
Total 662,929
HOPWA Program
Subrecipent Funding Levels Outputs
reStart, Inc.
60,000
75 SAVE, Inc.
985,960
477
Admin./Unallocated Funds
69,298
na Total 1,115,258
137
HOME Investment Partnerships Program (HOME) Statement of Specific Goals and Objectives The City, as a Participating Jurisdiction, receives an annual allotment of HOME funds from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development that must be used to support affordable housing initiatives. These initiatives must assist low- and moderate-income households:
• with the repair or rehabilitation of their owner-occupied homes; • with financing to purchase homes; • by the development of new affordable homes or affordable rental housing; or • by providing tenant based rental assistance.
The City’s HOME grant that it will receive in 2012 is $1,870,946 which is approximately 30% less than the grant received in 2011. Additionally, the City also expects to have available for allocation in 2012, $2,365,600 in program income as well as $900,000 in reprogrammed funds which is reflective of grant program income revenues previously received by the City and not allocated to projects as well as planned expenditures that did not materialize as originally budgeted.. City/CDC Partnership Program The newly created Housing Partnership Program will provide 0% deferred payment loans to both non-profit and for-profit organizations that wish to act as developers to provide permanent housing for lower- income families. The priority use of the funds will be to acquire and renovate existing housing; however, other uses may include: acquisition of vacant land and construction of new housing; or acquisition and demolition of a blighted structure and creation of new housing. The developer will be expected to acquire, develop, and sell or rent the property and identify and assist qualified buyers or renters. A fee will be paid to the developer for this work. Requests for proposals will be issued periodically depending upon available funding and Neighborhood Strategy Area needs. Community Housing Development Organization (CHDO) Activity HUD has established specific guidelines for identifying and qualifying participating CHDO’s. Generally, CHDO’s must be non-profit (501(c)(3) or 501(c)(4) corporations whose charter or by-laws must list as a purpose the provisions of affordable housing for low-and-moderate income persons. They are further required to maintain accountability to the low-income advice to the nonprofit on design, location, construction and management of affordable housing projects. The HOME program includes a component requiring cities to reserve, or “set-aside,” a minimum of 15% of its total HOME allocation for use by qualified Community Housing Development Organizations (CHDO’s) for projects. In 2012, Kansas City will reserve a minimum of $280,642 of its grant for eligible HOME CHDO activities. These activities will be implemented through the aforementioned City /CDC Partnership Program which will award funding throughout the year for the development of housing in specific target areas depending upon need. Homebuyer Assistance During 2012, the City will once again use its HOME funds to provide assistance to first-time homebuyers. Through the City’s Kansas City Dream Program, the City will continue to offer a
138
first-time homebuyer program to eligible households purchasing homes located within the city limits. For the first time, financial assistance for buyers under the program will vary depending upon the location of the home they are purchasing with the maximum subsidy going to those buying in one of the Plan’s Primary Target Neighborhoods. The Dream Program has been revised so that financial assistance will be provided on a sliding scale depending upon the location of the home to be purchased. In an effort to focus investment in areas of greatest need, buyers of homes purchased within primary revitalization areas as identified in the Consolidated Plan will be able to receive more assistance than buyers purchasing in secondary revitalization areas, while those buying outside of any target areas will be eligible to receive the least amount of assistance. A map of the applicable target areas is shown on the following page. Assistance will be made available as described below:
• within primary target area lesser of 20% of sales price or $20,000 • within secondary target area lesser of 20% of sales price or $12,000 • outside of any target area lesser of 20% of sales price or $8,000
Consumer loan products for home purchases will be originated by a consortium of participating
lenders approved by the City. Lenders participating in this program will market, originate and underwrite first mortgage loan products. Subprime or predatory financing will not be allowed. The Neighborhoods and Housing Services Department staff will ensure compliance with federal regulations. An important provision of the HOME Program regulations is the implementation of effective, and long-term, resale and recapture guidelines. These guidelines apply when a homebuyer or developer is assisted with HOME funds and the homebuyer sells or transfers the assisted property without completing the period of affordability. The City uses HOME funds to provide homeownership assistance. The forms of subsidy to be used to assist homebuyers and/or developers include down payment assistance, development cost subsidy, direct loan, project grant, or some combination of these methods. The City will determine, based on the type of subsidy, whether the period of affordability will be enforced by either Resale or Recapture provisions. The City’s full Resale and Recapture provisions are found in Attachment D of this plan. While the primary focus of the KC Dream Program is to assist residents who qualify for bank originated, first position mortgage loans to purchase their first home, due to limited mortgage lending by area banks in targeted areas, the City will also consider providing down payment assistance (up to $3,000) to persons wanting to access special housing programs, such as limited equity cooperatives and lease to own programs. This program will be utilized on a case-by-case, demonstration basis on projects approved by the Director of NHSD. Rental Housing The City also recognizes the need to support the development of affordable rental housing. To this end, $1.5 million in financial assistance has been identified to help build new rental units. A request for proposals will be issued in the spring of 2012 for housing that addresses the location and unit type needs identified in the Consolidated Plan. A program description and policies that will be used in the awarding of funds are currently being developed.
139
140
2012 HOME INVESTMENT PARTNERSHIP (HOME) FUNDING
AND DESCRIPTION OF ACTIVITIES
Resources 2012 Entitlement $1,870,946 Estimated Program Income 2,365,600 Estimated Reprogrammed Funds 900,000 Total Resources………………………………………………………………………..$5,136,546 Allocations Administration Housing Administration 274,878 Funds Housing and Community Development Dept. for costs associated with administration of HOME-funded activities. Housing Quality Inspections 42,000 Inspection of rental units covered by affordability requirements and single-family units purchased through KC Dream. CHDO (minimum 15% of grant) 280,642 Assistance to undetermined CHDO. Homebuyer Assistance 800,000 Down payment and closing cost assistance for low- and moderate-income first-time homebuyers. Rental Housing Development 1,500,000 Assistance to undetermined rental housing developer. City/CDC Partnership Program 2,239,026 Assistance to CDC’s for the development of new housing and acquisition and rehabilitation of existing housing. TOTAL ALLOCATIONS…………………………………………………………….$5,136,546 HOME Matching Funds The City of Kansas City, Missouri will utilize its excess match from prior Federal fiscal years to meet the HOME Program 25% match requirement. This amount is now slightly in excess of $4.5 million. Continued investment in housing such as Holy Temple Homes through the use of tax abatements and capital improvement funding (PIAC) is expected to increase the amount of match available in future years.
141
Description of Other Forms of Investments During 2012, the City expects to continue to invest program income resulting from the liquidation of HEDFC assets into new housing projects. Among those under consideration are Seven Oaks a/k/a Oak Pointe (Vineyard) and Bancroft School (Green Impact Zone). Recapture/Resale Guidelines An important provision of the HOME Program regulations is the implementation of effective, and long-term, resale and recapture guidelines. These guidelines apply when a homebuyer or developer is assisted with HOME funds and the homebuyer sells or transfers the assisted property without completing the period of affordability. The forms of subsidy to be used to assist homebuyers and/or developers include down payment assistance, development cost subsidy, direct loans, project grants or some combination of these methods. The City will determine, based on the type of subsidy, whether the period of affordability will be enforced by either Resale or Recapture provisions. The City’s full Resale and Recapture provisions are found in Attachment D of this plan. Affirmative Marketing Activities Particular emphasis will be placed on marketing the HOME program and other homeownership programs through established minority newspapers such as The Call and Dos Mundos. Established community housing development organizations (CHDO’s) and community development corporations (CDC’s) will also be a primary conduit for the neighborhood based marketing effort. The Neighborhoods and Housing Services Department will use the Equal Housing Opportunity logo on its advertisements and public notices. Each contract for financial assistance will require the recipient to use the logo as well in their advertising and display a fair housing poster at the site. The City works to ensure that to the greatest extent possible, its housing programs affirmatively further fair housing. The lead City agency in educating and enforcing fair housing laws is the Human Relations Department. The Department conducts fair housing training sessions for housing professionals, tenant groups, community groups, neighborhood associations and others. It also produces fair housing brochures and literature for citizens and participates in events each year where fair housing information is distributed. Additionally, the newly formed Compliance/Monitoring Section of the Neighborhoods and Housing Services Department works with subrecipients and developers to develop affirmative marketing tools and monitors agency activities toward that end. MBE/WBE Outreach An important part of Kansas City’s HOME Program is the involvement of MBE/WBE real estate, appraisal and other businesses that provide services and activities which assist in the program’s overall success. To insure the participation of MBE/WBE firms the City will perform the following outreach activities:
• An on-going effort to provide information about the HOME Program to MBE/WBE contracting firms. The City of Kansas City, Missouri will encourage participation by
142
local MBE/WBE realty firms and salespeople, appraisal companies, insurance companies, pest control companies, furnace inspection companies and any related business by (a) make a minimum of three presentations about the program to area minority and women realty firms and associations, (b) providing program brochures and information to the Black Chamber of Commerce and the Hispanic Chamber of Commerce and the Women’s Yellow Pages of Greater Kansas City;
• Publish in The Call and Dos Mundos newspapers in addition to the Kansas City Star a statement of public information, policy and commitment to MBE/WBE participation;
• Send targeted information to all MBE/WBE firms registered with the City Manager’s Office and
• Utilize all available public and private sector resources to encourage the participation of MBE/WBE firms in the program.
Emergency Solutions Grant Program (ESG) ESG Executive Summary The City of Kansas City, Missouri, through its Neighborhoods and Housing Services Department, administers the Emergency Solutions Grant (ESG). The Homeless Emergency Assistance and Rapid Transition to Housing Act of 2009 (HEARTH Act), revises the Emergency Shelter Grant and renames the program to the Emergency Solutions Grant Program. The Emergency Solutions Grant Program includes significant changes such as:
Elimination of the 30% caps on essential services and homelessness prevention; Addition of new categories:
∼ Rapid re-housing ∼ Homeless Management Information System (HMIS)
Limitation of the amount that can be spent on street outreach and shelter services to the greater of 60% of the City’s total allocation or the hold harmless rule (McKinney-Vento Act, section 415 (b)) that allows the amount expended on shelter activities during the previously completed fiscal year grant (FY2010); and
Limitation of homeless prevention services to persons below 30% of area medium income (AMI); and
Increase in administration expenses from 5% to 7.5% The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, in preparation for HEARTH, allocated the 2011, $579,513.00, in two phases. The first allocation totaled $370,888 and was based on the pre-HEARTH Emergency Shelter Grant regulations as defined in 24 CFR 576. The 2nd allocation, in the amount of $208,625, will be based upon the final regulations for the Emergency Solutions Grant Program. The interim rule includes revisions to 24 CFR parts 91 and 576. First phase proposals were reviewed by the Neighborhood and Community Services advisory panel. The panel included a non-subrecipient peer agency, department staff, and a representative of Homeless Services Coalition of Greater Kansas City, the designated agency responsible for
143
the planning and coordination the Continuum of Care planning process within the Kansas City jurisdiction. The panel recommended funding for 9 non-profit agencies as follows:
∼ $271,063 in the operating fund category to supplement emergency shelter, transitional housing, and domestic violence activities for five (5) non-profit agencies to include food, shelter utilities, and maintenance.
∼ $25,501 in the essential services category for salary costs for an overnight shelter
case manager, transportation, child care, hygiene supplies, clothing, bedding.
∼ $10,000 in homeless prevention funding for the purpose of stabilizing housing for persons at imminent risk of becoming homeless (rent and utility).
The City retained $18,544 for administration of the grant to include processing expenditure requests and monitoring. Based upon existing federal regulations, there is no need to reprogram Phase I, pre-HEARTH, Emergency Shelter Grant recommendations. The Phase II allocation (shown as unallocated funds) will be subject to the revised regulations and require a substantial amendment to the Action Plan to: Announce availability of additional funding; Revise the consolidated plan to integrate the new regulations as published in 24 CFR
Parts 91 and 576; and Define local and regional strategies and goals for responding to homelessness.
The deadline for completion of the substantial amendment is May 15, 2012. The City has 24 months to expend the 2nd allocation starting from the date of the signed grant agreement.
144
2012 EMERGENCY SOLUTIONS GRANT PROGRAM ALLOCATIONS
Resources 2012 Entitlement ………………………………………………………………………...$662,929 Total Resources…………………………………………............……………………....$662,929
Allocations Administration Administration and Planning……………………………………...$18,544 Administration Subtotal…………………………………………………………………$18,544 Operating Costs Benide Hall………………………………………………………..$59,180 Food and utilities reStart, Inc….………….…………………………………………..$76,001 Shelter utilities. Synergy Services………………..………………………………....$32,000 Domestic violence shelter expenses. Rose Brooks Center……………………………………..………...$65,881 Staff costs and shelter advocate. Sheffield Place…………………………………………………….$38,001 Utilities, facility repairs/supplies, and client supplies. Operating Costs Subtotal………………………………………………………………$271,063 Prevention Services Community Assistance Council Inc………………….……………$10,000 Rent, utilities and mortgage assistance. Prevention Services Subtotal………………………………….………………………...$10,000 Essential Services reStart, Inc.………………………………………...........................$17,500 Housing counseling for documented homeless. Sheffield Place……………………………………………………..$ 8,001 Essential Services Subtotal………………………………………………………………$15,501 Unallocated Funds Subtotal…………………………………………………….………$337,821 Total Allocations…………………………………………………………………..…….$662,929
145
2012 EMERGENCY SOLUTIONS GRANT MATCH
# Agency Name Award Federal State Local County Other Total 1
Benilde Hall Veterans Admin.
59,180
250,000
$59,180
$250,000 2
Community Assistance Council CDBG
10,000
10,000
$10,000
$10,000 3
reStart-OES Private Foundations
$17,500
$17,500
$17,500
$17,500 4
reStart-Inc Emergency Shelter In-Kind Donations
$76,001
$76,001
$76,001
$76,001 5
Rose Brooks Cabaret Annual Fundraiser
$65,881
$65,881
$65,881
$65,881
6
Sheffield In-Kind Volunteer Hours
$8,001
$10,000
$8,001
$10,000 7
Sheffield Place Hall Family Foundation and State Street
$38,001
$40,000
$38,001
$40,000 8
Synergy Services Clay, Platte, Ray Mental Health Board
$32,000
$32,000
$32,000
$32,000 10
NCSD CDBG-Admin
$18,544
$18,544
$18,544
$18,544 11
TOTAL
$325,108
$278,544
$241,382
146
Housing Opportunities for Persons with AIDS Program (HOPWA) HOPWA Executive Summary The Kansas City, Missouri Health Department, through its HIV Services Program, will administer and monitor the Housing Opportunities for Persons with AIDS (HOPWA) Program. This unique service area is comprised of a 15-county region in Eastern Missouri and Western Kansas. By the end of 2011, a total of 4,241 persons had been reported as HIV+ in the Missouri portion of the transitional grant area (TGA). HIV/AIDS is an impoverishing condition, and the majority of the persons living with the disease continue to be extremely low income, yet housing costs in Kansas City continue to rise. According to the National Low Income Housing Coalition (NLIH), approximately 65% of the people living with HIV/AIDS cite stable housing as their second greatest need, exceeded only by health care. This translates to approximately 2,757 persons living in Kansas City, Missouri who will need housing assistance. Access to stable housing is crucial to this population. Recent studies confirm that the more stable people are in their housing, the more likely they are to participate in primary medical care, adhere to their treatments, and return to productive lives. Furthermore, as more people are living with HIV disease and living longer, there is an increased demand for housing resource to meet their specific need. Current housing providers utilized through the RFP (Request for Proposal) process include homeless prevention activities, emergency shelter, transitional and permanent housing options to this specific population. Supportive housing services are also available. Housing providers submit quarterly reports and are audited on a yearly basis by the City. Homeless and Other Special Needs Populations The Kansas City, Missouri Health Department, through its HIV Services Program, will administer and monitor the Housing Opportunities for Persons with AIDS (HOPWA) Program to assist this Special Needs Population. Current housing providers utilized through the RFP process specialize in meeting the needs of persons living with HIV/AIDS and their families through homeless prevention activities and emergency assistance, emergency shelter, transitional and permanent housing options. Supportive housing services are also available.
147
2012 HOUSING OPPORTUNITES FOR PERSONS WITH AIDS GRANT ALLOCATIONS
Resources 2012 Entitlement …………………………………………………$1,115,258 Total Resources………………………………………………………..…………………$1,115,258 Allocations Transitional Housing …………………………………………….…..$60,000
restart, Inc. – Operating support to provide transitional shelter (up to 24 months).
Rental Assistance………………………………………………..….$985,960
SAVE, Inc. - Provision of housing assistance to low-income persons living with HIV/AIDS.
Administration (3%)…………………………………………………$33,457 Unallocated Funds……………………………………………….…..$35,841 Total Allocations……………………………………………………………………....…$1,115,258
148
ATTACHMENTS A. Grantee Certifications
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
B. Public Participation
Public Notices, Sign In Sheets & Testimony
City Council Resolution Approving the Plan
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
PUBLIC TESTIMONY AT PLANNING & ZONNING COMMITTEE MEETING
CDBG FUNDING FEBRUARY 29, 2012
Kansas City Community Gardens, Inc. - Ben Sharda, Executive Director, Kathy Greer and Dennis Robinson, Ivanhoe Neighborhood Council and Marty Kraft citizen, Greater KC Food Policy Coalition, Beth Low Assists citizens to create healthy food choices by creating gardens in backyards, vacant lots, and at community sites. The agency was not recommended for CDBG funding in the 2012 budget. There were many citizens and agencies testifying on the importance of funding this agency. The staff reconsidered and recommended them for CDBG funding in the amount of $35,000. Legal Aid of Western MO - Greg Lombardi, Executive Director and Town Fork Creek Neighborhood Association Work with neighborhood groups, nonprofit organizations and individuals to abate blight and address problems with abandoned properties with a cost of approximate $2,300 a house. Many of the properties are renovated and turned in to affordable rental/purchase housing. The agency was not recommended for CDBG funding in the 2012 budget. There were many citizens and agencies testifying on the important of funding the agency. Legal Aid was funded through the City’s general fund budget in the amount of $100,000. Operation Breakthrough Inc. - Sister Berta – Ex Officio, and Steve Callahan CEO Thanks the City for CDBG funding recommendation. The agency provides childcare, health services and mental counseling. Sister Berta says, as a nation we save cans and throw away our children”. Palestine Senior Activity Center - Pastor Butler, Thanks the Council and staff for their support. They provide over 200 meals at their facility. Synergy Services, Inc, Dennis Meier- Associate Director and Miguel Jaramillo Thanked the City for making homelessness a priority in Kansas City. In 2009 they built a homeless youth campus. They provide medical, dental and job readiness training. W.E.B. Dubois Learning Center - Nailah M’Biti Strategic Plan Prevention Coordinator Thanks the City for CDBG funding, their organization serve over 300 children on site and over 2,500 children in their technical program. They provide services in math, English, and reading; and service restart and the Wayne Minor locations. CDBG funds provide paid staff at their Pinkerton location. United Inner City Services (St. Marks Child & Family Development Center - Dorice Ramsey, Executive Director They greatly appreciate the CDBG funding. The agency is an accredited/licensed early childhood education center that provides wrap around services such as health, dental and emergency assistance. They are the only center in the area that provides Head start.
174
Guadalupe Centers Inc, Chris Medina - Executive Director, Diane Rojas, Associate Director Grateful for the CDBG funding which provides funds for staffing. They service over 430 households which is approximately 2,100 individuals at a cost of $156,000. They provide emergency assistance/homeless counseling services in the Downtown Strategy Area, Truman Plaza Neighborhood Strategy Area, Winnwood, and Heart of the City. They are the only bilingual housing counseling agency in the City of Kansas City, Missouri. Guadalupe Centers Inc, Plaza de Niño’s - Alexis Delaney, Preschool Director Grateful for the CDBG funding for childhood services program. The program provides early childhood education and day care for working and single parent households. The program focuses on kindergarten readiness. Morningstar’s Star Development Company, Inc. - Reverend John Miles, Executive Director Thanks the City, Housing and Community Development Department and City Council for the CDBG funding recommendation. They plan to construct a neighborhood Youth and Family Life Center. They appreciate the support and caring spirit of the City. Greater Kansas City Housing Information Center - Pam Johnson Thanks the City for the CDBG funding they’ve received over the years. The organization is a HUD recognized counseling service. R& L Investment Group LLC – Shane Lamb, Agency requested the City reconsider their request for CDBG funding. Requested funding to purchase vacant lots and foreclosed properties to repair and rent out to low income families. The Whole Person Inc. – David Robinson, Chief Executive Officer Requested CDBG funding to renovate a parking lot at 3710 Main Street. Staff didn’t recommend this project for CDBG funding. However, he thanked the staff for helping them find alternative funding. Community Assistance Council – Carol Bird Owsley, Executive Director They are the only Homeless Prevention agency in south Kansas City; they serve over 1,200 unduplicated households. They would like to thank the Committee and staff for CDBG and ESG funding recommendation. Community Baseball Academy of Kansas City Inc. – Don Motley, Chairman and Greg Mothy Ask the staff to reconsider his request for CDBG funding. The Academy will use baseball and softball as tools to inspire disadvantaged children from the urban Kansas City. Neighborhood Housing Services of Kansas City, Inc – Mark Stalsworth, President/CEO Request the City reconsider his application for CDBG funding for the Minor Home Repair program. He wanted to clarify that the money received in July, 2011 from Energy Works KC can only be used for energy projects and it’s a loan, therefore this money can’t be used for minor
175
home repair. They also requested the City reconsider their request for Home Buyer education. They are the only agency that operates in all 6 districts. Northland Neighborhood Incorporated – Jim Rice Thanked the Housing Department staff for Minor Home Repair CDBG funding recommendation. Mattie Rhodes – John Fierro, President/CEO Requested support for Kansas City Community Gardens. Requested increased CDBG funding for the Youth program, they felt that the funding should be more equitable and fair. They provide school site intervention, after school prevention services through arts and sports. This project will serve over 300 children and youth in middle and high school in the Northeast area. CDBG funding was increased to $47,487. Niles Home – Valerie Watson, CEO/President Request the City staff reconsider their request for CDBG funding for their Case Management Program. This program supports adolescences that are aging out, (turning 18) these youth are no longer able to be in the foster care system. They have nowhere to go, they have no safety net except for the Niles Home program these funds would allow them to continue to provide continuing education, counseling, and assist them with paperwork necessary for job search. Restart – Evie Craig, President and Marty Kraft citizen Would like to thank the wise staff for CDBG recommendation. In 2011 they saw an increase of 20% in homelessness; they worked with 10, 991 homeless population with 4,905 of these were children. In May they will start a re-housing program which will be able to move 150 people into housing. Tycor Community Development Corp – Teresa Bradskey, Vice President Would like for staff to reconsider their request for CDBG funding. They would like funds to replace the roof on their building. Ivanhoe Neighborhood Council – Margaret May, President Thanked the City for CDBG funding for the Minor Home Repair program. And requested staff reconsiders funding other agencies such as Green Impact Zone, Niles Home. KC Community Gardens and Legal Aid. Sparrow Development - Talbert Tutoring Academy, Kimberly Warren Requested the City reconsider their request for CDBG funding for their after school program. They currently serve 650 children the additional funds would allow them to increase the program by 250 additional students. Their focus is to keep kids on track to finish high school Boys & Girls Club – Jason Roth, Development Director Would like to thank staff for CDBG funding recommendation. There are currently operate five clubs in the Kansas City area and serve over 8,000 unduplicated youth. The JD Wagner center sees’s 100 kids a day. They provide breakfast and lunch at this facility. The focus is to keep youth on track to graduate high school.
176
PUBLIC TESTIMONY AT PLANNING & ZONNING COMMITTEE MEETING
HOME, ESG AND HOPWA FUNDING March 7, 2012 Westside Housing Organization – Gloria Fisher, Executive Director and Marlene Day Thanked the City for HOME funding recommendation. Their focus is renovating houses and making them energy efficient in the process. Rose Brooks – Susan Miller, CEO Thanked the City for ESG funding recommendation. The funds they received last year allowed the agency to provide beds for 25 women. They serve as a safety net for 120 women and children every year. They provide safe housing, counseling and assist with locating employment for women. Rose Brooks is a place where families can rebuild their life together away from the violence. Out of 114 homicides last year 50% of them were attributed to domestic violence. Somali Foundation, Farah Abdi, Appreciated the support provided but would like committee to increase funding to their organization.
177
178
179
C. Consolidated Plan Listing of Projects (Table 3C)
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
City of Kansas City, Missouri
D. Resale and Recapture Provisions
Recapture Federal Recapture provisions must ensure that the City recoups all or a portion of the HOME assistance to the homebuyers if the housing subsidized does not continue to be the principal residence of the family for the duration of the period of affordability. The period of affordability is based upon the total amount of HOME funds subject to recapture described in paragraph 24 CFR 92.254 (a)(5)(ii)(A)(5). For the City, this period is five(5) years for homebuyers assisted by the Kansas City Dream program in an amount less than $15,000; and ten (10) years for homebuyers assisted by the Kansas City Dream program in an amount of $15,000 but not more than $40,000. In every case, these guidelines apply only when a property is sold by the homebuyer originally assisted. If the property is converted to rental use, or if the property is refinanced causing the HOME requirements to be canceled, the entire amount of the HOME assistance originally provided must be recaptured. Properties must be sold for current appraised value, unless a lower sales price is approved in advance by the City due to current market conditions, condition of property etc. If a property should be sold for less than current appraised value, the City will require Recapture of that portion of HOME funds that would have been recaptured if the property had been sold for current appraised value. Amount subject to recapture. The HOME investment that is subject to recapture is based on the direct subsidy of HOME assistance that enabled the homebuyer to buy the dwelling unit. The direct subsidy consists of any financial assistance that reduces the purchase price from fair market value to an affordable price, or otherwise directly subsidizes the purchase. Shared net proceeds : The City has elected to utilize the Shared Net Proceeds method of calculating the amount of HOME funds Recaptured from the homebuyer upon sale of the property, whether voluntary or involuntary. This option is acceptable to HUD. The City recognizes the limitation that when the recapture requirement is triggered by a sale (voluntary or involuntary) of the housing unit, and there are no net proceeds or the net proceeds are insufficient to repay the HOME investment due, the City can only recapture the net proceeds, if any. The net proceeds are the sales price minus superior loan repayment (other than HOME funds) and any closing costs. If the net proceeds are not sufficient to recapture the full HOME investment (or a reduced amount as provided for in paragraph 24 CFR 92.254(a)(5)(ii)(A)(2) ) plus enable the homeowner to recover the amount of the homeowner’s down payment and any capital improvement investment made by the owner since purchase, the City will share the net proceeds. The net proceeds are the sales price minus loan repayment (other than HOME funds) and closing costs. The net proceeds may be divided proportionally as set forth in the following mathematical formulas:
HOME Investment / (HOME Investment + Homeowner investment) = HOME Percentage Homeowner Investment / (HOME Investment + Homeowner investment) = Homeowner Percentage
The City will permit the homebuyer to recover up to the homebuyer’s entire investment (down payment and capital improvements made by the owner since purchase) after recapturing the HOME investment. The Homeowner must provide documentation, including but not limited to receipts for materials or services performed. “Sweat Equity” by the homebuyer or any member of their family will not be considered investment. Only work performed by licensed professionals in an arms-length transaction and paid for by the homeowner will be considered in this calculation. Only actual investment will be considered; appreciation of the property will be considered to be a function of the Market, and will be shared per the formulas described above, up to the total amount of HOME subsidy originally provided.
Resale
The City’s Resale provision will apply when HOME funds are used as a development subsidy for new construction and acquisition and rehabilitation of home units sold at fair market value. The Federal Resale provision requires the City to ensure that; when a HOME-assisted homebuyer sells his or her property, either voluntarily or involuntarily, during the affordability period, the following items are to occur:
1. The property must be sold to another low-income homebuyer who will use the property as his or her principal residence.
191
2. The original homebuyer must receive a fair return on his or her investment. 3. The property must be sold at a price that is affordable to a reasonable range of low-income homebuyers.
Under resale, 92.254(a)(5)(i) of the HOME rule states that the period of affordability is based on the total amount of HOME funds invested in the housing. The following is an outline of HUD’s HOME investment range and the applicable required period of affordability: HOME investment under $15,000 (5 year period of affordability) HOME investment between $15,000 and $40,000 (10 year period of affordability) HOME investment over $40,000 (15 year period of affordability) The City’s Resale provision shall apply for the full affordability period beginning when the City has completed the project per HOME requirements. If the house is transferred, voluntarily or otherwise, during this time, it must be made available for subsequent purchase only to a buyer whose family qualifies as low-income and will use the property as its principal residence. If the house does not continue to be the principal residence of the buyer for the duration of the period of affordability or the home is sold during the period of affordability and the applicable resale provisions were not enforced, this project becomes noncompliant and all HOME funds must be repaid to the City. The City must then repay HUD for the noncompliant project. In cases of foreclosures, if the affordability is not preserved by a subsequent purchase at a reasonable price by a low-income homebuyer who will use the property as its principal residence, and who agrees to assume the remainder of the original affordability period, the PJ must repay the HOME investment. To prevent a home being sold without the resale provisions being enforced, the City will enter into a homebuyer written agreement that ensures that all parties are aware of the specific HOME requirements applicable including the period of affordability, principal residency requirement, terms and conditions of the resale requirements at the time of sale. Along with the written agreement, the City will also execute a promissory note, deed of trust and a “Land Use Restriction Agreement” (LURA) with the county to enforce the affordability period. If a property is sold during the period of affordability, the price at resale must provide the homeowner a fair return of investment. The City’s uses the average change on the Consumer Price Index (CPI) over the period of ownership as its standard index for fair return on the homeowner’s investment. The homeowner’s investment includes the homeowner’s initial investment (down-payment) and approved capital improvements made by the owner since purchase. Accepted capital improvements are internal or external improvements which cost more than $3,000, add market value to the home or prolong its useful life, and have been approved by the City prior to being made. Prior to a capital improvement being made during the period of affordability the homeowner shall submit plans and specifications for approval as a capital cost. Capital improvements made without approval will not be used to calculate the fair return. The homeowner must provide documentation, including but not limited to receipts for materials or services performed. “Sweat Equity” by the homeowner or any member of their family will not be considered investment. Only work performed by licensed professionals in an arms-length transaction and paid for by the homeowner will be considered in this calculation. Please note, that if the property cannot resale at or above the original purchase price, the homeowner may not be eligible to receive any funds when the house sells. For example, if the homeowner’s initial down payment investment was $3,000 and he or she paid an additional $7,000 for approved home improvements, the City will multiply the average change in the Consumer Price Index (CPI) over the period of ownership to determine the homeowner’s fair return on his or her investment.
($3,000 + $7,000) X 4% = $400 fair return on initial and capital investments $3,000 + $7,000 + $400 = $10,400 total return to the homeowner at sale
In addition to ensuring that the HOME-assisted homebuyer receives a fair return on investment, the house must remain affordable to a reasonable range of low-income homebuyers. The City targets families between 65 and 80 percent of area median income as a reasonable range of low-income homebuyers. The City measures affordability as no more than 33 percent of the homebuyer’s income may be spent on the fixed costs of owning a home: principal, interest, property taxes and insurance. The City has a maximum resale price of $150,000 and the price must not exceed appraised value of the home. Under no circumstances may the “affordable” sales price exceed 95% of the median purchase price for the area. In some instances the City will need to provide additional HOME assistance to insure the homebuyer receives a fair return on investment and the unit is affordable to its target population.
