Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 02262002 - D3 TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORSf. �. Lantra'` Costa FROM: Dennis M. Barry,AICP M Count Community Development Director DATE: February 2 ,2002 SUBJECT: Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice SPECIFIC REQUEST(S)OR RECOMMENDATIONS(S)&BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION RECOMMENDATIONS ACCEPT the Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice as a fair housing study consistent with the federal Consolidated Plan and Community Development Block Grant regulations. FISCAL IMPACT No direct General Fund impact.An Analysis of Impediments is a required component of the Contra Costa Consortium Consolidated Plan(CP). An approved CP is required for local government participation in housing and community development programs funded through the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development(HUD), BACKGROUND/REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATIONS The Contra Costa Consortium was established in FY 1994 for purposes of participation in the HOME Investment Partnership Act(HOME)program:and includes all of Contra Costa County with the exception of the City of Richmond. Consortium members include Contra Costa County as the Urban County representative and the participating jurisdictions of Antioch, Concord, Pittsburg, and Walnut Creek.. As the designated Consortium representative, the County is authorized to act on the behalf of the Consortium. CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: X YES SIGNATURE: - i /" "/" !!"e COMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATORMME TION OF BOA COMMITTEE PPROVE OTHER �7 SIGNATURES): .�: ACTION OF BOARD ON Adbivary 26 2002 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED x OTHER x SEE ATTR WED ADDENDUM FOR BOARD ACTION. VOTE OF SUPERVISORS I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A x_. UNANIMOUS (ABSENT None ) TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF AN AYES NOES: ACTION TAKEN AND ENTERED ON THE ABSENT: ABSTAIN: MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN. Contact Kara Douglas, 335-1253 ATTESTED Fphr„AY32'6- 26M Orig: Community Development JOHN SWEETEN,CLEC` cc County Administrator OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS County Counsel AND COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR Auditor-Controller BYE : ,DEPUTY The Contra Costa Consortium Consolidated Plan(CP)outlines the priority needs, goals, and objectives,and strategy for meeting its housing and community development needs using HUD entitlement grants from the following programs: (1);Community Development Block Grants (CDBG); (2)HOME Investment Partnership Act(HOME); (3)Emergency Shelter Grant(ESG); and(4)Housing Opportunities for Persons with AIDS (HOPWA). A major focus of the CP is the provision of affordable housing,opportunities for very low and low- income households and persons with special needs, many of whom are targets of housing discrimination. As part of the CP,the Consortium must also certify that it actively furthers fair housing choice for all residents through: + Conducting an analysis to identify impediments to fair housing choice; • Taking appropriate actions to overcome the effects of any impediments identified through the analysis; and Maintaining records reflecting the analysis and actions taken. This Analysis of Impediments (AI)to Fair Housing Choice constitutes the Consortium's effort in identifying impediments to fair housing. It also provides recommended actions to overcome the effects of identified impediments. Through the annual planning process,the CP will incorporate specific actions to he undertaken during a fiscal year to remove impediments and to further fair housing choice. Attachment: Contra Costa Consortium Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice, Executive Summary KD W:\Sara\AI'01\board order-AI.doe Analysis of impediments to Fair Housing Choice EXECUTIVE SUMMARY WHAT IS FAIRHOUSING? Equal access to housing is fundamentalto each person in meeting essential needs and pursuing personal, educational, employment, or other goals. In recognition of equal housing access as a fundamental right, the federal and Mate of California governments: have both established fair housing as a right protected by law. Fair housing is a condition in which individuals of slmllar Income levels in the same housing market have a Me range of choice available to them regardless of race, color, ancestry, national origln religion, sex, disabillt},marital status, familial status, or any other arbitrary factor. PURPOSE OF THIS REPORT This Analysis of:Impediments (AI) to Fair Housing Choice for the Contra Costa Consortium provides an overview of laws, regulations, conditions' or other possible obstacles that may affect an individual or a household's access to housing. The AI involves: ♦ A comprehensive review of the laws, regulations, and administrative policies, procedures, and practices; r An assessment of how those laws affect the location, availability, and accessibility of housing; and ♦ An assessment of conditions, both public and private, affecting' fair housing choice. This AI represents a coordinated effort among participating jurisdictions:in the Contra Costa Consortium to address fair housing issues in the region. GEOGRAPHIC AREAS COVERED County unincorporated areas, as well as cities and towns with populations less than 50,000 can form an Urban County to participate in the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program as long as the combined population is over 200,000. The Contra';Costa' Urban County is comprised of the unincorporated areas, as well as the cities and towns of Brentwood, Clayton, Danville, El Cerrito, Hercules, Lafayette, Martinez, Moraga, Oakley, Orinda, Pinole, Pleasant Hill, San Pablo, and San Ramon. The combined population for the Contra Costa Urban County was estimated at 516,200 according to the 2000 Census. The cities of Antioch, Concord, Pittsburg, and Walnut Creek, and the Urban County form a consortium for purposes of participation in the-federal HOME Investment Partnership Act Program to carry out affordable 'housing activities. This consortium had a combined,, Contra Costa Consortium Page E-1 Analysis of Impediments to'Fair Housing Choice population of 849,600in 2000. The goal of the consortium is to address regional housing issues with coordinated efforts and funding. SUMMARY ARY OF FINDINGS The fair housing equation has two sides access to fair housing and availability of a range of housing choices. This AI provides an overview of the demographic, income, and housing profiles in the Consortium, identifying the special needs groups and the existing availability of housing choices.' The AI further looks at the potential impediments that prevent or limit equal access to housing and issues relating to the provision of a range of housing choices. Demographic Profile Certain groups are more susceptible to housing discrimination. These include minority persons, particularly those earning lower incomes and/or are new"immigrants with language barriers; families with children, particularly large families and/or female-headed families; and persons with disabilities. Communities with rising numbers of these special groups may face increasing 'incidence of fair housing issues. The Contra Costa Consortium has become increasingly diverse, with 38 percent:of the population consisting of minority persons. Specifically, Antioch, Concord, EI Cerrito, Hercules, Pinole, Pittsburg, and San Pablo have pardculariy high 'concentrations of minority populations. Some jurisdictions have high proportions of families'with children. These include Antioch, Brentwood, Oakley, Pittsburg, and San Pablo. These communities may have a comparatively higher' demand for adequately sized'.and affordable housing opportunities than communities where the populations'are mature and established. Furthermore,'families with children also tend to face more housing discrimination issues compared to households with no children. This is particularly true for female-headed families with children. Some landlords.'are unwilling to rent to families with children for fear`of increased liability with regard to safety and repairs. Housing discrimination against persons with disabilities has also increased in recent years, according to fair housing service providers. Some landlords are unwilling to make the necessary improvements to accommodate the accessibility needs of disabled persons. Others view that renting to disabled persons may increase the liability with regard to safety and repairs: Various data sources have been consulted for this analysis, including the 1990 and;2000 Census, Horne Mortgage Disclosure Act data State Department of finance papulation and housing estimates, data from County and Pittsburg`Housing Authorities, County Welfare- to-Work data, among others. Page E-2 Contra Costa Consortium Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice Income profile ` Lower income households tend to have limited housing choices. While economic factors that affect a household's housing choices are not fair housing issues per se, the relationship between household income,` household type, race/ethnicity, and other factors can:create misconceptions and biases that raise fair housing concerns. Antioch, Brentwood, El Cerrito, San Pablo, Pittsburg, and the unincorporated County areas have higher proportions of 'households earning lower incomes (up to 80 percent of the County Median 'Family Income). These are also communities with high concentrations of minority populations. ' Given the historic correlation between low incomes and minority populations, and stereotypes associated with such correlation, these communities may face more fair housing issues than others. In Antioch and 'Pittsburg, more than two-thirds of the elderly households and more than one-third of the large families have low incomes. As discussed before, large families tend to have more difficulty in finding adequate and affordable housing. This issue is 'further compounded if the families earn lower incomes. Elderly households also face similar issues Limited incomes and poor' health may deter some landlords `from` renting to >elderly households. Housing'Profile The housing stock varies significantly among the jurisdictions in the Contra Costa Consortium. Some communities are old and established, while others are new and fast growing. Some communities cater to an ownership market, while others are comprised of primarily renters. Housing in some communities is overcrowded and deteriorating,'but in others is well-maintained and high quality. While housing costs and quality are directly related to affordability issues that are not fair housing concerns, each jurisdiction is required; by State law to assume a "fair share"of regional'housing needs for all income groups and to maintain and improve the housing condition. To provide a healthy, balanced and diverse housing stock in the region, the Consortium should work collaboratively to improve the housing condition and expand housing choices for all income'groups. Affordable Housing In general, many minority and special needs households tend to earn lower incomes. These households are disproportionately affected by the lack of adequate and affordable housing.; While affordability issues are not fair housing issues, expanding access to housing choices' for these groups cannot ignore the affordability'factor. Thus, insofar as affordable housing'' is concentrated in certain geographic locations, access to housing by lower;income and minority groups is limited. The;Consortium has a large inventory of affordable housing units. However, most units are concentrated in Antioch, Concord, Martinez, Pittsburg, and unincorporated communities. A few communities''offer only limited affordable housing opportunities. Thus, the Consortium should work collaboratively to provide affordable housing throughout the Consortium. Centra Costa Consortium page E-3 Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice Special Needs Housing Residential community carefacilities offer an alternative housing option to persons with special housing needs. However, these facilities typically face NIMBY (Not-In-My-Backyard) issues as neighbors often view the residents as undesirable elements. This is particularly true if the facilities serve the disabled, especially the mentally disabled. Licensed community care facilities serving the mentally disabled are extremely limited in the Contra Costa Consortium. Transit Accessibility Many minority persons, particularly those earning lower incomes, and persons with special needs are transit-dependent. A network of public transit must be available to link housing, employment centers, and community facilities in order to expand the choices of housing locations for transit-dependent persons. In general, Contra Costa County is adequately served with a network of public transit. However, several community residential care facilities, particularly for seniors, are ''located outside of the transit zone. Fair Housing Complaints and Tenant/Landlord Disputes The current fair housing profile in the Consortium validates the concerns mentioned'earlier. According to fair housing records maintained;by service providers, housing discrimination against minority households, particularly new immigrants, families with children, and persons with disabilities has increased in recent years due to increased pressures in the housing market.' Access to Conventional lame Purchase Financing' Equal lending practice is a.:fair housing concern. Lending discrimination directly affects a household's access to housing. While NMDA data cannot be used to prove lending discrimination, it does point to areas of potential concerns. Black applicants had the lowest loan approval' rates for all income levels. Throughout the County, statistically significant differences are present in the approval and denial rates between White and Black applicants in all income levels. Access to financing is slightly 'better for Hispanic applicants in comparison to Black applicants. In the West County,': significant differences exist between White and Hispanic applicants in all income groups except those earning more than 120 percent of County MFI. In the Central'County, statistically significant differences are present'between White and Hispanic applicants in the income group of 50-80 percent of the County MFI and in the income group of above 120 percent of the County MFI. In the East County, White and Hispanic' applicants had statistically significant differences among applicants earning between 50 and 80 percent of the County MFI and among applicants earning more than 120 percent of the County MFI: Page E-4 Contra Costa Consortium Analysis of impediments to Fair Housing Choice Lending to low income tracts and minority concentration areas varies for different lenders. Bank of America and Norwest Mortgage had comparably high rates of loan approval in low income areas and minority concentrated areas as reported by the lenders for the entire County. Approval rates reported by Countrywide Home Mortgage are noticeably lower in low income areas and minority concentrated areas, compared to the lender's overall approval rate in the County. While the disparity in lendingIn low income areas versus in moderate and upper 'income areas is not a fair housing issue per se, it becomes a fair housing issue when minority households are disproportionately impacted due to their higher concentrations in the lower income areas. Public Policies Public policies of a jurisdiction significantly affect the range of housing choices in the community. Policies and actions that prevent or impede the development of a range of housing are fair housing concerns. Specifically, State laws mandate the provision of a range of housing choices. Most communities have adopted policies and zoning provisions to regulate the development of housing. However, some policies or provisions may be in conflict with State laws and other policies;;may be viewed by the development community as restrictive.. In the Consortium, potential fair' housing issues relating to public policies include. Growth management measures that regulate the rate of growth may impede a jurisdiction's ability in meeting its share of the regional housing needs depending on the adapted growth rates and allocated regional housing needs. ♦ Several communities permit only a limited range of residential densities and housing types, potentially limiting the range of housing choices in the communities. Seven of the 19 jurisdictions in the Consortium do not have an adopted Housing dement that is certified by the State Department of Housing and Community Development for compliance with State law. t Many jurisdictions have zoning ordinances that contain a definition of a 'family that can be viewed by many as restrictive, offensive or obsolete. Licensed community care facilities that serve six of fewer persons must be treated as a residential use and permitted in all residential zones.. Most jurisdictions do not provide a clear definition of licensed community care facilities, identify where such facilities can be located, nor specify the permitting requirements. ♦' The conditions for approving second units in several communities are more restrictive than State law. Most jurisdictions have not incorporated density bonus provisions into the zoning ordinances. A few jurisdictions have density bonus provisions that are stricter than State law. Contra Costa Consortium Page E-5 Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice + Parking and development fee requirements operate as a "constraint to housing development, limitingthe range of housing options in some communities. RECOMMENDATIONS The following recommendations will help address fair `housing issues identified in this analysis. 1. Housing Element Compliance Action 1.1` All participating jurisdictions in the Consortium are in the process of updating the Housing Element for the 2001-2006 period. Pursuant to State law, the Housing Element must contain programs and policies to mitigate constraints to housing development such as growth management measures, excessive development standards," and high development fees. The Housing Element mush also demonstrate the availability of vacant/underutilized land at appropriate densities to facilitate the development of a range of housing types for all income groups. Participating`, jurisdictions are strongly recommended to work toward achieving substantial compliance with State law. 2. Consolidated Plan Action 2.1 The ;,five-year Consolidated Plan and one-year Action Plan govern the Consortium's use of CDBG, HOME, ESG, and HOPWA funds'. for addressing affordable housing and community development needs. Through these two plans, the Consortium should continue to allocate resources to encourage and facilitate the development of affordable housing throughout the entire Consortium Also, adequate resources should continue to be allocated' to provide fair housing education and outreach efforts. 3. Public Housing and Section 8 Assistance Action 3.1 The Housing Authority of Contra Costa County: (HACCC) and the Housing Authority of the City of Pittsburg should ensure adequate outreach'-to minority populations, including-those for whom English is a second language, regarding the availability of public housing and Section 8 rental assistance. Program information should be provided in English, Spanish, and Asian languages (e.g. Chinese and Tagalog). Action 3.2 The HACCC and the Housing Authority of the City of Pittsburg should continue to conduct outreach efforts to promote 'acceptance of the Section 8 program by property owners, particularly in areas outside of minority and poverty concentrations, 4. Deeoncentration of Affordable Housing Action 4.1 The County' and cities should', continue to collaborate to expand affordable housing in communities where such opportunities are limited.' Page E-6 Contra Costa Consortium Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Chane Contra Costa Consortium Page E-7 Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice Action 4.2 When allocating funding and administrative resources for affordable housing development, the Contra Costa jurisdictions should continue to assign;,a high priority to expand affordable housing in communities where such opportunities are limited. S. Incentives for Affordable Housing Development Action 5.1 Participating jurisdictions should consider offering additional regulatory and financial incentives to facilitate the development of affordable housing. In particular, parking requirements and high development fees are viewed by the development community as constraints to housing development. Jurisdictions may consider offering reducedparking requirements, flexible design standards, and/or development fee reduction as incentives to facilitate affordable housing development. 5. Coordination with Public Transit Action 6.1 The Consortium is served by a network of public transit. Continued efforts to expand the transit>.zone and to coordinate' employment opportunities and housing for 'transit dependent persons along transit corridors should be encouraged. 7.' Outreach and Education Action 71 Fair housing ,;service providers should continue to expand outreach to the community regarding fair'housing rights. Outreach should also emphasize that the residency status of the clients (documented versus undocumented) is confidential information and will not be transferred- to other agencies without the client's consent. Action 7.2 Hate crimes are typically committed by members of°the general public against'persons in the protected' classes. Education and outreach to prevent hate crimes must be conducted' at the community level, beyond the typical venues'for fair housing outreach. Participating jurisdictions and fair housing service providers should identify community events to promote diversity and tolerance. S. Information on Fair Housing Services Action 8.1 The Consortium should'' encourage the fair housing 'service;, providers to develop one 'brochure to describe fair housing services offered by the three service'providers (Bay Area Legal Aid,``Housing Rights, and Pacific Community Services), including geographic areas covered by the service providers and contact information. Action 8.2 Participating jurisdictions should consider providing links on their official web sites to the web sites of the fair housing service providers, Page E-8 Contra Costa Consortium Analysis of impediments to Fair Housing Choice 9. fair Housing Records Action 9.1 Fair horsing service providers should work collaboratively to develop a format for reporting fair housing services to allow compilation of data to assess trends and patterns. 10.Consultation Workshop with Lenders Action 10.1 The Consortium and fair housing service providers should explore with lenders ways to improve access to financing for all: Action 10.2 The Consortium should support credit counseling services to low and moderate income households, particularly minority households. 11.Lender performance Action 11.1 When selecting lenders for contracts or participation in local programs, jurisdictions should use CRA rating and HMDA data, in addition to other criteria, for evaluating lending performance in underserved areas and to underserved populations, 12.Amen+dments to the Zoning Ordinances Action 12.1 California court rulings stated that defining a;family in the zoning ordinance does not serve any legitimate or useful objective or purpose recognized under the zoning and land planning powers of the city, and therefore violates rights of privacy under the California Constitution. Participating jurisdictions with a zoning ordinance that contains a definition of a family should consider removing the definition from the ordinance. An alternative is to revise the: definition of a"family, for zoning purposes, to be synonymous with that of a household (i.e., all persons who occupy a dwelling unit). Action 12.2 As required by State law, state-licensed community' residential care facilities for six or fewer persons should be included as permitted uses in all residential zones by right. Participating jurisdictions should review the zoning' ordinance to ensure that a clear definition of community residential care' facilities is provided. The location (zone district), conditions for approval, and permit procedures for facilities serving more than six persons should be clearly specified. Action 12.3 State law requires local jurisdictions to either adopt ordinances that establish the Conditions under which second units will`be permitted or to follow the State law provisions governing such units. No jurisdiction can adopt an ordinance that precludes the development of second units or apply standards' that exceed the State standards,' Participating jurisdictions should consider adopting a second 'unit ordinance to clearly identify the location (zone: district),'conditions for approval, and permit procedures. The conditions and:, Contra Costa Consortium Page E-9 Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice standards specified in the secondunit ordinance cannot' exceed State requirements. Action 12>4 State' law requires that a local-jurisdiction to either adapt an ordinance that specifies the conditions' under which a density bonus may be granted or default to the State density bonus laws. No; jurisdiction can adopt an ordinance that places stricter'density bonus requirements than specified' in state laws. Participating jurisdictions should consider incorporating the density bonus provisions into the zoning ordinance. The provisions should clarify the requirements in order to qualify for a density bonus and specify the types of regulatory incentives that may be offered. The State density bonus law intends to facilitate the development of affordable housing. Local density bonus ordinances cannot be more restrictive than State law. 13.Housing Task Force/Committees Action 13.1 !If and when establishing task'forces/committees to address housing issues, participating jurisdictions should consider 'including members who represent the interests and needs of various segments of the population, such as very low and low income households, minorities, and persons with disabilities, families with children/female-headed families with children, and seniors. Action 13.2 The Contra Costa Consortium'jurisdictions will consult and coordinate with other public agencies and private organizations to expand fair' housing choice. Page E-10 Contra Costa Consortium Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice This page is intentionally blank. Centra Costa Consortium Page E-1 ADDENDUM TO ITEM D.3 February,26, 2002 On this date,the Board of Supervisors considered the Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice. Dennis Barry,Director,Community Development Department and Kara Douglas, Community Development Department presented the staff report and recommendations: The Board discussed the matter. The Chair invited those who wished to address the board on this matter. The following person presented testimony: Thomas Fulton,Northern California Family Center. After further discussion,the Board took the following action: ♦ ACCEPTED the Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice as a fair housing study consistent with Federal Consolidated Plan and Community Development Block Grant regulations; ♦ DIRECTED staff to provide the Board with a full copy of the report presented today; REFERRED the report to the appropriate committees for consideration; ♦ REFERRED'memo received from Thomas Fulton,Northern California Family Center to the Community Development Department. February, 2002 To: Contra Costa Community Development Department&.Board of Supervisors From: Thomas Fulton,Northern California Family Center Regarding: Administrative Policies used to Evaluate the Cost-Effectiveness of Housing Proposals Recently one of our proposals to provide shelter for runaway and homeless youth was assessed exclusively in terms of its per-day cost and compared to other programs for adult homeless. At the time we concluded that the analysis by was erroneous because it failed to adequately compare services which are required to legally shelter unaccompanied children and are not necessary for adults. The analysis also failed to compare the outcome.,moving to stable housing after shelter was provided within a specific time period. This leads us to request the following information about housing programs which are funded by County government: 1) Can a program by program basis, ghat is the erage per caoita cast per ygar for each individual or family using services. 2) Can a program by program basis, what is the average.time that a person or family stays in any given shelter?' What is the average cumulative amount of time which a homeless person stays in all shelters in a given year? 3) On a programm by program basis,what is the percent g_ of users who move to'stable housing,after the shelter program provides emergency services?' 4) On average,how much is the per capita cost ofproyiding shelter to each of the populations described in the Cgntinuum of Care each.yegg? 5) Each year,how much money is expended in each of the categories of homeless which are identified in the Continuum of Care? 6) What is the unduplicated count of people served in each of the categories of homeless which are identified in the Continuum of Care?' We believe the answer to the above questions should be known and should be public information,before anyone could make management'decisions regarding the comparative cast benefits of any program. When should we expect to have an answer to these questions?