HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 04121976 - R 76C IN 3 1976
APRIL II
MONDAY
THE BDARD OF SUPERVISORS MET IN ALL ITS CAPACITIES
PURSUANT TO ORDINANCE CODE SECTION 24-2.402 IN
REGULAR ADJOURNED MEETING AT 8:00 P.M. , MONDAY,
APRIL 12, 1976 IN ROOM 107, COUNTY ADMINISTRATION
BUILDING, MARTINEZ, CALIFORNIA.
PRESENT: Chairman J. P. Kenny, presiding;
Supervisors A. M. Dias, J. E. Moriarty,
E. A. Linscheid.
ABSENT: Supervisor W. N. .Boggess.
CLERK: J. R. Olsson, represented by Geraldine Russell,
Deputy Clerk.
06M
^M.
JAMES P.KENNY.RICHMOND CALENDAR FOR THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS JAMES p KENNY
IST DI M. T CONTRA COSTA COUNTY CHA RM
AN
ALFRED M.OIAS,EL SOBRwNTE EDMUND A.LtNSCHEID
2No oISTRICT VICE CHAIRMAN
JAMES E.MORIARTY.L^FAYETTE Ano FOR JAMES R OLSSON,COUNTY CLERK
3Ro DISTRICT SpEdAL DISTRICTS GOVERNED BY THE BOARD AND Ex Off►ao CLERK Of THE BOARD
WARREN N.BOGGESS.CONCORD BOARD CMRS,GERALDINE RUSSELL'
4TH DISTRICT HAYOERS MOON107.AOYYiSTRATION eultaNC CMEf CLERK
EDMUND A LINSCHEID,rlrrsBuom ►a DOs 911 PHONE(415)372.2371
STH DISTRICT MARTINEZ CALIFORNIA 94553
MONDAY
APRIL 12, 1976
REGULAR AWOURIM MEETING
8:00 P.M. Hearing on Community Development Housing Rehabilitation
Assistance Program.
8:30 P.M. Staff presentation on Social Service funding problems.
(No public testimony will be received; public hearing
to be held April 20, 1976 at- 2:00 p.m.)
i
omm
i
IN BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
OF
ill
v �
00002
1
Ii? THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
OF
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, STATE OF CALIFORIIIA
In the Matter of Social )
Service Funding Problems. ) April 12, 1976
As recommended by the Administration and Finance
Committee, the Board on April 6, 1976 having fined this time
for a public work session on funding problems of the Social
Service Department; and
Mr. C. L. Van Marter, Director, Human Resources
Agency, having presented a comprehensive report (a copy of
which is on file with the Clerk of the Board) detailing
present operations of the Social Service Department, indica-
ting mandated service programs, setting forth various
alternatives to resolve the funding problems, and commenting
on the recommendations submitted to the Board on April 6,
1976; and
Mr. R. A. Jornlin, Director, Social Service Depart-
ment, having commented on the inequity of the forimtla used
by the State to allocate Federal Social Service funds to the
counties and the ongoing attempts being made by our County
and others at both state and federal levels, to obtain a
more equitable allocation formula which considers past
performance levels; and
Mr. A. G. Will, County Administrator, having
furnished the Board with a written report commenting on
the recommendations of the Director, Human Resources
Agency; and
Members of the Board having discussed the matter;
and
Supervisor E. A. Linscheid having expressed the
opinion that the County's financial burden resulting from
reduced Federal funds is being placed on only the Social
Service Department, and having recommended that the
Director, Human Resources Agency, review the budgets of
the other denartmants irithin the Agency to see if adjust-
ments can be made and develop additional alternatives for
resolving the funding problem for presentation to the
Board at its public hearing scheduled for April 20, 1976
a. 2 p.m. ; and
Supervisor J. E. Moriarty having indicated that he
concurred with the aforesaid recommendation, but also
recommended that the alternatives developed by the Director,
Human Resources Agency, be submitted to the County Administrator
for review; and
Board members being in agreement therewith, IT IS
3'' THE BOARD ORDERED that the aforesaid reconmandations are
A?i ROVM.
PASS D of the Board on April 12, 1976.
0M
CERTIFIED COPY
cc : D1rOCi.OI', �:LL'?!fl^ I certify tt:1! this 1--sa II:It, tragi $ correct copy of
Resources AL). th- ,r.•f atal (!-1:nt ft; a f4 on fife in tay office.
County Administrator and tl:�-t ft uag i-244 :! k ad,p;W. by the Burd of
Viz;,.•:at_c,r.; of Con:ra C--"Ll Couaty. California, na
Local 535 tie date nhns.n. ATTF:-`T: J. ft. OLSSO.N. County
Director of Personnel C!erk L es-off.eto Clerk of said Board of Supersrism,
County Counsel ° t�yt:tr Ctbrt
RPR 1 2) 1976
RECEIVED
OFFICE OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY APR 12 4!976
j �. C ,
Administration Building CL OF SU?'cnljpjS
Martinez, California By C
To: B r4 0f Supervisors Dote: April 12, 1976
From: L U IV Subject: Social Service Funding
County Administrator
Being presented to you this evening is a report on the above
subject prepared by C. L. Van Marter, Director, Human Resources
Agency. The report indicates a serious funding problem in the
Social Service programs and recommends that your Board approve
specific actions designed to keep the Social Service programs
within the anticipated level of funding for the 1976-77 -fiscal
year. This report sets forth my comments on those recommendations.
The Human Resources Agency Director's report indicates that
our Social Service funding problem began with passage of the State
and Local Fiscal Assistance Act of 1972. The nationwide ceiling on
Social Service expenditures established by that legislation and the
allocation formula established by the State of California have
resulted in Contra Costa County receiving a progressively smaller
amount of Federal Social Service Funds. The financial crisis
faced by our County at this time points out the fact that historically
our County has provided a high level of social services__to_the citizenry,
I ddition, because Federal funds were available, the use of such
funds was maximized by incorporating a wide variety of programs into
the Social Service Department. Such programs include conciliation
services, the conservatorship program, the Children's Shelter, the
Meals on Wheels Program, and workshop services for mentally retarded
adults. The limitation on social service funds, therefore, has been
detrimental to Counties like ours but has not adversely affected
those Counties which had not made such extensive use of Federal
Social Service Funds in the past. County staff have and will continue
to encourage our legislative representatives at both the State and
Federal levels to modify existing legislation to properly recognize
past performance.
The recommendations set forth in Air. Van Marter's report are
based on two assumptions: (1) further staff attrition through the
1976-77 fiscal year will result in 30 less positions by June 30,
1977; and (2) the State will cover all in-home care costs, thereby
eliminating any projected deficit in that program. Based on current
information, these two assumptions appear to be reasonable.
00004
Microfiirn ,d with board order
2.
The following are my comments on each of the specific recommenda-
tions set forth in Mr. Van Marter's report.
1. The Board of Supervisors should commit the County to pro-
viding $2,992,000 in County funds as the County share for Title XX
funds in the 1976-77 fiscal year budget.
The County has been notified that its tentative allocation
of Federal Social Service Funds for the 1976-77 fiscal year is
$4,224,000. Inasmuch as the Social Service programs are funded on
a basis of 75 percent Federal, 25 percent County, the required
County share of funds for the 1976-77 fiscal year would be $1,408,000.
In other words, if the Board committed itself to providing $2,992,000
in County funds for the next fiscal year, that amount would be
$1,584,000 more than would be required to simply match the Federal
funds available. It should be pointed out, however, that a similar
situation exists in the current fiscal year; that is, the allocation
of Federal funds for the 1975-76 fiscal year is $5,326,878. County
funds required to match those Federal funds is $1,775,600. However,
the actual amount of County funds provided this fiscal year is
$2,796,000. The County already, therefore, has provided more than
its required local share of funds to help offset the decreasing
amount of Federal funds made available to us.
2. The Board of Supervisors should anticipate that efforts to
increase the allocation will be successful and direct that plans be
drawn up anticipating an allocation at the 1975-76 funding level of
$5,327,000.
The recommendation here simply stated means that the Board is
being requested to commit itself to a budget for the 1976-77 fiscal
year which is based on anticipated Federal funds in the same amount
as received for the 1975-76 fiscal year. The tentative allocation
of Federal funds for the next year is $4,224,000. In essence, the
Board is being requested to anticipate Federal funds of $1,103,000
more than what the County has been notified we will receive. The
recommendation is based on the fact that efforts are being made at
the State legislative level to modify the existing allocation formula
to guarantee that our County will receive at least as much Federal
funds as we received for the current fiscal year. Whether or not
these legislative efforts will be successful is conjectural at this
point. Recently introduced into the State Legislature was a bill
(SB 1881) which, if it passes, will provide our County with the
same level of Federal Social Service Funds as we received for the
1974-75 fiscal year ($6,168,220) . Taking all current information
into account, the recommendation appears to be a reasonable approach
to determining funding requirements for next year.
3. The Board of Supervisors should agree to make available
$555,000 in County money to fund the conservatorship program and
the workshop for the mentally retarded for the 1976-77 fiscal year
and direct that plans be made to fund these programs with Short-
Doyle money not later than the 1977-78 fiscal year.
0OW
00005
TIM 4"F
3.
Shifting the cost of these programs from the Social Service
f budget to another department's budget will, of course, lessen the
Social Service funding problem, but will still require that these
programs be funded with County money unless another source of
funding can be found. When looking at the County budget as a
whole, the shifting of costs from one budget unit to another does
not affect the total County dollars required overall. The funding
of the subject program with State mental health money is something
which will have to be explored with appropriate State officials.
It must be pointed out, however, that there are also limitations
on the level of funding of our County Mental Health programs.
That funding level is already being strained.
4. The Board of Supervisors should agree to discontinue use
of facilities at 28 Columbia Circle, Pittsburg, and 247 Rodeo
Avenue, Rodeo.
This recommendation results in a minor savings to the County,
but I agree that continued operation of unneeded facilities is not
warranted. It appears that the County could discontinue the use of
both of these facilities without causing any undue hardships on the
clients they serve. With regard to the facility located in Pittsburg,
the County has for several years had a small number of social work
staff located there. The County, through specific action by your
Board each year, has been paying the utility charges for that
facility in lieu of rent. The building is used as the headquarters
for the Pittsburg Community Services Project. CSP has been claim-
ing the amount paid by the County for utilities (approximately
$5,000 per year) as part of its required OEO local matching funds.
If the County were to discontinue payment of the utility bills for
this facility, such action would have a secondary effect on the CSP.
5. The Board of Supervisors should direct that plans be made
to lay off or otherwise eliminate the salaries of 155 Social Service
Department employees.
If the County is to provide social services within the presently
anticipated Federal funds available, staff layoffs are inevitable.
This is true because staff salaries constitute about two-thuds of
the Social Service administrative costs. Staff layoffs could be
avoided only if the County were willing to appropriate County funds
in an amount several times its required share.in order to continue
Social Service programs at the current level. Simply put, the more
County funds used to offset the decreasing Federal funds available
to fund Social Service programs means that much less money to fund
other vitally needed ongoing County programs. It does not appear
feasible for the County to totally offset the decreasing Federal
funds. The funding problem must be attacked at the Federal and
State Legislatures in order to modify existing legislation which has
led to our current financial crisis.
i
M
q.
I
6. The Board of Supervisors may wish to provide for public
input regarding County funding and what programs should be reduced
or eliminated after May 31, 1976 in order to bring program responsi-
bilities in line with available staffing.
I agree wholeheartedly with this recommendation. All interested
groups and individuals should certainly be afforded the opportunity
to express their views on this matter prior to the Board of Supervisors
taking any final action. Social Service programs are provided to a
broad spectrum of people throughout the County, and many of them will
be directly affected by the elimination or reduction of certain
services. In recognition of this need for public input, the Board
has already scheduled a public hearing to be held in the Board of
Supervisors Chambers on April 20, 1976.
7. The Board of Supervisors should give consideration to
providing County funding for certain programs which previously
were funded entirely with County money, but which are presently
funded, at least in part, with Title XX funds.
Previous comments also hold true here; that is, the basic
problem is with the total net County dollars required to fund the
County budget. Programs such as the Children's Shelter, Conciliation
Court, Meals on Wheels, etc. , are currently part of the costs which
are claimed against the Federal Social Service Funds. To forego the
claiming of these costs simply increases the net County dollars
required. The basic question remains: To what extent beyond its
basic matching requirements is the County willing and/or able to
fund Social Service programs?
GEB:es
!r
STAFF BRIEFING
,�. ......,.�.o._ a
------------------
r
STAFF BRIEFING
FOR THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
ON THE SUBJECT OF
TITLE XX SOCIAL SERVICE FUMING PROBLERS
FOR 1976-1977 FISCAL YEAR
RECEIVED
APR «.1976
J. k OtSSON
CLERK BOARD O. SUPERVISORS
lCONT COSTA CO.
PREPARED BY:
CONTRA COSTA COU.ITY
HUMAN RESOURCES AGENCY
SOCIAL SERVICE DEPARTMENT
Claude L. Van garter, Director, Human Resources Agency
Robert E. Jornlin, Director, Social Service Department
April 12, 1976
Mi:rcii med with boars! order
00008
TABLE OF COEITVITS
Page
Col-llby the Director, Human Resources Agency 1 - 12
APPE11DICES:
Al. Impact of State Allocation Formula on 13
Contra Costa County
B. State Deparbrent of Health Allocations of Federal 14
SRS Funds to County Social Service Departments
for Basic Service Programs for FY 1974-75,
1975-76, 1976-77
C. Alternative is l 15
Tentative Allocation of $4.2 Million plus
Straight County Share of 25%
D. Alternative r2 16
Tentative Allocation of $4.2 Million plus
$2,991 ,000 County Match
E. Alternative 53 17
1975-1976 Allocation of $5.3 Million plus
$2,991,000 County Hatch
F. Alternative r14 18
1974-1975 Allocation of $6.1 Million plus
$2,991 ,000 County Match
G. Alternative f5 19
1974-1975 Allocation of $6.1 Million plus
$3,991 ,000
H. Alternative r26 20
Sufficient County or Other Funds to Avoid
any Program or Staff Reductions
I. Summary of Alternatives Presented 21
J. Determining the Federal and State Share of the 22-24
Expenditures of the Social Service Department
K. Description of Title XX Service Programs 25-50
L. Non-Title XX Funded Service Programs 51
N. Recoi! i.endations Made to the Board of Supervisors 52
00009
Ut�VV.,
..........
STAFF BRIEFING FOR TJE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS:
SOCIAL SERVICE FUNDING PROBLEMS
April 12, 1976
Fir. Chairman, !embers of the Board of Supervisors:
INTRODUCTION:
You have set this date and ticne for a work session on the funding
problems your Board confronts in the 1976-1977 fiscal year in that portion
of your Social Service Department's operations known as Title XX programs.
It will be our goal this evening to assure that you have a thorough under-
standing of the problem, the alternatives available to you, the cost of
each alternative, and the program and staffing implications of adopting each
of the alternatives. To insure that we accomplish this goal , we plan to
proceed as follows--
First,
ollows:First, we will review briefly for you the background of the situation in
an effort tc describe why your Board now faces a problem and how the
problem came about.
Second, tie will describe the present overall operations of your Social Service
Department in an effort to place the Title XX funding problems in perspective
with the rest of the department.
Third, to :•:ant to spell out clearly the precise extent of the problem nosy
facing your Board. To solve this problem your Board has several alternatives
it can take. Last Tuesday, your Administration and Finance Committee reported
one alternative to you. Tonight, I would like to put those recommendations
in perspective for you by describing several other alternatives you may wish
to consider.
00010
,ti
ON10
mum
Fourth, I want to review the recon.„endations made to the Administration
. and Finance CoTritittee and reported to you in light of the other alternatives
you have before you.
After my coz�ents, it would be appropriate for you to receive comments and
recommendations from your County Administrator, Mr. Will , based on his
review of the recommendations I made to the Administration and Finance
Co-moli ttee.
Finally, vie will be happy to attempt to respond to any questions your Board
may have. To assist in responding to questions, I mould like to introduce
several members of the staff of your Social Service Department. It is
these staff members who are responsible for the content of both the report
made to your Administration and Finance Committee last week and this report
this evening.
BACKGROUND:
With your permission, then, I would like to review briefly how and why
your Board came to the point of having a large deficit in the operation of
your Social Service Department.
Beginning about twenty years ago, the Federal Government began to take an
interest in the need to provide social services to welfare recipients.
Beginning in 1953, specific mandates were placed on states as a condition
of receiving Federal service funds. Initially, 50% reimbursement was
available on an open-ended basis for services provided to recipients of
-2-
Ow11
Vv�11
{ .
welfare grants. In 1962, Congress because convinced that -if additional
funds were pL—mped into social services there :could be great benefits to
the public and the client population. States were required to separate the
income maintenance function fro.-n the services function as a condition of
receiving 75" Federal matching funds. Over the years further refinements
were added, caseloads were lowered, staff was added, and the whole eligibility
worker classification grew up to relieve social workers of the grant
com.putation and eligibility determination functions. A li-mited number of non
cash-grant recipients were rade eligible for social services; contracting of
some services out to private agencies was encouraged; more services were
made eligible for Federal funding. And still the funding was on an
open-ended basis.
Your Board remained in the forefront of social services. You made many
needed programs available to this cononunity. Your County earned a well-deserved
reputation on a statewide and national basis for the development and
implementation of innovative programs.
In 1972, Congress and the Federal Administration became concerned because
of projections submitted by the states calling for a 100% expansion in the
level of social service expenditures. Questionable practices by several states
finally convinced Congress that runaway expenditures had to be controlled.
Unfortunately, rather than recognizing that the existing service levels in
different states varied widely, Congress sir:ply slapped a $2.5 billion limit
f on Federal social service expenditures and set a formula for allocating the
funds to the states based on each state's share of the general population.
-3-
00012
i +^
I
I
The formula provides a little more than $10 in Federal funds per
person per year in each state. The formula ignores poverty levels,
unemployment figures, inflation, relative standards of living, the general
state of the economy, the welfare caseload in different states, and all
other relevant factors r►hich might have been included in creating a formula
that had some meaning. As a result, California received approximately 10%
of the national allocation, or 5245 million per year. This allocation went
into effect October 1, 1972, but was retroactive to July 1, 1972.
The State Administration was able to honor all counties' claims for service
funds during the 1972-1973 fiscal year. Beginning July 1, 1973, a formula
for allocating funds between the counties was devised which we knew at the
time would eventually work to the detriment of your County. Appen ix A
shows the formula now in use in California and the effect it has had on
Contra Costa County's allocation of funds. Since 1973 we have had our
allocation of funds cut by $2.5 million, or 37.6%. If this formula continues
through the 1977-1978 fiscal year, as it is projected to do, your Board will
have sustained a 54.2' reduction in available Federal social service funds
in a five-year period. During the same five-year period, there will have
been an unprecedented increase in the level of inflation and thereby the cost
of providing all services, including social services. If we assume an
average inflation factor of only 10' for each of the past three years and
7 , for each of the next two years, your Board will be confronted by
July 1 , 1978 with being asked to provide services which cost 44' more than
they did in 1973 to th a reduction of 54" in available Federal funds. This
transfer of fiscal responsibility from the State and Federal governments
to the County, dean combined with the limits placed on your taxing authority
by the State Legislature, produces a clearly intolerable situation for
your Board. 00013
!Appe::dix 8 to this report shows the 1974-1975 and 1976-1977 allocations,
the dollar difference and the percentage increases or decreases for each
County. Your County has sustained the greatest dollar reduction in
allocation of any county in the State. To demonstrate the contrast,
Orange County's allocation has increased 40% or $1,173,000 in the past two
years u bile your allocation has been reduced 31.5%, or $1 ,944,000.
PRESENT OPERATIMS OF THE SOCIAL SERVICE DEPARTMENT:
To recall to your mind the scope of your Social Service Department's
operations, I would like to share the following statistics with you.
The department presently has 1582 budgeted positions, only 1360 of which
are presently filled. The department operates out of 27 different buildings
stretching from doyntwon Richmond to Oakley. You appropriated $78.2 million
for the department this fiscal year.
In the income maintenance bureau, $3.9 million in financial assistance is
authorized each vionth in addition to $1.5 million in food stamps. The 626
employees in this bureau provide cash grant, food stamp and medical
assistance services to 55,000 residents of this County.
In the services bureau, 514 ea!ployees provide 22 different supportive,
preventive and protective services to 12,000 families and individuals in
this County. The staff attempt this despite a 31% reduction in staff over
the past four years. It is in this area that the present fiscal
crisis exists.
An additional 127 employees provide a variety of specialized services,
including medical eligibility determinations at the County Hospital ,
-5-
00014
operation o tthe Rodeo Corr:unity Service Center, and staffing the Edgar
Children's Shelter.
Fin-llw nZ mnln,. - n
In the services bureau, 514 ea!ployees provide 22 different supportive,
preventive and protective services to 12,000 families and individuals in
this County. The staff attempt this despite a 31% reduction in staff over
the past four years. It is in this area that the present fiscal
crisis exists.
An additional 127 employees provide a variety of specialized services,
including medical eligibility determinations at the County Hospital ,
-5-
00014
operation of the Rodeo Co.-=unity Service Center, and staffing the Edgar
Children's Shelter.
Finally, 93 employees provide all support, administrative and management
services in the department's central office. These include training for
all employees, preparing and controlling the $78 million budget, claiming
the $53 million in revenue received each year from the State and Federal
governments, keeping track of $600,000 worth of furniture and equipment,
managing the 27 buildings, and performing all other central office control
and management services.
AVAILABLE ALTERNATIVES:
On April 6, 19706, your Administration and Finance Committee forwarded to
your Board a. report I had filed with the Committee March 30. This report
represents one possible alternative you could adopt to resolve the funding
problems you face. It clearly is not the only alternative. To place in
perspective the recommendations presently before you, I want to share with
you several other alternatives that are available. Let us first identify
the absolute minimum you must do next fiscal year. (Appendix C) You have
been allocated $4,224,000 in Federal Title XX funds for next year. To claim
these funds you are required to provide a 25% match of County money. This
means that you must provide at least $1,408,000 in County money in order to
provide a total progra-m costing $5,632,000. If our present budget request
were approved, Title XX programs would cost $11 ,484,000 next fiscal year.
This u,ould confront you with a $5,852,000 deficit. This is the base point
fram urhi ch your decisions crust be made. You can require the department to
operate a $5,632,000 procrasr and eliminate 55,852,000 of costs from the
-6-
00015
. ., s . . .
00010
E
existing program. This one year reduction of just over 50% in the level
of your social service expenditures results in staff and program reductions
which are so extreme that we have not even attempted to compute their exact
level. A budget at this level would require a complete reworking in the
depart,ment's budget. Well over 300 employees would probably have to be laid
off, leases for several buildings would have to be broken, all optional
services would have to be termsinated, and the level of mandatory programs
uould be reduced overnight to such a narginal level as to raise compliance
questions with the State and Federal governments_ While your staff strongly
oppose this alternative, vie point out that it is legally available to you.
Adoption of this alternative will save you more than $1 .5 million in County
money fram what you budgeted for this fiscal year. It would, however, be
so destructive to the department and so disruptive to the community that vie "
do not believe it can be supported on any kind of rational basis.
As a second alternative, (Appendix D), you can assume that you will receive
the same $4,224,000 in Federal funds now allocated for 1976-1977. However,
instead of providing only the minimum County match required, you could continue
the same level of County funding which you provided for in the 1975-1976
budget, adding a nodest 7" inflation factor. This requires $1 ,583,000 more
than the absolute minimum identified in alternative 01. It is, however, only
$120,000 more in County money than has been requested in the existing
1976-1977 budget. Increasing the County matching funds to the 1975-1976
budgeted level plus 7: requires a cGunitment of $2,991 ,000 in County money.
It will leave a deficit $4,269,000. This is equivalent to laying off 266
employees. You will have only 89 of the present 278 social work staff
remaining.
-7- 00016
t
A third alternative, (Appendix E), is to assume that our efforts to get
the State Legislature to roll back the allocation for next year to this
Year's level will be successful. This would give you an allocation of
$5,327,000 in Federal funds. If you then provided the same $2,991,000
County match described above, the deficit would be reduced to $3,166,000.
This is equivalent to 193 employees and would leave you with only about
144 of the present 278 social work staff.
A fourth alternative, (Appendix F), is to assume that our efforts to roll
back next year's allocation formula to the 1974-1975 level will be successful.
This provides you with an allocation of $6,168,000. With the same County
funding of $2,991,000, you are left with a deficit of only $2,325,000. This
is equivalent to 138 staff, leaving you with 186 of the present 278 social
work staff.
The 1974-1975 allocation level of $6,168,000 is probably the most optimistic
Federal funding level we can hope to achieve. To reduce the possibility of
staff reductions beyond the level projected in alternative #4 requires
additional County money. If we project an additional appropriation of
$1,000,000 in County money, we have alternative #5, (Appendix G). With the
1974-1975 Federal allocation of 56,168,000 and $1 ,000,000 in added County
money, you still have a deficit of $1,325,000--equivalent to 72 positions--
leaving 236 of the 278 present social work staff.
To prevent any reduction in the level of present staff requires that your
Board fund the entire $11,484,000 present budget. Given the $2,991 ,000 in F
County funding spoken to already, the additional County money required
-8-
0001'7
ranges from $2,325,000 to $4,269,000, depending on the level of Federal
funding available. Thus, alternative r6, (Appendix Ii), provides for no
reduction of staff, but requires additional County funding of at least
$?,325,000_
S„raaarizing the alternatives available to you, (Appendix I), the issue
really comes down to two questions:
1. What level of Federal funding will you have available?
2. What level of County funding does your Board wish to make
available to the department?
I do want to offer one caution in relation to the staff reduction figures
given for each of the alternatives. The figures represent what are
probably maximum reductions in staff at each level. They are not, however,
absolute. The manner in which the claiming of Title XX revenue is handled
is of necessity so complex that many seemingly unrelated factors can
influence the exact amount of Title XX revenue which is claimed at any
point in tire. Since we are unable to control or even accurately predict
all of these variables, we have given estimates based on the best information
available and given certain assumptions regarding the level of income
r:.aintenance staffing, clerical staffing, overhead costs, and many other
;actors. Appendix J provides an explanation of the Title XX claiming
process if you Nish to pursue this matter further. Once your Board makes
the policy decisions required, including the amount of County funding which
will be available and the programs for which you wish the department to
be responsible, the department %:ill recheck their figures and give you
r,ore precise figures on the level of staff reductions required. The
figures provided are, tie believe, fairly accurate for planning purposes at
this point in time.
_g 00018
„r .� -
I have said little thus far about the program implications of implementing
any of the six alternatives covered. Attached as Appendix K is a description
of each of the programs presently administered by the department. I commend
this material to your reading prior to the public hearing you will hold on
April 20. I believe that several community organizations, advisory groups,
and employee organizations will want to testify on the program implications
of any of these alternatives as well as my recorrmendations. Let me just
comm-ent briefly that your Board cannot make any reduction in social work
staff without its having significant and very real impact on the community.
My recommendations for a reduction of approximately 105 worker positions
represents a reduction of nearly 38% from the existing Title XX program
H
staff levels.
There are an additional 48 social work staff providing a number of services
not funded by Title XX. These are listed on Appendix L. The fact remains
that the worker level staff will have been reduced from 453 on July 1 , 1972
to 221 on July 1, 1976. This is a reduction of 52% over a four-year period.
There is no question that a reduction of this extent will cause problems in
the community. You and only you can measure the extent of these problems
and determine whether you can afford to prevent the program reductions which
will inevitably follow a rzajor reduction of staff.
COMMENTS 0N1 EXISTING RECOMIMENDATIO?1S BEFORE THE BOARD:
Appendix M shores the recor.z—endations which were forwarded to your Board by
your Administration and Finance Committee last week. In relation to
recommendation :-*:1 , you will recognize this as a recoar.endation which has
#' been repeated in all but the first of the alternatives identified for you
-10-
00019
earlier. It provides for a minimal increase in costs over what you
%;ere willing to budget for this fiscal year. It is almost essential
for
your Board to provide this funding level , particularly if we are unsuccessful
will inevitably follow a major reduction of staff.
COmAEUTS ON EXISTING RECommENDATI0NS BEFORE THE BOARD:
Appendix 11 shop-is the recon.;-endations which were forwarded to your Board by
your Administration and Finance C m.ittee last week. In relation to
reco,=endation 1 , you till recognize this as a recoarendation which has
been repeated in all but ne first of the alternatives identified for you
-10-
00019
earlier. It provides for a minimal increase in costs over what you
tiIere willing to budget for this fiscal year. It is alrros t essential for
your Board to provide this funding level , particularly if we are unsuccessful
in increasing the level of Federal funding.
In relation to recon- aendation 12, I have recommended a middle position in
terms of anticipated Federal funding. I will tell you very frankly I have
no assurance that we will be able to get the cooperation of the State
Legislature in reversing the inevitable trend toward lowering our allocation
of Federal funds. The situation may, therefore, actually end up worse than
I have identified in my report. However. we probably will not know for
sure until the State Budget is signed at the end of June whether we have
been successful or not. We must take action to reduce the level of Title XX
spending before the end of June. Therefore, I have taken the middle position
of suggesting that our planning be based on the current (1975-1976) level
of funding.
In relation to recommendation 13, I must honestly say I have no idea how we
will be able to squeeze these programs into the existing Short-Doyle funding
for the 1977-1978 fiscal year. We certainly cannot do so for the 1976-1977
fiscal year without major reordering of Mental Health priorities. Short-Doyle
funding is in trouble already for 1976-1977. Fie have no assurance that
additional funding will be available for the 1977-1978 fiscal year. Therefore,
the recommendation to fund the conservatorship program and workshops with
County money for one year may well result in problems in setting Mental
Health program priorities for the following year.
-11-
00020
k
VW�►V
The fourth recd„endation concerns do buildings. While they do not
involve a lot of money, they do represent the equivalent of one staff
position. In my opinion, we can manage without them. Thus, we again are
left with the result that unless your Board is in a position to provide
far rare County money in support of the department than I believe you are able
to provide, reduction of staff appears to be inevitable. I do not like to
make such a recors:rendation; I would avoid it if I felt there were any other
viable alternative, but I do not see any. The only questions are around the
level of staff reductions with which we are concerned--not whether or not
there will be any. The recoamendation for reducing 155 positions will
include 18 administrative positions. These include second line supervisors
and above, central office program staff and administrative positions. I
an, not prepared at this time to spell out exact classifications or numbers.
I will do so as soon as your Board determines the precise level of funding
ti•:hich will be provided to the department. The 32 support positions include
lo' clerical positions and 16 unit supervisors. The 105 worker positions
include social workers, social work practitioners, social work trainees,
co.;nunity aides and other worker level classifications in the department.
Again, I cannot at this time tell you exactly how many of each classification
will need to be reduced. Those recommendations will be made to your Board as
so.--n as possible after you determine the funding levels and program
priorities.
At this time, I would like to ask Mr. Will to comment on the report which
is before your Board, after which I will be happy to attempt to answer any
questions your Board may have. Thank you for your time and attention.
-12-
00021
Q
r.
MfAo .
►-�
soon as possible after you detem- ine the funding levels and program
priorities.
At this time, I i.ould like to ask Mr. Will to comment on the report which
is before your Board, after which I will be happy to attempt to answer any
questions your Board may have. Thank you for your time and attention.
-12-
V 0021
11 F
r,
r�i ori
ry
� cv ,• cn .
O O O
u
f
U U 0 401 C>
> O O O O CO
O
� + OCO
i
+^ � ^
CV
O
<
R
O CS
94
O �
6 v
O OO
.Oi h try N
a.
C3
OC.) E.
A
O
ILIA
Ln N O P7 O
Q h O
a
Ln
MCn
U.
h
H M M
!
.1 r
f ..J
� U
0 622
Appendix B
TJWLE A
STATE OF 11EALTH ALI.0:.7IC.:5 OF FME.RaL SPS FUNDS
TO Cow.--_y SxIAL S!WIIC DF t.11 T:i.:. 70-4 H.L Ic SEW110E PROCTm1 i
FOR FY 74-75, 7x76, 76-77 -
1 2 3 4 5
CCF'-..TIES ALIMC.TICCI ALLC)CATION A IZC: IG:I S DIFF l- DIFF
6/74) (ORICI:41L) COLGIVS COMMS
FY 74-75 FY 75-76 FY 76-77 1 t 3 1 6 3
Ala ,oda S 7,113,293 S 6.868,528 S 6,58-3,767 (5 526,526) (7.4)
Alpine 6,821 5,561 3,707 (3,114) (45.7)
Fedor 34,371 38,510 43,253 8,892 25.8
butte 588,763 625,310 673.449 89.686 15.2
Calaveras 84,917 80,326 73,091 (5,826) ( 6.9)
Colusa 83,376 59,936 53,139 (30,237) (36.3)
Cant:a Costa 6,169.223 5,326,678 4,223,935 (1,944,288) (31.5)
Del *. rte 77,592 94,533 92.684 15,092 19.5
1:1 Dorado 319.862 289,793 255,809 (64,053) (20.0)
Fresno 2,140,366 2,454,699 2,8:7,931 757,565 35.4
Glenn 78,749 76.001 77,655 (894) (1.1)
F3:-Uldt 734,242 674,121 641,376 (92,866) (12.6)
I= zial 331,627 462,196 477,015 145,383 43.8
Inyo 67,685 73,530 65,497 (2,188) (3.2)
Xerr3 2,155,0;1 2,066,961 2,092,195 (62,866) (2.9)
rings 462,562 442,413 43?,542 (42,620) (8.8)
La3:e 154,998 163,124 181,661 26,673 17.2
Lassen 21,3% 69,204 65,733 45,337 211.9
Los Angeles 46.496.3:6 47,162,739. 47.821,415 1,325,069 2-8
• Madera 488,456 434,999 423,876 (64,530) (13.2)
Farin 1,031,151 836,013 656.205 (374,946) (36.4)
Xariposa 22,105 29,041 23,423 6,318 23.6
a
Fe !Sciro 432 ,356 437,470 423,820 (3,536) (0.8)
!cued 844,807 828,593 S1S.F-53 (27,549) (3.3)
lndoc 26,256 33,366 3:,602 8,346 31.9
laao 12,932 12,976 122,594 1,662 13.9
l:antercj 824,935 974,421 1,C65,252 250,316 30.7
397.781 369,502 - 359,615 (28,166) (7.3)
Vevada 120.359 148.295 154,474 31,115 23.3
Orange 2,934,539 3,403,369 4,107,770 1,173,231 40.0
Placer 404,958 421,405 433,763 28,805 7.1
Flumts 75,315 70,440 6.5,497 (9,818) (13.0)
Riverside 2,751,573 2,757,668 3,256.156 514,623 18.7
Sacramento 5.516,472 5,255,203 4,902.384 (614,089) (11.1)
San Benito 68,081 72,294• 79,091 11.010 16.2
San Bernardino 3,300.338 3,6S6,706 4,094,176 793,838 24.1
San Diego 7,035,403 -7,224,436 7,055,132 19,727 0.3
San rranc"co 5,147,090 5,570,9,47 5149618GO 349,710 6.8
Swan Joaquin 2,540,990 2.482,087 2,537,420 (33,570) (1.3)
San Luis Obispo 658,154 572,789 557,223 (90,926) (13.8)
• San tsteo 3,629,774 2,823,165 2,317,109 (1,312,665) (36.2)
Santa lia:tiara 1.113,622 1,114,694 1,133,221 19,599 1.8
\ Santa Clara 7.199.709 6,693,8:5 6,222,763 (916,946) (12.7)
$aceta Czu= I,C04._4'3 . 162.451. 9,!-0.210 (44,070) (4.4)
Shasta 703,965 =.24,693 53.1053 (121,967) (17.3)
Sierra 13,453 9,268 31,122 (2,331) (17.3)-.
Siskiyou 113,503 122,961 244.5?3 31,0330 27.4
Solana 0:1.832 957,71-8 975.C39 100,147 11.4
Saa.1-aa 1.320.055 1,351,338 1.410.033 81,992 6.2
Stanislaus 1.a12.983 ,722,075 1,652.253 (160,730) (8.9)
Sutter 261,074 233.503 231,093 (29,931) (11.5)
Tera.-a 246.760 155.092 103.124 16,364 11.2
Trinity 39.673 41,399 37,54S (228) (0.3)
St:lare1.313.820 1.421,778 1,621,912 368.092 28.0
tioly�e 101.034 116,164 121,103 20,074 19.9
Ventura 1,3a4.3-37 1,579,341 1,723,872 344,565 24.9
Yolo _435,249 46..0.0 453,:01 34,352 7.9
Yu`a 349.677 329.338 339.943 (9,034) (2.8)
GSA•,-> :Or,A;. _ _ 5123,579.133 $123,579,327 :123,573,129
-14-
00023
UUUA
Appendix C
AL'jTEP"VATIVE 1
MWTATIVE A`.LO1::_IO' OF $4.2 MILL103 PLUS STRAIGHT C0UNTY SHARE OF 25%"
I. ALIDCATIOY ZWD D'." FC!
Estimated Exprnditurc�: 1976177 for Title XX Programs
Federal $ 8,613,000
County Patch 2,871,000
T
atal $11,4:8:,000
Funjin3 Available 1976177 for Title X.X Programs
Federal Allocation for
1976177 $ 4,224,000
County Share (25--) 1,408,000
Total $ 5,632,000
POTENTIAL DEFICIT: $5,852,000
II. PROM-MIS TO BE OPEWAT£D FROM TITLE XX
This alternative assumes that the Board provides the minimum County money required
to mtch the tentative Federal Title XX allocation. The impact of the cuts re-
quired to rxzt such a deficit is so large that we are usable to present a plan
at this time. The nuaber of Social Porkers to be reduced would require a major
restructuring of the services organization, with layoffs of additional admini-
strative and support staff and other major changes. Major decisions that would
need to be made include: which programs to staff, what organizational structure
is appropriat-_-b for ti;e smaller Service Bureau, svhich buildings could be closed
and how soon the leases could be terminated, which contracts and services of
other departments could be terminated and haw soon.
Should your Board require us to cover this deficit, we could need two to three
weeks to wort: out a tentative plan.
-15- 00024
UM
:*
.r
Appendix D
ALiL -/Fi I I vL 2
11^E rTil"'II ALLG�r"=£0=I Ot $4.2 ?�ILLION PLUS $2,991,000 COUNTY M4TCi!
I. A�
LnC,Tlo:r AND nEFFICIT `.,
• ^--n nr3itrrr'•- 1Q7'%t7 f'nr Titltr '-•y 6rr,'-rrrrmc
_.lal C.aa PLL j1 ... LV ..4 .LL, _ ajar. Viya[jl aL..tualal :a L..uL.ture
is appropriate fior the smaller Service Bureau, which buildings could be closed
and how soon the leases could be terminated, which contracts and services of
other departiaents could be terminated and how soon.
Should your Board require us to cover this deficit, we would need two to three
weeks to wort'; out a tentative plan..
-'S- 00024
r'
Appendix D
ALT ER7AT1 vE 2
TF:P.'TATf VE ALLO%.TMII Or $4.2 MILLION PLUS $2,991,000 COMITY MATCH
I. I,LLOCATION AND DEFICIT
Estiroted Expenditures 1976177 for Title Xx Programs
Federal $ 8,613,000
county Matc.31 2,871,000
Total $11,484,000
Funding Available 1976/77 for Title XX Program
Federal Allocation $ 4,224,000
County Share (incl- 7a
more than 1975/76) 2,991,000 POTENTIAL DEFICIT.- $4,269,000
Total we 7,215,000 Staff Equivalent
18 Administrative Staff
189 Workers
29.5 Unit Supervisors
29.5 Clerks
266 Total Staff
II. PROGRAMS TO BE OPERATED FMV TITLE XX
(Distribution of Workers Only to
Program to be Operated)
Present Staffing at Difference
Staffirg $4.2 Million (Reduction)
State-Mandated Program
Information d Referral 33 10 23
Protective Services--Children 35 10 25
Out-of-Xo:;;e Care--Children 36 27 9
Protective Services-Adul is 17 10 7
Out-of-Hom_- Caro--Adults 9 1 8
Health 14 2 12
Child Day Care 8 1 7
In-Rome Care 44 I8 26
Employm_..nt 11 -- 11
Optional Progra:.%
Eciucatioa S Training Services (GA) 14 6 8
Family--Conciliation Services 3 3 --
ta,:zily--How Yanager..ent 3 -- 3
Fardly--Chil 'cren's Sp_-cial Problems 4 -- 4
Fati1y--Prevent Family Problems 13 -- 13
1�.:ti3y--SLste,:ance I -- 1
Special Services--Disabled_ 5 -- 5
Sp..4ia2 Services--Blind I -- I
vo1L•:d!'ee COJrd21:3t0:5 2 -- 2
Licensing--Foster Jt'o='es 13 -- 13
Licensing--Ad:.,!t des. C�!e 2 -- 2
Licensing--Child Day care 9 - 9
on Wheels I 1
Totals (iior,:erS) 278 89 189
-16- 00025
a
E
r
Appendix E
ALTEDYATIYE 3
1975-76 A'.._'.C>:-:TJa 0,F $5-3 MILLIO-7 PLUS ,52,991,000 111 COUNTY E14TC1t
I. A,_,-7 CATION AND PZ FIC17
Esti+!ted Errr�rd t cares 1976/77 for Title XX Progz-i.=
Federal $ 8,613,000
County NZItch 2,871,000
Total $11,484,000
F. -acing Available 1976/77 for Title Y% Progrars
Federal A,llocatioa $ 5,327,000
CoU�lity Share (incl. 7%
nacre thar. 1975/76) 2,991,000 POTENTIAL DEFICIT: $3,166,000
Total $ 8,318,000 Staff Equivalent
18 Administrative Staff
134 Alorkers
20.5 Unit Supervisors
20.5 Clerks
193 Total Staff
I1. PROGRAMS TO BE OPERATED FROM TITLE XX
(Distribution of Forkers Only to
Programs to be Operated) Present Staffing at Difference
Staffinq $5_3 Million (Reduction)
State-Mandated Progrars
Inforr-.atiorr & Referral 33 22 11
Protective Services--Children 35 28 7
Out-of-Ho:^e Care—Child-ren 36 28 8
Protective services.dims 17 12 5
Out-of-Home azre--Adults 9 4 5
Health 14 6 8
Child Day Care 8 4 4
In-How Care 44 22 22
Bvploymant 11 -- 11
Oational Progrars
Education & Training (CA) 14 6 8
Fand l y--Conciliation Sem-vices 3 3 --
Family—Hom-e Panagera-nt 3 3
Fancily--Children's Special Yroblers 4 -_ 4
Famai l y--Prevent Family Problem 13 -- 13
Farm1y--Sustenance
Special Services--Disabled 5 -- 5
Special Serrices--Blind 1 __ 1
Volunteer Coordinators 2 2
Licensing--Foster Homos 13 6 7
Licensing--A-ult Res. Care 2 __ 2
Lict.msiny--Child Day Care 9 __ -9
1•:eals on :4bee2s 1 1
Totals (:Vorf:ers) 278 144 134
-»- 00026
-»- 00026
Appendi r. F
ALTcRN'ATI VE 4
197.1-75 ALLOCATIO:I OF $6.1 F!ILLIO:: PLUS $2,991 ,000 COUNTY IdATCH
ALLOCAT103 AND DEFICIT
Esti meted Expenditures 1976/77 for Title XX Programs
Federal $ 8,613,000
L'
County !latch 2,871,000
Tota1 $11,484,000
r
Funding Available 1976/77 for Title XX Programs
Federal Allocation $ 61168,000
County S ar (incl. 7
more than 1975/76) 2,991,000 POTENTIAL DEFICIT: $2,325,000
Total $ 91159,000 Staff Equivalent
18 Administrative Staff
92 krorkers
14 Unit Supervisors
14 Clerks
138 Total Staff
II. PROGRAYS TO BE OPERATED FROM TITLE XX
(Distribution of Workers Only to
Programs to be Operated) Present Staffing at Difference
Staffing $6.1 Million (Reduction)
State-Mandated Programs
Information & Referral 33 24 9
Protective Services--Children 35 31 4
Out-of-Home Care--Children 36 32 4
Protective Services--Adults 17 12 5
Out-of-Bone Care--Adults 9 4 5
Health 14 7 7
Child Day Care 8 5 3
In-Hon.-_ Care 44 26 18
Employrsent 11 -- 11
Optional Programs
education F Training Services (GA) 14 w 10 4
.7a:-dly--Conciliation Services 3 3 --
Faraily--How Ranagement 3 1 2
Family--Children's Special Probleas 4 1 3
Favily--Prevent Fanily Problez= 13 7 6
Fa ni 1 y--Sus tev arc e 1 1 --
Special Services--Disabled 5 5 --
Spacial Services--Blind 1 1 --
Volunteer Coordinators 2 2 --
Licensi:%g--Foster 13 7 6
Licensing--Adult Fir's. Care 2 1 1
L2Cc:lS_T._7--C,h;ld Pay Care 9 5 4
I:eals or: :'Heels 1 1 __
Totals (1:arkers) 278 186 92
-18- OOO 1
-is- Qo027
Appendix c
ALTEP,.:'ATI vE 5
1974-75 ALLOCA: ON OF $6.1 HILL101 PLUS $3,99.1,000 COUNTY MATCH
I_ n.r.Z_TIO`J AND DEFICIT
estimated Expenditures 1976177 for Title XX Program`:
t c 3eral $ 8,613,000
Courity Katch 2,871,000
Total $11,484,000
Available ole !976177 for Title XX Programs
Fede-Tal Allocation $ 61168,000
County Snare (incl_ 7%
tr+)re than 1975176) 3,991,000 POTENTIAL DEFICIT: $1,325,000
Total $10,159,000 Staff Equivalent
18 Administrative Staff
42 Workers
6 Unit Supervisors
6 Clerks
72 Total Staff
II.
PPOCRAMF ro BE OPERATED FROM TITLE XX
(Distribution of Porkers Only to
Program to be Operated) Present Staffing at Difference
Staffing $6.1 Million - (Reduction)
St
ate-,Vandated Program
Information & Referral 33 32 1
Protective Services--Chilaren 35 35 --
Out-of-Ho,-.x- Care--Children 36 35 1
Protective Services--Adults 17 16 1
Out-of-Ho.-w- Care--Adults 9 8 1
Health 14 13 1
Child Day Care 8 7 1
In Rome Care 44 35 9 .
ploynt 11 00 11
Optional Pxoq-ars
Education & Training Services (CA) 14 12 2
FWaUy--Conciliation Services 3 3 0
Fazuly--Home- Management 3 2 1
Family--Children's Special Problems 4 1 3
Faruly--Prevent Family Problems 13 9 4
Farad y--Sust,,nance 1 1 --
Special Services--Disabled 5 5 --
Special Services--Blind 1 1 --
Uol,_=teen Coardirators 2 2 --
Ticensing--Foster gores 13 10 3
L_cen5ing--A dolt Res. Care 2 1 1
Licensing--Child Day Care 9 7 2
.Weals on impels 1 " 1
Totals (.orkers) 278 236 42
-,9- 00028
��-
Appendix !r
AL'3TERMA TIVE 6
SUFFICIENT COU?7Tr OR OTHER FU."1DS TO AVOID ANY PROGRAM OR STAFF REDUCTIONS
I. A O ATIO.y A:.D DEFICIT
Esti=ated Expenditures 1976/77 for Title XX Programs
Federal $ 8,613,000
County natch 2,871,000
Total $11,484,000
Funding Available 1976/77 for Title XX Programs .
$4.2 Million $5.3 Million $6.1 !Million
Federal allocation $4,224,000 $5,327,000 $6,168,000
County Share (incl. 74
rbre than 1975/76) 2,991,000 2,991,000 2,991,000
Subtotal $7,215,000 $8,318,000 $9,159,000
Additional County Funds
Required $4,269,000 $3,166,000 $2,325,000
II. PR03'!!XM TO BE OPERATED FRaV TITLE XX `
(Distribution of iforkers Only to POTENTIAL DEFICIT: -0-
Progra w to be Operated)
Present
Staffing
State-:landated Programs
Information & Referral 33
Protective Services--Children 35
Out-of-Home Care--Children 36
Protective Services-Adults 17
Out-of-Home Care--Adults 9
Health 14
Child Day Care 8
In-Form Care 44
Erployment II
22::i0221 Progra.^ts
Education & Training Services (CA) 14
Family--Conciliation Services 3
Fa^ply--Ho. manage.mt4nt 3
Family--Children's Sp-cial Problems 4
Famu l y--Prevent Pro_bl erm 13
Family--Sustenance 1
Special Services--Dzsabled 5
S:=^ial Servic4s--Blind 1
1'a1Lnteer Coordinators 2
Licensing--Foster Homes 13
Licensing--Adult Res. Care 2
Licensing--Child Gray Care 9
Peals on Wheels I
Totals (Workers) 278 0
0
VA00
-20-
Q 7 O O O O
Ln i=1 \ V M LIS
.--1 . 4-1
><
-
'rC .'-t 47 O M N ;
L„ U C 14
0-1 U li.: ti?
S:: r_
X
.H
t1.
t7.
a
W O o O O O
♦T40 CA 430•+ O O p p
O
1 t1' W O a O O Ln
GO O .-4 .-4 1 1 N
T' Z�r .t M to t7
W
.�7 H to to c4
Q til +
W O O O O O O
64 O O O O O O
I-' N
r V W t0 H to n O
X. to 00 O . t 0% N O
O
� .-� �^ to t'') .•-1 .-t
W H
ti? ;
Cl Cl O O O
O O O O O
H O O O O O
E+ '• GO 1
C `C 00 .-a to M Co
N21 00 O r"/ C1 N ri t
Q .a M Q1 t7
N
t:l
� cS
.0 N
O O
ts2 O Cl O O O i
Co O O O O V
t—+ O O O O O N FS
O
r M 00N In Q1 'V r/ 1 •r1 •r/
N
f4 U 1
O u
•r-1•r•1
r.
fj U
> O O O O O Y
+ V O O J O ^_ 7
CS %0 O
N 00 N V G1 V' c`1 1 U U
Q CJ, N G1 M c,}.-4
F— .-� � � N •ct r, •r4
O O
N L3.
u •,-1
14
c: en
.r4
O Cl O Co O O H
O O C) O Cl O 1
+ O O O O O a.+
F-• U
-T `C O 00 N is t7 O •O
rr 00 N %J O to co U
llz- (V
to -
i• .� _ t- .. to .� U
.-a t:4
r, u
tJ N
U c;
CIO t4,4 LA dp
1,t� G) �a. ;� J U •,3 _. � i t:
• t` i � �. l 1 1 � �� J i I.'� tJ .� �.
Appendix J
l)ETEP_MINING VIE FEDER.,XL AND STATE SHARE
OF TllE EXPENDITURES
OF THE SOCIAL SERVICE DEPARTMENT
C) 0C>
C> C> C)
C)
CZ) C)
C> 03
00
"T Ln
co
.ZJ Go
0
CS J
4-4
rJ _J
i-L
44 4-4
1111 t
-77
Appendix J
VETEPNINING IME FEDERAL AND STATE SHARE
OF T11E EXPENDITURES
OF THE SOCIAL SERVICE MPARTMENT
'nie Social Service Department is responsible for administering a large number of
Social Service and Income Maintenance Programs. Iliese programs are financed
from combinations of Federal, State and County funds. On a quarterly basis,
counties are required to submit through the State Department of Benefit Payments
a financial report that shows the administrative cost of the Social Scivice
N-Part�I.ent for that period of time. This report is actually an accounting claire
for the funding provided by the various Federal or State agencies.
Because of the number of agencies involved, how and where the expenses are to
be charged is determined on the basis of a "Cost Allocation Plan." This Plan
serves several purposes: It satisfies the funding requirements of the agencies
involved, determines the amounts of the Federal and State reimbursement, and
provides the County with the expenditure detail necessary for efficient and
responsible administration of the Department.
The Cost Allocation Plan uses time spent by "case carrying" eligibility worl.ers
and service workers and their first-line supervisors as a basis for identifying
the total amount of administrative expense to be distributed to the various
programs. For one month in each quarter, these workers complete a time study
which identifies the anount of time the worker spends on each program. At the
end of the time-study month, the total time is categorized into Social Service
time and Eligibility/Non-Services time, and program ratios are developed for
each.
The prograzi allocation ratios derived through the time study process are used
in conjunction with a classification of expenses which further classifies them
into the following functional categories:
Group I - Case Bork Costs. These are the salaries and benefits of staff com-
pleting time studies, (i.e., case-carrying, workers and their immediate super-
visors). The case work costs are separated and pooled according to Eligibility/
Non-Services and Services functions. The program ratios indicated by each
o-.,)uu throu i the tine study process are then applied to the case work cost
pool of each to determine the amount to be charged to each progran.
Group II - Allocable Support Costs. This group is comprised of the salaries
and benefits of administrative and clerical support staff that do not carxy
caseloads and are not included above. It also includes the cost of all
operating overhead such as supplies, utilities, space, etc. The costs of
this group are spread to the various programs in the same manner described
under Group 1.
Group III - Direct Costs. Direct costs are those that are unique to, or benefit
only a specific function or program. These costs are identified, isolated, and
then charged directly to a particular program. They are not pooled and prorated
to the various programs as is the case in Groups 1 and II.
-22- 00031
-22- V I,
DETERMINING MME FEDERAL AND STA'rE SHARE - Page 2
Group IV - Staff Dcvelopment. These are all of the administrative costs of the
Staff Development (Training) Division of the Social Service Department. - They
are allocated to the various programs in a manner similar to that explained in
Group. I and II. These costs are not subject to the Federal Title XX closed-end
al location.
Group VI - Extraneous. These are the costs for activities not directly related
to other Social Service program and are funded outside of the administrative
claim. For example, the Area Agency on Aging Project, Retired Senior Volunteer
Pro r.Lm, etc.
Once the expenses are categorized as to function (groups) and program, the funding
source (i.e., Federal, State, County) nust then be determined. This is done
based upon fixed cost-sharing ratios determined by applicable regulations.
-23- 00032
t is
ESTIMATED DISTRIBUTION OF 1976-77 TITLE XX COSTS
Reduction in our claim against the Title XX allocation cannot entirely be made
by reducing the number of workers because some costs do not vary directly with
the number of i,orke:rs and because of the way overhead costs are allocated to
co::.Dly with claiming regulations. Each dollar claimed against the Title XX
Federal allocation is made up as follows:
Gro::h I, Case pork Costs. (tforkers and first line supervisors'
salaries and benefits.) 46.3%
Groap 11, Allocable Support Costs. (Expenses allocated through
the claim.)
Unit Clerical support (I.M. & Services) 16.1%
Administrative support 9.4%
Space rental 4.0%
Hunan Resources Agency 0.7%
Other operating costs supplied by other County
departments or outside vendors* 7.1%
Countywide overhead (A-87) 4.4%
Group 111, Direct Costs. (Direct charges not dependent on
number of workers in service programs.)
Children's Shelter 6.S%
Contracts with CCAMR, Fatchetts Bus Co. and Mt. Diablo Rehab 3.3%
Health Department direct services 0.90-0
Service-connected aid paid to clients 1.3%
100.0%
* Auditor's welfare system accounting, postage, office supplies,
utilities, telephone, printing, maintenance of buildings and
grounds, janitors, purchase, rental and saintenance of office
equipment, memberships, and various other operating costs.
-24- 00033
.a r
Appendix K
DESCRIPTI03 OF TITLE XX SERVICE PRCGRAMS
Tile XX service programs are funded by the Federal Government and the
county. Some programs are mandated by the State and others are optional
at the county level. Each program described below is classified according
to its being mandated or optional.
Some programs rust be operated by the county in some department but, for
reasons of funding, were placed in the Social Service Department in order
to take advantage of ghat then was open-ended Federal funding. Included
in this are Dependency Services under the Juvenile Court Law, operation of
the Children's Shelter and the Conservatorship program.
For programs mandated by the State, the mandate is on the existence of the
program and not on the level of services. No one really knows for sure
how low a level of service meets regulatory requirements. The community
has considerable interest in these programs; however, the constituency which
supports a particular program is determined by who will benefit from the
services and who will suffer if the services are not provided. Some of the
constituency for a given program may actually be the voiceless disadvantaged
who are not organized and cannot speak for themselves even when needed
services are essential to alleviate dangerous situations for the involved
parson. The consequences of the department's not providing some services
may not really be known until such time as the individual or family comes
back to the Agency in crisis at a later date.
Except as noted in the program statements to follow, only selected persons
are eligible for these services. Eligibility is determined on the basis of
the individual or family being a recipient of public assistance or someone
within low ince:re limits determined by the Federal Government.
Following are stateinents which briefly describe each of the Title XX programs
and some implications of the reduction in such services. The programs
described are:
MIANDATED:
1. Information and Referral
2. Protective Services for Children
3. Dependency Services under the Juvenile Court Law (1-1. & I. Code)
4. Out-of-Ho=me Placement Services for Children
5. Protective Services for Adults
6. Conservatorship (N. & I. Code)
7. Out-of-Home Care Services for Adults
8. Child Care
9. Health-Related Services
10. Family Planning
11. In-Home Care Services
12. Employment Services
13. Edgar Children's Shelter
-25- oUM
IMIvKf
a;•
OPTIONAL:
1. Special Care for Children in their own Home
2. Home Management and other Functional Educational Services
3. Educational and Training Services
4. Services to Alleviate Family Problems and Services for
Children with Special Problems
5, Conciliation Services
6. Sustenance--Heals on Hheels
7. Special Services for the Blind
8. Services for Disabled Individuals
9. Volunteer Program
10. Licensing
-26- 00035
i,
INFORMATIQ: AND REFERRAL SERVICES t1 IDATED
Anyone in the cwjr.unity is eligible to receive information about social
services offered by the department or otherwise available in the community.
Vhen requested, the social worker refers the client to an agency of his
choice and makes an appointment for the client.
The social worker assists the client to identify and state his problem
and helps hin choose the course of action the client wishes to take. The
department is also responsible for helping to develop community resources
and to keep an index of resources available.
Reduction in level of the program will lead to a variety of consequences.
The department will be unable to develop resources and maintain the directory
of services as mandated ty the State Department of Health and needed by the
staff for purposes of making referrals. Additionally, there will be a
reduction in referrals to other agencies and elimination of follow-ups.
Clients will not receive sufficient helps to get to other needed services.
Shortened interviews could lead to inappropriate referrals when the worker
makes the referral on the basis of the initially stated problem rather- than
having the time to identify the client's real problem resulting in his need
for services. Consequences for clients may be unknown until a family or
individual crisis occurs at a later date.
C
-27- OMW
-27-
PROTECTIVE SERVICES FOR CHILDREN MMIDATED
Complaints of child abuse, neglect, and mistreatment are directed to the
Child Protective Services Units. Services are directed towards strengthening
of family life in order to correct the situation or to taking authoritative
action, such as petitioning the Juvenile Court for out-of-home care.
n
On both the Federal and State level, Child Protective Services has the
highest priority among the social services. The program has strong public
support and, when the work is well done, engenders a deep commitment on the
part of local persons and agencies, such as police, schools, health agencies,
neighborhood groups.
It is essential that Protective Services be of high quality. Quality depends
on staff skill and time; otherwise, what Has intended as a social service
becomes little more than routine police and legal activities. Staff reduc-
tions mean less skill (social workers get transferred to uncongenial programs,
the department is unable to hire qualified person) and less time. This
easily can result in more petitions to the court, more entrances to the
Shelter, and strong negative reaction on the part of the public.
-28- 00037
DEPENDENCY SERVICES WDEs THE JUVENILE COURT LAS!
STATE MANDATED
COUNTY MANDATED
Services under the Juvenile Court Lara are not completely separate from
Child Protective Services or Out-of-Home Care Services, which programs
are described separately, however. These paragraphs are concerned with
Wore specific "arm of the court" functions, such as preparing petitions,
court hearings, evidence gathering.
"Rights" movements that have gathered momentum recently changed the former
somewhat informal family court system to the present one in which many of
the proceedings are hotly contested in an adversary framework. Each person
is entitled to counsel and as many as five attorneys have been known to
appear.
The court data being argued in legal terms is available almost only because
of the social worker's investigations. If there is a reduction of time
available, it seems unavoidable that more children will be denied legal
protection because the social worker has not had the time or skill to
gather appropriate evidence.
-29- 00M
OUT-OF-HOME PLACEMENT SERVICES FOR CHILDREN WIDATED
This service provides for children under 18 years of age who require care
and who cannot remain in their own homes, temporary or long-term 24-hour
rare' in licensed facilities, such as emergency shelter care, foster family
-29-
4
OUT-OF-NOME PLACEAMENT SERVICES FOR CHILDREN MANDATED
This service provides for children under 18 years of age who require care
and who cannot remain in their cnin homes, temporary or long-term 24-hour
care in licensed facilities, such as emergency shelter care, foster family
care or group care. Worker determines if out-of-home care services are
necessary, determines needs of the particular child, selects the best
available hemne, discusses the child's needs with the caretaker-to-be of
the child and assists that person to provide the best possible care and
supervision for the child. porker provides services to the natural parent
%•rhich will enable child to return to his own family as soon as possible;
refers to Adoptions Services when return to family home is not a viable goal ;
and explores the possibility of guardianship or other long-term placement,
taking necessary steps to complete the legal process. Supervises children
placed by the court in their own homes.
For children who are dependents of the court, the worker makes intermittent
reports concerning the progress of the child and the family and recommends
long-term planning or termination of dependency status when family can
again care for the child or the child reaches his majority.
Cases are referred to Institutional Placement Unit when workup shows need
for those services. Institutional Placement worker locates institutions
and group homes in which children are placed and supervised. Such children
may require treatment for severe mental, emotional, physical or developmental
' problems; or may exhibit behavior or relationship problems of such severity
as to be intolerable to foster families and thus must be placed in institutions
where the structured environment is used to improve behavior.
Program reductions will have consequences for children needing these services.
Children who need placement may stay in the Edgar Children's Shelter longer
than is desirable. Without monthly mandated visits to children, foster
parents and natural parents, focused on counseling and return of the child
to his own home or a suitable permanent alternate, children will be left in
placement for periods beyond that desirable for the child and at added
Public Assistance expense. Also, without counseling, the foster parent may
be unable to cope with certain children who exhibit behavior problems; and
thus the child will be returned to the Shelter. Child placement failures
are traumatic to the child, the foster parent, the natural family, and are
expensive to the person or agency responsible for payment of the service.
Increased institutionalization of children may result. If children in
institutions and their families do not receive appropriate staff services
these placements too may fail; the process of returning to the Shelter,-
staying
helter,staying too long a tire. and ending up in an additional placement is
repeated once more.
The majority of children in out-of-home placement are dependents of the court.
-30 0OM,.
PROTECTIVE SERVICES - ADULTS PANDATcD
This program must continue since it is mandated by Congress through
Title XX for all persons in the community without regard to income or
resources.
The purpose of the service is to prevent or remedy conditions which cause
individuals to be exploited, neglected, abused, or in danger of losing life,
health, limb, or property. Included in this are such service activities
as are necessary to protect the individual from others,and also from them-
selves, in the case of individuals who are not competent to provide for their
own needs due to physical, mental, or developmental disabilities.
Social b:orkers intervene on the behalf of such individuals when the need is
made known either by the individual himself or by a concerned friend, relative
or citizen. All such complaints or referrals must be investigated and evaluated
in order to decide upon a suitable plan of action.
Social :,corkers offer assistance through counseling and certain corrective
action to assist vulnerable persons to secure less hazardous living arrange-
ments, prevent unnecessary admission to institutions and facilities, arrange
for community care when individuals cannot provide for their own care and
supervision, and arranging for legal services, guardianship, conservatorship,
commitment where necessary. In cases where there is financial exploitation,
Social Workers can arrange for protection of the client's resources.
Social Wori:ers also assist friends and relatives to assume responsibility for
the endangered person whenever possible.
Any program cut would result in a commensurate cut in the quality and quantity
of service now being provided. We expect that with increased activity
resulting from establishment of the local Office on Aging, we will see an
enlarged call for the service as more and more of the aged are reached and
become aware of the resource. Maintaining the present program level will
represent a cut in quantity and quality of service if there is increased referral
activity. Increased institutionalization, medical costs, and trauma to
individuals are some of the potential consequences of a reduction in the level
of protective services.
-31- 0nV_AZ0
CONSERVATORSHIP/GUARDIANSHIP COUNTY MANDATED
The county is responsible for operating a Conservatorship program. Rarely
is it found in Social Service Departments. In this County, funding comes
from Title XX, Short-Doyle funds and County funds on a 75°x, 22.5`6, 2.5%
ratio. Title XX services provided for Conservatorship staff cover a range
but focus on protective services, out-of-home placement and health care
services for adults.
;he Social l:orker accepts referrals from Mental Health Services and
investigates client's situation for the purpose of recommending to the
court need for Conservatorship. The Worker serves as conservator of person
and/or estate for alcoholics and mentally ill who are gravely disabled and
arranges placement, treatment and/or hospitalization, as necessary. The
Vlorker provides counseling, determines need for continuation of Conservator-
ship and reports back to the court; serves as Conservator of the estate,
inventories assets, receives income, pays bills, manages property, maintains
accounts, initiates public assistance application or takes other steps to
provide financial support for conservatee, insures that work of private
guardians and conservators who are relatives understand their responsibilities
and assists such persons in reporting back to the court. Additions to the
caseload in certain instances include persons in State Mental Hospitals
with criminal charges pending against them who are incompetent to stand trial
and minors who are dependent children or wards of the court.
In meeting the above requirements, staff works closely with the County
Counsel, Public Defender, Mental Health and Auditor's Office.
Any reduction in staff will restrict ongoing contacts to urgent or emergency
situations. The resulting increase in loneliness, despair, or acting out on
the part of conservatees is not measurable. It is probable the curtailment
will be counter-productive in terms of conservatees remaining longer in
out-of-home care, requiring more frequent moves, being more often confined
in county or state hospitals, and remaining longer under Conservatorship.
Reduced services will also result in more community complaints.
-32- 00041
aCn� rs.
--- AUUL 7
This serviCe is available MPJDATFD
coaLaunS ty whose incor„e rr� tO all SSI
eligible for ets certain/SSP recipients and
to
State Depar�.Pgt service by eithhe Corzanu requirements
and Who are Cos in
i o f vice n , ,. ,. , , the
Y Care Divi sion nt certified
h
OQO
-32-
t
OUT-OF-HOME CARE: ADULT MANDATED
This service is available to all SSI/SSP recipients and to others in the
community whose income meets certain requirements and who are certified
eligible for the service by either the Community Care Division of the
State Department of Health or by Golden Gate Regional Center.
The purpose of this service is to assist individuals to arrive at realistic
decisions regarding the care and supervision they need if they are unable
to live in their o.,•n homes due to inability to care for themselves. Such
individuals are in need of care and supervision and limited medical assistance.
Placements can be rade in substitute homes, institutions, or other facilities
which are licensed to provide 24-hour care and supervision.
There is an income maintenance component in that Social Workers must certify
that SSIISSP recipients need and are receiving such care in licensed
facilities in order for Social Security to pay an increased benefit payment
level. This requires coordination between the Social Security Administration,
the State Departments of Health and Benefit Payments, and the local Social
Service Department.
Social Workers assist in assessing the initial need for such care, locating
and selecting suitable facilities, preparing the individual and the facility
for admission, counseling with the individual and the family and developing
a plan for return to the home if feasible.
Adequate assessment of the need for out-of-home care involves coordination
with the client, family, providers, and medical staff, in addition to
coordination with several agencies. Such assessments are time-consuming and
must be done every six months. Eligibility for the OTIC benefit level must
be recertified annually.
The current level of provision of this service must be maintained. The
alternative is a deterioration in the physical or mental condition of the
client until placement in a Skilled Nursing Facility or medical institution
becomes necessary.
-33- W012
00042
CHILD CARE MANDATED
Funds for child day care services are provided through the State Department
of Education. Such funds may be used to enable eligible persons to seek
employment, engage in vocational training programs, maintain employment,
maintain family constellation where parents are incapacitated and where
parents neglect, abuse or have propensity to abuse or neglect their
children_
The social worker determines the need for child care services, assists the
parents as is necessary in locating child care resources and initiates
necessary docma;ents to provide the payment of child care funds. Child care
plans are reviewed as mandated by the State or as necessitated by the
family situation.
This service is an integral part of other services, such as employment-related
services and protective services for children. In the latter instance it
may be used to stabilize the home situation and reduce the need for placing
children out of their own homes.
Reduction in Ws program would mean reduction in reviews with possible over-
payment of funds. Limitation of staff then would result in less exploration
of the child's need and development of the most appropriate and sometimes less
costly resources for child care. Parents may leave some children unattended
when child care services are not readily available to them. This could lead
to other family crises and need for protective services.
-34- OOM3
HEALTH-RELATED SERVICES MANDATED
The purpose of the service under this program is to prevent health
deterioration due to lack of funds and/or resources; to help individuals
locate and receive health service; to hell) resolve problems which might
prevent utilization or over-utilization of needed health and medical services;
and to insure that the Federal Early, Pericdic, Screening, Diagnosis and
Treatment services are trade available. Health services as described relate
to physical and r„ental health and drug and alcohol abuse programs.
Social Workers provide information about health resources, refer clients to
appropriate health care providers, provide counseling around fears, misuse
and lack of understanding about health needs/problems, provide coordination
of care in multiple problem situations, assist in providing and securing
transportation when essential to receiving care and advocate or mediate in
behalf of the client in order to insure care.
A reduction in these services will mean fewer clients are served and will
lead to deterioration in the client's health.
The Federal mandate to establish the Early, Periodic, Screening, Diagnosis
and Treatment program has been implemented in California through the State's
Child Health and Disability Prevention Act of 1973.
All AFDC clients are offered such services. Upon request, services staff
arrange for services within specific time limits. A 1% fiscal penalty for
failure to implement EPSDT regulations may be imposed against the AFDC
budget, and penalty assessment has already been made against the State for
the first quarter of 1975. Contra Costa's program was seen as being in
greater compliance than other counties' in the audit report. Program
reduction could lead to penalties against Contra Costa County. In addition,
any cut in health-related services would reduce liaison and coordination
efforts with other departments which have possibly been a substantial reason
for the County's positive image in the Federal penalty report.
-35- 00(44
W._
FAMILY PLANNING MAADATED
Family Planning services are mandated by State and Federal regulation.
All Medical Family Planning services are provided by agencies contracted
by the State Department of Health.
The Social Service Department is responsible for assuring that services
are offered to all AFDC and Fedi-Cal recipients of child bearing age.
This mandate is met by the Income Maintenance system.
Social !Mork Staff are required to assess the requests for this service,
provide information and educational services, and make referrals to
appropriate resources. Persons eligible to this service are AFDC,
SSI/SSP recipients, and those persons who are defined as income eligible
in the California Annual Services Plan.
In addition, Federal regulations require that these requested services be
provided within 30 days of the request. This means that referrals to a
Social Worker from any source must be acted upon almost immediately in
order to assure that the client receive the requested service in a timely
fashion. Reductions of Information and Referral staff will decrease our
ability to meet the requirements.
Federal Law imposes a 1% penalty against AFDC funds for failure to meet
the requirements of the Federal program. There are consequences unacceptable
to the client who fails to learn about services which will enable him/her
to determine the number and timing of children in his family.
-36- W045
I11-HOIIE CARE MANDATED
In-tiome Care is the State mandated Houtemaker/Chore Services program which
provides domestic and personal services to 2675 aged, blind, and disabled
Contra Costa County residents who, because of impairment, cannot care for
themselves. Social porkers assess the individual's level of functioning
and need for housekeeping and personal care. Social Workers recruit and
contract with approximately 2100 individuals who are compensated at the
rate of $2.20 per hour. Social Workers monitor the level of care provided
and reassess the recipient's needs for service at least semi-annually.
Provider reinburser,�ent of approximately $3.9 million annually is funded from
the State's share of Title XX funds and the State General Fund.
A recent survey conducted by the State Department of Health determined that
83% of the random sample of Contra Costa County In-Home Care recipients
(projected to 2220) mould require institutionalization within three months
if provision of In-Home Care services to them were to stop. Further, they
found the general health of these In-Home Care recipients to be far better
than individuals with similar incapacities who are institutionalized.
If In-Home Care staff were cut in half, social workers would only be able to
male cursory assessments. In-Home Care recipients would be forced to find
their own service providers. Many recipients would be unable to do this.
Their needs, then, could only be met by institutions, at greater County
expense. Staff would be unable to assist these individuals in locating
out-of-home care placcarents. The In-Harte Care services provided Mould not
be monitored. The approximately 200 monthly requests mould not be processed
in a timely fashion causing increased institutionalization and great hardship
to the recipients and their families.
-37- ON46
MMM
MANDATED
F;�Pl nYlaa 1T SERV
-37-
W46
AN
EMPLOYMENT SERVICES MANDATED
State directions to County Welfare Deparbrents concerning employment
services are very unclear. Title XX is a program operated under the
jurisdiction of the State Department of Health. Recently, the WIN n
program was transferred to the State Department of Benefit Payments.
We are receiving program information from both sources. It is probable
most employment service will be provided under the WIN program for those
AFDC recipients who must register with Employment Development Department
as a condition of eligibility. The WIN program is funded by Title IV-C
money which is a closed-end appropriation under the Department of Benefit
Payments.
Until the State clarifies the role of the Department of Health in Employment
Services versus the role of Department of Benefit Payments in Employment
Services, the department is not planning to allocate any service worker
time to Title XX Employment Services. He anticipate that Title IV-C
WIN funds will provide Employment Services.
-38- 0004"1
II
EDGAR CHILDREN'S SHE=LTER
STATE MNIDATE D
COUNTY IVIUNDATED
Ed-ar Children's Shelter was established to provide humane care and supervision,
foal, clothing, shelter and medical care to children and youth who have no other
pl-ce to live. -flic reasons children require public care can be divided into
three fairly distinzt categories:
1. A crisis in a child's home (usual place of abode) resulting in abuse or
neglect or the child. Care lasts from one day to one week, on the average.
2. Expulsion fro: , or child's refusal to remain in a foster home or institution.
Care lasts from one week to three months, on the average, until another
foster care setting can be found.
S. Repeated failure to adjust to foster care, resulting in severe damage to
child's ability to relate positively to others. Care lasts from three
months to one year.
Capacity is for 2" boys and 24 girls. An average of 500 children per year are
cared for.
STAMNIG -
One (1) Institutional Supervisor III (Center Director)
Four (4) Institutional Supervisors I (Supervisors of four 40-hour shifts
during the 168-hour week)
Eighteen (18) Group Counselors 11 & III: Two (2) on each Boys' and Girls'
Sections during the two "active" shifts (7:00 a.m. - 11:00 p.m.) and one
on each section during the "graveyard" shift. Four Counselors are assigned
to segregate selected young children from adolescents on the sections and
give them individualized attention during all but the sleeping hours.
Two (2) Institutional Nurses; a 11 (Lead Nurse) and a 1, to provide
coverage from 7:00 a.m. - 11:00 p.m. ttonday through Friday only)
Two (2) Custodians plus a 24/40 Custodian.
One (1) Storekeeper (clothing supplies, laundry, etc.)
One (1) Senior Clerk, 9:00 a.m. - 4:00 p.m. , Monday through Friday.
One (1) 24140 Intermediate Typist Clerk., 4:00 - 8:00 p.m., Monday through
Thursday. 11 :0.0 a.m. - 6:00 p.r.. , Sunday.
-39- 000A
738
EdgarChildren's Shelter
Page 2
IMPACT OF STAFF REDUCTION .
Nursing staff is no:: below "bottom line." So long as we have no nursing coverage
on weakends, the health and safety of children is jeopardized and the County risks
suit for negligence. "Bottom line" staffing would be reached by elimirtating the
,our Counselors uho provide segregation and individualized attention to young
children. The result Mould be to subject these children to scapegoating and
actual physical assault by those adolescents -:ho are aggressively hostile. No
Cotu-iselors can be released from covering the Sections without risk of serious
neglect or abuse of the children and resulting suit against the County.
-40- 00049
SPECIAL CURE FOR CHILDREN III THEIR OqN HGMES 0PTIt017IA,L
No level of service mandated.
This program is designed to provide care for children in their own
ho7zes on a temporary basis when parents are absent, incapacitated, or
need help to achieve adequate household and family management.
This is a very small program, and the amount of staff time is not significant
as most child care in the family home can be provided through Child Day Care
services.
To this year, such services have been provided through Child Day Care funds
which are no longer available for this purpose. Without such services,
children may need to be placed in emergency foster homes or other temporary
placements until such time as the parent is able to provide for his own
child.
-41- O0050
i
HOME MANAGEMENT AND OTHER FUNCTIONAL EDUCATIO3 SERVICES
OPTIONAL.
This service is designed to prevent crises and deterioration among poor
families. Worker activities are directed toward enabling individuals
and family members to increase their skills in home maintenance, personal
care, child rearing and nutrition. Resolution of landlord/tenant problems
is part of this service as is the provision of money management for those
people who can't manage their own funds.
Reduction of this service would affect merchants, landlords and others who
deal with public assistance recipients and community complaints would
increase. Without these services greater reliance on County General
Assistance funds would be needed to meet emergency payment needs of persons
unable to manage their affairs. Additional burden on income maintenance
and Auditor's staff would be the result with increased cost to GA.
-42- W051
-42- ll[Illt�l
i
EDUCATIONAL AND TRAIRING SERVICES OPTIONAL
This service is provided to or on behalf of individuals for whom there
is a reasonable expectation of early employment. Vocational Services
staff assess each General Assistance employable client's education,
training, and experience in teras of employability and discusses how he
i,ight best seek employment. His efforts to seek employment is monitored
monthly. Such services mean a reduction in General Assistance employable
public assistance payments when job search efforts are closely monitored.
Eff=ectiveness of the program is directly related to the frequency of
contacts with the clients. Monthly interviews are essential to control
the program and prevent an increase in the caseload. Program reduction
could probably lead to an increase in General Assistance costs since cost
containment controls on Inca-ne Raintenance prohibit expanding Income
Maintenance controls on job search efforts.
Since this program directly affects County General Assistance payments,
it is recommended that present staff be continued under County funding and
that the program be deleted from the Title XX plan.
-43- OU052
r. SER I` TQ ALLEVIATEFA:,jILY PR LUIS
-_
SERVICES FOR CH1� NITN SPE,_L PRO�4$
OPTIONAL
00052
-43-
r'Y
SERVICES TO ALLEVIATE FAMILY PROBLE14S
SERVICES FOR CHILDREN WITH SPECIAL PROBLEMS
OPTIONAL
These services to children and families are designed to alleviate problems
but also are preventive--that is, they enable families to avoid a crisis and
reviain intact. Our Conciliation Service is included in this program.
Parents of children who are in danger of neglect or abuse are counseled
through these services. Families are enabled to use supportive resources.
For example, a volunteer to provide tutoring or big brother service might
be arranged by the social worker. These services provide for counseling
runaway youths and for helping with school problems. Counseling to parents
Who plan to separate, or have separated, is given.
Generally, these services are directed towards poor people (usually public
assistance recipients) who are unable to cope with their problems because of
lack of money, poor physical or emotional health, or lack of education.
Service staff advocate or mediate for the child and families when the child
is having problems in school, or a family member is unsuccessful in efforts
to utilize other resources_
A reduction in service levels may contribute to school drop out, increased
family break-up and public assistance applications.
-44- 00053
COMILIATION SERVICES
(Services to Alleviate or Prevent Family Problems)
OPTIONAL
Conciliation Services means the provision of marital and short-term
crisis counseling to families in conflict in order to help marriage
partners decide what action to take with respect to their marriage. The
social worker counsels parents and rMnors concerning marriage plans of
the minor, including social, economic and personal responsibilities. She
evaluates individual and family behavior and attitudes (interviews parents
and children when appropriate) around family relationships in order to
assist in resolving conflict and to recommitend to the court, as requested,
in custody and visitation natters. She refers lour income families to
public facilities and financially independent families to private
facilities for long-tern counseling when indicated. Staff also participates
in co;inunity education focused on family life.
The laws do not delineate level of service to be provided but require the
courts to see that certain services are provided to persons filing for
dissolution of marriage and for parties considering marriage where one of
the couple is under the age of eighteen. Services are therefore needed
through Social Service, Probation, or staff attached to the Superior
Courts to meet the needs of the court-referred clients.
Reduction of staffing in Conciliation would build up a backlog of court
referrals on which the court is awaiting a response. Such delay would clog
the Superior Court calendar (Domestic Relations Division) and compound the
disposition of cases.
OU054
-45-
v ,
OPTIONAL
SUSTEUXICE--WEALS 03 WHEELS
Presently, four separate teals on Wheels programs deliver hot meals to disabled,
aged, convalescing, or socially isolated Contra Costa homebound residents. Thera-
peutic diets are available and a frozen meal or cold supper can be delivered
together with the hot noon seal. Additional meals or a "weekend pack" are also
available. Meals are purchased on a sliding scale relating to income, and the price
ranges from SOY to $2.30. Purchase of meals is subsidized from funds raised by
community volunteers %.,,ho belong to Friends of Meals on Wheels and/or the Commission
on Aging (the latter groin sponsors the El Cerrito program). Meals are purchased
for del-ivery fro-, various convalescent hospitals. One half-time social e:orker and
three half-tine clerks assist programs operated by Home Health and Counseling and
the MacArthur Baptist Church. The other two programs are staffed by part-time
help from the cities of E1 Cerrito and Antioch as well as volunteers. Without
Meals on ::heels, r.ost persons would be unable to remain in their homes. Out-of-home
placenant in board and care facilities or nursing homes is more expensive to the
County and far less acceptable.
14EALS ON WHEELS PROGRAM TOTAL
AREA SERVED tlartinez-Pacheco El Cerrito Richmond Antioch
Orinda-Lafayette San Pablo
Walnut- Creek El Sobrante
(Rossroor) Pinole-
Danville-Alamo Rodeo
Pleasant Hill-
Concord
SPONSOR Home Health & City of E1 MacArthur Friends of
Counseling Cerrito Baptist heals on
Friends of deals E1 Cerrito Church Wheels
on Wheels Conmission Friends of
on Aging Meals on
Wheels
NUMBER OF
PEOPLE
SERVED PER
t ONT':1 80 7 27 27 141
NUMBER OF
MEALS SERVED
PER 1-IONTH 2600 173 659 307 3739
PAID STAFF .5 S:a III .25 Clerk .5 Typist- 1 part-time .5 SW (County)
ASSIGNED .5 Typist Clerk City of E1 Clerk City of 1.5 Clerical
.5 Acct. Clerk Cerrito (since 5/15/75) Antioch (County)
Social Svcs.
APP;:O\, 1;0.
OF VOLUi:TEEPS 150 8 30 30 218
0()0&5-46-
"own
REEIAL SERVICES FOR THE BLI[
OPTIONAL
ThThese servicesare available to the Blind who arA
i.hflca 1I1 i-
a ..
M' jvinn ��T ���n
27 1 Rl
7 27
SERVED PER $0
t:0`iTlI
t:llt•IBER OF 659
307 3739
HEALS SERL'ED 173 .5 SW (County)
PER i-014TH 2600 Typist- 1 part-time
.25 Clerk .5 City of 1.5 Clerical
.5 S;a III city of El Clerk Antioch {County)
PAID STAFF `5 'Typist
since 5/15/75)
ASSIGTIED �stClerk `Cerrito
., Acct.
Social Svcs. 2l8
303O
1,0. 8
J'TEERS 150
OF VOLU
-46-
..: ,«;,air�, •a.
SPECIAL SERVICES FOR THE BLIND OPTIOifAL
These services are available to the Blind who are receiving SSI/SSP
or whose incase is within certain limits_
The purpose of this service is to provide help to the blind in securing
needed radical , psychological and psychiatric services from the community.
Social Norkers provide counseling and training toward self-care, mobility,
personal care, home management and community skills.
Socia; .•arkers hake referrals to resources within the community which can
help clients secure appliances, special aids, talking book machines, etc.,
which aid the client to become more self-sufficient.
Social Workers offer counseling toward adjustment to the onset of blindness
in order to reduce behavioral or attitudinal problems and help the client
accept the disability.
The primary benefit of this service is to prevent institutionalization and
its attendant higher cost.
-----------------
-47- 00056
SERVICES FOR DISABLED INDIVIDUALS OPTIOPI;L
This optional program is available to mentally or developmentally disabled
AFDC or SSI/SSP recipients, and to others in the community whose income
is within certain limits.
The primary focus is on assisting individuals to participate in the sheltered
workshops operated by CCC Association for the mentally Retarded. Social
Workers coordinate with the three workshops in certifying eligibility for
the service and in providing ongoing casework services to complement the
activities of the workshops. Workshop emphasis is on training in mobility,
personal care, home managetrent, and co�r,i�.�unity skills. Training in developing
employment skills within the capabilities of the individuals is emphasized.
Social :dorkers assist in securing necessary medical, psychological and
psychiatric services and assist persons to receive appropriate treatment.
Referrals are made to cammunity resources when available.
Primary goal of the service is to reduce dependency and develop self-
sufficiency and avoid institutionalization. Without such workshop services,
emotionally disturbed individuals may develop behavior problems which their
families cannot tolerate and expensive institutional placement may result.
Costs for care of retarded individuals will increase when resources to learn
self-care and/or sane self-support skills become unavailable. However,
there may be some potentiality of having these services funded through the
State's Regional Center program or through Short-Doyle funds if they were
so allocated.
OU05
_48_ P
i
VOLUNTEER PROGRAM
SUPPORT ACTIVITY
1
00057
-48-
VOLU3TEER PROGRAM
SUPPORT ACTIVITY
Though Volunteerism is not in itself a program, Volunteer Services are
required by State Law and proposed Title XX regulations.
The County utilizes two Social Workers as coordinators of volunteers.
Tliey recruit and train volunteers to assist in a variety of programs,
such as providing Big Brother or Big Sister services to children, tutoring
students, providing transportation for persons who need it to reach
medical appointments, reading to blind persons, providing special programs
to children in the Shelter and taking them on occasional outings, friendly
visiting to the elderly, recruiting volunteers for the Food Pantry, etc.
Such volunteer services eventually lead to reduction in the need for other
social services and can alleviate medical problems which would worsen if
the client could not get to treatment. Additionally, Big Brother and Big
Sister programs affect child behavior and give him a more positive attitude
about himself and his community_
Individuals and families who do not receive a little bit of service now may
subsequently end up in a crisis situation which becomes more expensive for
the community at a later date. Many of the services provided are
"preventative" in nature.
-49- 00058
LICENSING OPTIMMAL
Social Worker staff licenses family homes where non-medical care and
supervision is provided as follows: 1) foster homes providing 24-hour
care for up to 12 children; 2) day care homes providing part-time care
for up to 10 children; 3) residential care homes providing 24-hour care
for up to 15 adults. The majority of homes we license provide care for
six or fewer persons.
Health and safety standards for homes when such care is provided, as well
as standards for care and services which ensure needs of resident5'are met,
are set by State law and regulations. Licensing workers are responsible
for ensuring those standards are met before a license is issued, and that
they continue to be met. following licensure. This is done through initial
and periodic home visits, interviews and collateral contacts, and obtaining
required clearances (fire safety, criminal record, medical , etc.). In
addition, licensing staff responds to public inquiries about licensed homes,
investigates complaints, and follows up on unlicensed homes which continue
to provide care (i.e., investigation and referral to D.A.). Currently, staff
also recruits new homes and provides training and consultation to licensees
for the purpose of upgrading the quality of care they provide.
The Foster Care licensing program primarily meets the department's needs for
homes in which to place dependent children, for whom are are legally
responsible. Program reduction would lead to elimination of recruitment
and development activities with a resulting lack of suitable homes for children
` needing placement_ Such childrer. inappropriately would be retained at
Edgar Shelter. Additionally, specialized foster homes could not be developed
to meet needs of children with special problems.
The Day Care program primarily provides homes for employed parents in the
community, but also provides some homes for welfare recipients who are
employed. Returning this program to the State will mean fewer homes available
due to severe staffing problems in the State Department of Stealth Licensing
Section, but this would have minimal impact on services to welfare recipients.
Applications could not be processed within the legal time limits; recruitment
and development activities Mould be terminated. The number of unlicensed
homes would probably increase.
The Adult Residential Haeme licensing program provides homes for financially
independent individuals as well as persons receiving SSI/SSP grants. Loss
of this licensing program would severely affect availability of resources for
aged, blind and disabled adults who frequently need protective services.
Additionally, SSI/SSP recipients in out-of-home placement would lose funds
if the department is unable to certify that the individual is placed in
a licensed hone.
00U59
APPendix L
i
h'J T ri L XX ITPID D SERVICE PROGRAMS
ThS'Uuril:aut our c) c te:ttdt20i7 be h",ve ded Zt ort,y with PrVi�-� .,rnrj�nr nn -i t inrt•-
ilUute? _.,Jiu P,uLwA, I$•
ro ram provides homes for financially
The Adult Residential Nom licensing F 9 p
independent individuals as would sevl as erelynaffectjavailability ofaresources sfor
of this licensing program wo
d blind and disabled adults who frequently need protecfpuld lose funds
aged,,
Additionally, SSI/SSP recipients in out-of-home placemen
ify that the individual is placed in
if the department is unable to cert
a licensed home.
00059
-so-
Appendix L
NOM TITLE xE F YDED SERVICE PROGRAMS
Throughout our presentation we have dealt only with service worker positions
funded through Title .11 _ There are some 48 additional positions funded from
-other sources- In addition., the staff working at the Edgar Children's
Shelter have not beas included in the computations. The 48 :taff, the pro-
grams to which they are assigned, and the source of fundiny are shown A'
below.
Program/Service Source of Funding Workers
Step-Parent Adoptions County 2
Adoptions Department of Health 8
State Dept. of Benefit Payments 12
Food Coalition 1/2 Project; 1/2 County 1
Child Day Care
Development Program Department of Education 2
CETA 1'.anpaller 8
Staff Loaned to Pil? County Medical Department 10
Staff Assigned to AAA Area Agency on Aging 3
Alca:lolis:a Progra.: CounL.
ty f.ea_►th Depart=--nt 2
TOTAL 48
-51- 0"o
Appendix M
RECO.MEMAT IONS MADE BY DIRECTOR, HUMAN RESOURCES AGENCY
TO RESOLVE SOCIAL SERVICE DEPARTHEUT FUNDING PROBLEMS
1. The Board of Supervisors should commit the County to providing
$2,991 ,000 in County funds as the County share for Title XX
funds in the 1976-1977 fiscal year budget.
2. The Board of Supervisors should anticipate that efforts to increase
the allocation will be successful and direct that plans be drawn
up anticipating an allocation at the 1975-1976 funding level of
$5,327,000.
3. The Board of Supervisors should agree to make available $555,000
in County money to fund the Conservatorship program and the
workshops for the mentally retarded for the 1976-1977 fiscal year
and direct that plans be made to fund these programs with Short-Doyle
money not later than the 1977-1978 fiscal year.
4. The Board of Supervisors should agree to discontinue use of
facilities at 28 Columbia Circle, Pittsburg and 247 Rodeo Avenue,
Rodeo.
5. The Board of Supervisors should direct that plans be made to lay off
or otherwise eliminate the salaries of 155 Social Service Department
employees.
6. The Board of Supervisors may wish to provide for public input regarding
County funding and what programs should be reduced or eliminated after
May 31, 1976 in order to bring program responsibilities in line
with available staffing.
�y
00061
-52-
-52-
low
IN THS BOARD OF StUPERVISORS
OF
CONTRA COSTA COUTITY, STATE OF CALIFORNIA
In the Matter of )
Housing Rehabilitation )
Assistance Component of ) Monday, April 12, 1976
the First Year Community )
Development Program. )
The 1975 Government Operations Committee (Supervisors
A. M. Dias and J. E. Moriarty) on December 16, 1975 having
reported that it had completed its study of the policy recom-
mendations of the Contra Costa County Community Development
Advisory Council with respect to the proposed Housing Rehabil-
itation Program for the year 1975-1976, and having recommended
that the County Administrator report on the policy implications
and procedural aspects of implementing the proposal in two
target areas (recommended by the Community Development Advisory
Council in a later communication) located in Horth Richmond and
West Pittsburg; and
The County Administrator on March 23, 1976 having trans-
mitted a report from Mr. A. A. Dehaesus, Director of Planning,
furnishing background information and recommending proposed
policies to implement the Community Development Housing Rehabil-
itation Program; and the Board having fixed this tima for public
hearing thereon; and
Mr. Heinz Fenichel, Assistant Director of Planning,
havi co=nenttad on the differences between the recommendations
of the Planning staff and those of the CommiLnity Development
Advisory Council; and
Mrs. Elizabeth Schrank, Chairperson, dousing Subco!mni5tee,
Community Development Advisory Council, having proposed certain
changes in -ho Housing Rehabilitation Granto Program submitted to
the Board October 14, 1975; and
Tha following persons having appaared and commented with
raspect to the aforesaid program:
Vs. Juanita F. Bar flet, 436 West 10th Street,
Pittsburg, California, representing several Senior
Citizens from West Pittsburg;
Ids. Charlotte Flynn, 3175 Cafeto Drive,
Walnut Creek, California, representing Diablo
Valley League of Women Voters;
Air. Frank Navarro, 2460 Ranchito, Concord,
California, spokssm%-i for the Prasident, California
Physical Handicap Association; and
Msanbers of the Board having discussed tha various
proposals and comments, !T IS BY THS BOARD ORDERED that the
hearing is closed and tha aforasaid matter is RE".?EFLRZD to the
Government Operations Committee (Supervisor:. A. M. Dias and
E. A. Linschaid) for report April 27, 1976.
PASSSD by the Board on April 12, 1976_
cc: Board Committee
Piannin Director CE[cT[CiED COPY
Community Development I certify that flus rs a Cuff, trite &- correct copy or ,
Advisory Council the ariginai dncu:ne:st trWeh is na rile in my office,
aad t':at it .raj ms-ej r ad"i+ted by th? B,=-j of
Actin Funding Tn2pector SuptrrS.r)tt af con-r.t ro>t. r
Diractor, Scone=!: GPpart•l-qz� .J h%.=•: r :� cr�sUs, c-.., .�
'n - , - -
, y _ LU u . .lua 1j—%.,u wila 411113 Lor public
hearing thereon; and
r..r. Heinz Fenichel, Assistant Director of Planning,
havi coiilnentad on the differences between the recomatendations
of the Planning staff and those of the Community Development
Advisors Council; and
Mrs. Elizabeth Schrank, Chairperson, housing Subco:wat—otee,
Community Development Advisory Council, having proposed certain
changes in :h-- Housing Rehabilitation Granto Program submitted to
the Board October 14, 1975; and
The following persons having appaared and commented with
raspect to the aforesaid program:
Ms. Jut ni is K. Bar flet, 436 :•fest 10th Street,
Pittsburg, California, representing several Senior
Citizens from Hest Pittsburg;
Ids. Charlotte Flynn, 3175 Cafeto Drive,
Walnut Creek, California, representing Diablo
Valley League of Women Voters;
AIr. Frank Havarro, 2460 Ranchito, Concord,
California, spokesman for the Prasident, California
Physical handicap Association; and
M-tubers of the Board having discussed tha various
proposals and co*mviants, IT IS BY 'TIE BOARD ORDERS that the
hearing is closed and tha aforesaid clatter is RE,79ELRED to the
Government Operations Commi ttae (Supervisor:. A. M. Dias and
E. A. Linscheid) for report April 27, 1976.
PASSM by the Board on April 12, 1976.
cc: Board Com-nittee
Planning Director CERT[CIED COPY
Community Development I certify that this Is n full. trite & correct copy or ,
Advisory Council the nriginah dncu:nPat trl►Ich is on rile In rue ocftce
a tl that it wi" ad7rird by th? D-=d of
Acting Fuil ding Tn2pector Cwi-r.' (,a.:. 4�rw rp !•: j
Dlr3CtOr, ..CO:]C^I� �iJPJ:"�:'.L^��� r �;.rn .;r,i hii :`: is f:f�S &Jt .x. o�
.;j s.UV Caunry
c%-rick r:o.':•:io CI�sr::of said cosrll of sLoervl:sora,
Program b7 Depurs Clerk-
Director, Filtdlan Rasources
Agency
County Administrator 2 ,
a
._...•0.x .
j Y
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
CO A �'
PLANNING DEPARTMENT $.- %� �►
7- a
DATE: Allri I 9, 1976
TO: Board of SuPe"hors �'• `6�
Anthony A. Ilehaesus SUBJECT: f tIbl i c lienring on lie xllfi
FROM:
Reluhhilitation Assistance,
• Director of Plsnnin' April 12, 1976
I
r t+ hl i r ii •irinr
P-Lanning Director
Community Developriant CERT1GI8D COPY
Advisory Council I certirir that tint I, a reit, true
the orfianat docu:nont trb;ch °'�" correct roDY of
Actin i l T aad that It ,raj is on rtI" In ray office,
u'_dingy nsusctor �� � r_- Dd7poed
Dirac`,or, 3concfi; ��3�rt',ttl �.. '�`r*fF S�!�Contra Co.•... t� fy�3t rR3
Proaram �✓ ., hi.ii: iG Cr.SSOX. ccunty
, C..ri►4 e'er p_, ,t0 Clem or 31ftIrtL OL$L•j)�ryIyOCD.
Director, Human Resources by Drputp Clel�
r
Agency
County Administrator as
2
n •.-� ,r=a,.,., a�u .„.c. ... ..
�r
i;
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
�p l
TO: Board of Supervisors DATE: April 9, 1976 0 d'
FROM• Anthony A. Dehaesus SUBJECT: Public Rearing on 110 ing
Director of Plannin' . I Rehabilitation Assistance,
April 12, 1976
1. Purpose of Public Rearing.
On the night of April 12 the Board kill-hold a-pu5lic-hearing to obtain
comments and recommendations from the citizens of the County regarding
policies for implementation of the dousing Rehabilitation Assistance
component of the First Year Community Development Program. A total of
$150,000 was set aside from the Federal block grants for this purpose,
to be utilized in certain areas of the Korth Richmond and West Pittsburg
neighborhoods.
2. Suggested Order of Hearing.
We propose that the following general sequence of presentations be followed:
a. Staff presentation on purpose of program and need for the same.
b. Presentation of Chairperson of Housing Sub-committee of CD Advisory
Council to explain recommendation of October 14, 1975 (additional
copy attached) .
c. Staff discussion of modifications which might be considered by the
Board (additional copy attached) .
d. Presentations by the general public.
3. Staff Recommendation.
In view of the need to reconcile the recommendations made by the Citizen
Advisory Council , the general public and staff, it is recommended that the
Board close the public hearing, and refer the matter to the Government Opera-
tions Committee with a request that the Committee report a recommendation to
the Board on April 27, 1976.
d. background of Recon-tendations.
The First Year Community- Development Program, approved by the Board on April 8,
1975, contained an activity consisting of a Rousing Rehabilitation and Code
Enforcement Prorratn. This program was to be applied initially- to the Korth
Richmond and best Pittsburg neighborhoods, and $150,000 of block grant funds
were to he set aside for this purpose. Policies and procedures for this pro-
gram were to be developed subsequently. Wig
ee: ....�.�.� 3
Ahicrofilmed with bacud order
e�• �' ,.„ ,,6,, Miaotilmed with boord order
Board of Supervisors -2- April 9, 1976
Later in the year the CD Advisory Council established a Housing Sub-committee
which developed a recommendation for policies and administration. This recom-
mendation, dated October 10, 1975, was presented to the Board on October 14,
1975. An additional copy of Advisory Council recommendations is attached. At
that time this recommendation was referred to the Government Operations Committee
and in December to the County Administrator.
In view of the importance of this program, additional technical information was
obtained in January and February of this year. An ad hoc Task Force was -convened
by the Planning Department to discuss the experience of similar programs in other
communities, to review the desires and reactions of representatives of the cities
in the county slated to undertake similar programs next year to assure compati-
bility with future programs, and to suggest modifications in the Citizen Advisory
Council recommendations if necessary. A summary listing of criteria of 12 rehab-
ilitation assistance programs is attached_ �.
As an outgrowth of the work of this Task Force, the Planning Department submitted
a report for the Board to the County Administrator on March 9. This report was
based upon the citizens recommendations, but was a substantially modified version
in criteria and policy structure as well as wording. Attached are additional
copies of both an overall staff information report on components of a broad
Neighborhood Conservation Program to ensure compatibility of the first year
effort with future programs, and a staff recommendation for a first year program.
S. Maior Differences between Staff and Advisory Council Recommendations.
a. General Thrust.
Both the Advisory Council and staff agree on the need for the program, and
the need for it to be a voluntary program. Both agree that community support
should be enlisted before any individuals are contacted, through community
meetings in the Target Areas.
The Advisory Council recommends grants, never to be repaid. Staff recom-
mends 0% interest loans, to be repaid to the county when the structure is
sold or at the end of 20 years (the earlier of the two) . In this latter
proposal only a token payment would be made on the principal ($5.00 per month
or quarter) or none at all.
It has been pointed out that some residents feel that a previous commitment
to grants exist (due to wording of the approved application, and that any
change now would be "the breaking of a promise") . If this is a valid concern,
the first year could proceed with grants instead of 0% loans, shifting to the
loans in the second year.
b. Criteria.
i. The Advisory Council recommends that assistance be provided for owners
of single-farA ly residences, and owner-occupants of two-family resi-
dentes.
Staff recommends that in addition assistance be also available to
owner-occupants of 3 and 4 family residences (as long as all other
eligibility requirements are met) .
00064
4" A:,T, ._�. _x• -''�. ,�,✓^�`y--yP�'�'x.§�x a ::.... r.c .,..,. . .... .. .:. .. _ _ ._._
r
Board of Supervisors -3- April 9, 1976
ii- The Advisory Council recommends an income limit schedule which
is very complex and to be fixed in the policy document. As it
stands, it is intPndpri to hp thn anni•rni nt nF th r-
It has been pointed out that some residents feel that a previous commitment
to grants exist (due to wording of the approved application, and that any '
change now would be "the breaking of a promise") . If this is a valid concern,
the first year could proceed with grants instead of 01i loans, shifting to the
loans in the second year.
b. Criteria.
i. The Advisory Council recommends that assistance be provided for owners
of single-family residences, and owner-occupants of two-family resi-
dences.
Staff reco=ends that in addition assistance be also available to
owner-occupants of 3 and 4 family residences (as long as all other
eligibility requirements are met) .
00
.....................
....... ......
Board of Supervisors -3- April 9, 1976
ii. The Advisory Council recommends an income limit schedule which
is very complex and to be fixed in the policy document. As it
stands, it is intended to be the equivalent of the Section 8,
rent-subsidy program of the Housing Authority of the County.
Staff wishes to utilize the Section 8 schedule by reference,
since it is revised by HUD periodically to take care of inflation.
Incorporation by reference rather than detailing would eliminate
conflicts, time lags, and the need for constant revision of the
policy document.
iii. The Advisory Council lists certain specific items on which
assistance funds may be spent, and others on which it may not
be spent.
Staff recommends a different listing, less detailed, based on the
recommendations of the Task Force. This listing also provides for
a priority of expenditures in case the assistance is not adequate
to eliminate all deficiencies.
It also permits some unspecified repairs needed, since no lists can
be all-inclusive, provided they are within the assistance limits.
iv. The Advisory Council provides for maximum of $4,500 per parcel.
Staff recommends up to $4,500 for a single-family residence, with
an additional $1,500 for the additional units to be rehabilitated.
v. 'Me Advisory Council recommends mandatory participation in the
counseling program.
Staff does not believe this would be acceptable, and would not
make participation mandatory.
vi. The Advisory Council would set up an Appeals Committee of a member
of the Advisory Council, three citizens appointed by the Board, and
staff members of the Building Inspection and Social Services Depart-
ments, to rule on appeals.
Staff would not institute a special review procedure, but would
anticipate administrative matters to follow the usual departmental
procedures, with infrequent appeals to come to the Board (where they
would end up in any case) . Staff feels it to be improper that
Advisory Council members be in a "judge and jury" role, allocating
CD funds to the program and participating in running the program at
tile same time.
vii. The Advisory Board anticipates that the Building Inspection staff
will rule oil assistance cases.
Staff recommends that the Building Inspection staff only prepare
the materials and package the assistance application and investiga-
tions, with a Loan Panel of financial experts and a representative
of the Administrator's Office to make the ruling (thus removing it
One step from the staff involved in the case).
AAD:dh
- ---------
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
Community Developmeat
Housing Rehabilitation Grant Prograa
Year 1975 — 1976
The following outline sets forth policies and procedure; with
respect to "Community Development Grants" for residential rehabilitation, as
authorized by Section 103, Title 1 of the Housing Act of 1974. Under the
direction of the Housing Improvement Coordinator, "Rehabilitation Grants," may
be authorized fcr rehabilitation of dwelling unit structures in a designated
area :sere the owner voluntarily participates in the Hous%Z Code Enforcement
Program.
OBjECTI YE
The aricary objective of the voluntary Housing Code Enforcement
Program is to a gist in the development of viable communitiez by providing
decent housing and a suitable living environment in the community — principally
for persons of low and moderate income, and consistent with provicions of
Federal Assistaace provided in the Community Development Act.
SPECIFIC OBJECTIVES
1. The elimination of slums, blight and the prevention of blighting
influences causing the deterioration of property and neighborhood.
2. We elimination of conditions which are detrimental to health,
safety and pubjic wel;'ure, b; re:e►bilitation, demalition, or removal.
1of17
00066
I
i
3. The review of residential structures of owners participating in
SoECI?IC OBJEXTIy S
1. The elimination of slums, blight and the prevention of blighting
influences causing, the deterioration of property and neighborhood.
2. =ne elimination of conditions which are detrimental to health,
safet.. and Public welfare, by rehabilitation, dexalition, or removal.
1 of 17
00066
I
I
3. The review of residential strueture3 of owners participating in
the vuuntary Housing Code enforcement Program for need of rehabilitation.
PRWRUI POLICIES
PJRPOSE POR %riICH RE-E T-LBILIT TION GRANT WAY BE USED
1. To make repairs and improvements necessary to the structure in a
project area in order to conform to the code standards for safe, decent, and
sanitary housing as specifically required by codes and ordinances.
2. For the rehabilitation of facilities connected to the structure,
including such items as steps to the front door and walkways, excluding side-
calks parallel to the curb.
3. For the removal of unrepairable secondary buildings, structures
and conditions on the same property that cause a blighting influence on the
neighborhood.
4. For lot gradinS when cost would be less than rater-proofing the
foundation.
3. For correction of incipient deficiencies necessary for a structure
to be brought to and readily maintained at the code standards.
6. The total expenditure per land parcel may not exceed $4,500.00.
PURPOSE mil WHICH GFANTS SHALL Nor BE USED
1. For structures outside the project area.
2. :or new construction.
3. or subztan ia? recon,tructioa,in excess of 50,S of the structure's
value.
2of17
00LM
- I
4. ?or expansion of the size of a structure.
war completing basement, attic or similar space unless it is
necessary to provide required living and bedroom area based upon family
composition. When completed, the area shall be in compliance with the Housing
Codes.
o. For materials, fixtures and equipment of a type or quality which
exceeds that customarily used in the locality in properties of the same general
type.
EICIbILIVI FOR GRANT
To be eligible for a "Community Development Residential Rehabilitation
Grant
1. The applicant for rehabilitation of a single family residential
unit shall be the owner of record prior to application.
2. The applicant for rehabilitation of a two-family residential unit
shall be an occupant and owner of record prior to application.
3. The applicant's maximum adjusted gross annual income shall be
based upon family composition. The -narimum adjusted gross annual income shall
not exceed 65;a 'based on a family of four) of the median income for the area as
determined by the Department of "rousing and urban Developmeaz.
Deduct $750.00 per dependent for families with less than four (4)
dependents and add X750.00 per dependent for families in excess of four (4)
dependents.
family
The adjuited/grosz annual incowe shall be as folloaz:
3of17
00 068
t.+ c
Adjusted Adjusted
Family Size Gross Inco=e Family Size Gross Income
1 S 4,843.00 5 S 71848.00
2 51598.00 6 2,595.00
3 6,348.00 7 9,343.00
4 7,093.00 s 10,098.00
(a) The applicant's annual gross income shall be adjusted in
accordance with the .instructions and appendix for completing
application fora #1-75.76.
(b) In addition to unusual medical expenses, other similar unusual
expenses may be considered in determining the adjusted gross income.
4. The applicant for structures in 1 or 2 above for which a re-
habilitation grant is requested:
(a) The structure scall be within a voluntary code enforcement
project area.
(b) The structure shall be a unit in need of rehabilitation in
order to remove Housing Code deficiencies.
5. she applicant must agree to conform to the minimum rehabilita-
tion standards, should his request for grant be approved.
5. The applicant must agree to use the property in conformance
with the Federal Iron-discrimination Regulations.
7. Applicant shah agree and participate in the Office of Economic
Opportunity home maintenance counseling- progran. In cases of rental property,
the tenant shs.11 also narticinate in the hose maintenance counseling oroo=.
APP1,11CAT10:1 PROCESSING
1. Appl.caat shall use application fora prorided by the Contra
Costa Building Inspection repa_rt.aent. (the L. P. A.)
4of17
00069
smog
2
Grants will be issued based upon the following order or Priority;
(a) Me structure with `the greater degree of Health and Safety
deficiencies and still wit'r,.in the per cent limits of repair.
with the Federal Iron-discrimination R�-,V'_atiO"-
7. Applicant shall agree and participate in the Office of Economic
r
Opportunity home =ain:.enance counseling Program- In caves of rental property,
the tenant shalt also pa:ticinate in the home maintenance cou=eling prop"—
Ap? ,! ATIO I PROCESSI"El
s:,aL use applica:ion for^.:, pro aided by the Contra
I („
Costa 13uildiug -";.lnspe�t:oa .en3ment. ;he L. F. n.)
4 of 17
00069
-W NTPRFWWR"
2. Grants will be issued based upon the following order or priority:
(a) The structure with the greater degree of Health and Safety
deficiencies and still within the per cent limits of repair.
(b) Income; the lowest adjusted income.
(c) Overcrowding; ashen structure design will allow for alteration
to increase available space.
3. In the event of two or more eligible applicants requiring
identical priority, the date and time sequence of applications shall govern
selection, with the applicant nolo filed the earliest being issued a grant first.
4- Applicants eligible for grants when available ftinds are ex-
hausted, shall be required to submit a new application, provided that funds
are again made available for the project area.
5. Applicants of inelioi.ble applications or appeals shall be notified,
in writing. ^he notice may be delivered in person or mailed by certified mail
to the address given on the application. Undeliverable notices may be sailed
in the name of the applicant to the Clerk of the Governing Board.
APPakLS
An applicant aggrieved by an ineligible application may, vrithin ten
(10) calendar days following receipt of notification of the adverse administra-
tive decision, file an appeal in uniting with the Appeals Cottee.
The Appeals Co=ittee shall set a time and place for a hearing. The
hearing date shall not be less than ten (10) or more than thirty (30) days
following receipt of the petition.
The appellai.t ma;.° within ten (10) days folloaing receipt of notification
of an adve_se decision o the Appeals Coaittee, file an appcal :•zth the Board of
Supervisora l ro v ided for in Count,;; Ordinance Code Chapter 14-4.
5 of 17
00- 070
00070
im - W
Failure of the applicant to receive such duly railed notice of
Administrative or Appeals Co=ittee Action shall noti affect in any manner
the validity of any proceeding taken hereunder.
APPEALS COFQIRTFE
There shall be established an Appeals Committee whose purpose shall
be to insure adherence to the intent of this program in its proceedings.
The Appeals Committee shall be composed of five members from
the following:
One from the Co—unity Development Council appointed by the
Chairman;
Three citizens-at-large appointed by the Board, one of which shall
be a person of low income;
One from the Social Service Department appointed by the Social
Service Department Head;
One person from the Building Inspection Department appointed by
Ube Department Head to attend meetings in an advisory capacity.
6 of l7
00071
V
I�eS^_.tuC'=iG:iS FGR CU-TL"'L'G FORM #1-75.76
APPLICATION FOR ELIGIBILITY u011
?.RROILIiATION GRMIT
I. GM^...RAL II.SIRUCTIONS:
A. Rehabilitation Aoolication:
1. Form kl-;x.76 shall be used for all applicatioaa to determine eligibility
besed upon annual income, family composition and other criteria as out-
lined in these instructions and policies for carrying out the program.
2. The housing omaer (or his authorized managing agent, if any) is respon-
sible for preparing Form 01-75.76 and subaitting it to the appropriate -
L.P.A. Office in support of his request for Housing Rehabilitatioa
grunt. The o.=ier is responsible for supplying all necessary information
and documentation for verification of the application.
j. The copies shall ba distributed as fo?lowrs:
a. Private orner - one (1) copy.
b. L.?.A. Office - original (rrl copy)_
B. xi--till?
The for-- ;=1-75.76 shall be checked for co_zoletion of information by the
L.P.A. for each applicant for a Grant Request and for agreements of partici-
pation and proper%-, use. The L.P.A. is responsible for verifying the appli-
cant's statements as necessary and retaining the fora and documentation of
the verification in its files for WD audit or inspection.
II. I:tiSTFUCTIC?:IS, PART I:
A. Proiect Ide_itif ication:
3hiter the I.D. of the project as determined by the L.P.A. and address of
the L.P.A. office sv::ere applications are taken.
B. Applicant:
%-iter the na_ne of the property osrler who s=ill sign_ an. agreements and the
n=e of teh::e:t (if aad the a.d rers ;.,here the apn_icant receives mil.
7 of 17
00072
1
C. Family Composition:
List each member of the applicant's family who lives in�his dwelling.
List the family head on line 1 and the spout e, if any, on line 2. The
head and,/or spouse should be included even if temporarily absent from
-the household (such as being on active duty in the Armed Forced).
Clearly indicate full-tine student, by writing (student) in parenthesis.
D. Income:
1. .List each member of the family, other than minors, who will receive
income during the next twelve months. "Uirors" means a member of
the household (excluding foster children), other than the family
head or spouse, who is under 18 years of age or is a full-time
student. Include tae income of the head or spouse even if temporarily
absent. If a single family member has more than one source of income,
use a separate line for each source. (See Appendix 1.)
2. in Columns (2), shorn the type of income, (rate - hourly, weekly, or
monthly) and the addreas of the firm or agency through which it can be
verified. Column (3) should show the current income received by each
member of the family. Regardless of whether or not current income
can be expected to continue, it should be shown on an annual basis to
provide a basis for cokpa_-ison with anticipated income shorn in Column
(4). Colum (4) should show the income anticipate' over the next
twelve =onths which may or ray not be the same as current income. Any
nificant difference between the amounts shave in Columns (3) andsiM should: be explained in a statement to be attached to and retained
with the owner's copy of the fora. I_' it is not feasible to anticipate
a level of income over a 12-month period, a shorter period may be used.
E. Assets:
List all assets held by each member of the fa.:i.ly. For this purpose assets
Beans the v;O ue of equity in real property, sariags, stocks, bonds, and
other forms of capital investment. The value of necessary items of personal
property such as furniture and automobiles shall be excluded. Any income
producing assets will already have been listed in D. above but they Bust
also be listed in this section.
F. Allowances:
1. In Colu-n (1) enter the family member number from Section C to indicate
on whose behalf each allowance is made. In Col=mn (2) enter the type
8of17
000'73
777-
.f
} Y
t
of exuenditure and the source Lhrough which it can be verified. In
columns (3) and (4) enter the amount of expenditure anticipated over the
next zwelve months.
2. Medical expenses are those medical expenses which are anticipated during
the 12-:month period for which the Annual Income is computed, and which
are noz covered by insurance (however, premiums for such insurance may
be included as medical expenses).
j. - nusu:l expenses are amounts paid by the family for the care of minors
under 13 years of age or for the care of disabled or handicapped family
household members, but only where such care is necessary to enable a
lemily mexber to be gainfully employed and the amount allowable as
Unusual Exoenses shall not exceed the amount of income from such emvloy-
ment.
Line 1 Enter the total o: the entries in Column 3.
Line 2 From the amount shown in line 1, deduct an
amount equal to Y% of Annual Income. Enter
the result on Line 2. If the result is 0 or
less, enter 0.
Line 3 Enter the total of the entries in Colum 4.
Line 4 multiply the number of minors by E300.
Line 5 Total of lines 2,3, and 4.
The applicant shall sign Part 1 in the space indicated after it has been
completed.
III. INSTRUCTICi.S. NLRT II:
The numbering for the ?a_rt Ii instructions correspond to those on the corm.
A. Project Identification:
1. Assessor's Parcel go. Book Block Lot Pc C.T.
2. Project Number:
Street 11dd CJs --nd Co==rm by.
5of17
00074
x
3. Original Application or pee c= nation:
Indicate whether this application applies to an original application
or a reexamination.
B. _Applicant:
4. 2 inori,; Group CatexoM
The minority group with. which the family identifies itself. If the
family does not identify itself, it shall be counted in the group
which would most likely reflect the opinion of the head of the house-
hold (o= the answer that would most likely have been given by the head
of the household). The categories are self-explanatory except, possi-
bly, for Spanish American, Oriental, and Other Uinorities:
a. Snanish American:
Includes E:exican, Cuban, Latin American, Puerto Hi.caa, and other
Spanish or Iberia—. They include Spanish-speaking families and
those with Spanish sunwnes schen self-identified as such. Do not
include these in the +kite Column.
b. Oriental:
Includes .?apanese, Korean, Chinese and Pilipino.
c. Other Minorities:
Includes Aleut, m , Hawaiian, Part Hawaiian, Polynesian,
Nlicronesi.an and others not elsewhere categorized.
This info=ation is required for statistical purpoces so the
Depar=en nay deter=i.ne the degree to which its programs are
utilized by minority families. The General Counsel of BUD has
ruled that the regulation issued oa behal- of the Secretary
requiring collection of racial and ethnic data has tris force and
effect of la=, and :.saes precedence over any conflicting State
or local requirements.
5. Present Housing: (To be filled out by the I.P.A.)
a. Enter Code 1 if for any rer_sca it is impossible to azeertain
the condition of applicant's present housing.
10 of 17
00075
-,.. ,... :. W
b. :liter Code 2 if the family has no residence 'where it regularly
lives together as a family or if the family is under a notice of
termination, foreclosure, eviction.
c. Enter Code 5 if the family's present housing is deficient in any
one or more of the following respects.
(1) Dwelling structually unsafe.
(2) No potable ^inning water is dwelling unit.
(3) No useable flush toilet in dwelling unit.
(4) Uo installed useable tub or sho-wer in dwelling unit.
(5) No operating sink or proper stove connections in kitchen.
(6) Inadequate or no electric wising system in dwelling unit.
(7) Inadequate or unsafe heating facilities for dwelling unit.
(8) Overcrowded_ Llore tf= 2 persons per bedroom.
(9) Single family trait occupied by 2 or more families.
Z. F--.ter Code 4 if the family is presently living in standard housing.
6. Present Hcusin; Costs:
Enter present housing costs on a monthly basis includes utilities.
7.
C. Family Status:
8. Scecial Characteristics — Check as Many Boxes as Applicable:
a. Check elderly if either the head or spouse is sixty—two years
of tide or older.
b. Check disabled if either the head or spouse has a disability
u:.ich prevents -hi-- or her from ening in any substantial
gairi ul activity by reason of any medically determinable physical
or :Feng- impairment which can be expected to result in death or
rdii-�:h has lasted or .&ich can be expected to last for a Contin—
uous period of not less than 12 months including a disabili t;j
a:.tributable to mental retardation.
c. Cheri. EzL%dicapped if the head or spouse has an imoai-naer t which
II of 17
00076
(a) is expected to be of long-continued and indefinite duration;
(b) substantially impedes his ability to live independently; and
(c) is of such a mature that such ability could be improved by
more suitable housing conditions.
d. Check none if none of the above apply.
9. Nwaber in -amity:
Should equal the total number of lines filled in Part 1, Section C.
10. Number of tiinors:
Should count the total number of minors shown in Part 19 Section C.
U. Number of Bedrooms:
In preparing; the application for family participation the D.P.A. will
determine the appropriate unit size by applying the criteria of the
Uniform Housing Code.
12. Age of Head of Household - from Part 1, Section C
13. Sex of Head of Household - from Par: 1, Section C
14. Husband and wife present - checks a2propriate box
D. Income
15. Number of Hecinients - The number of family members listed in Part 12
Section D, vi<o expect to receive income throughout the nest twelve
months.
16. Source of income - Check as many boxes as are applicable. Refer to
Part 1, Section D.
a. Check rages if all or part of the family's income is earned.
b. Check welfare if all or p=t of the family's income is derived
from welfare (Public Assitance).
Thi;, includes paymen,.s to families or individuals on the basis of
economic need, age, family composition and size, and health of
recipient. Funding for such progrems will be oa the basis of
Federal, State or local governments or a combination thereof.
The following are examples of Federal and State programs:
!2 of 17
00077
Aid to
(2) Fa:nil.es
:kith Dependent Children.
SI. Supa�emenia�
i
is Of
from welfare lk individuals on the bas
!` to families or ind P and health of
Pn corapositzan anti siz-f oasis of
Thi-
includes pa} - � sear be as the
economic need, ages faaill tion thereof.
p�ding for sin p ants or a cambina
recipient-tate or local govexYsa and State proG
Federal. orcrirg u''e e%a ples of Federal
fine f ol-
12 of 17
�90.W
Aid to Families :+rich Dependent Children.
(2) CSI. Supplemental Security Income (PL-92603
(3) Mandatory Hini.mum State Supplementation of SSI Benefits (PL-9366)
(4) Optional State Supplementation of SSI Benefits (FL-92603)
c. Check benefits if all or part of the family's income includes
income such as Social Security, Railroad Retirement, U.S.
military Retirement, Miners' Blacklung Benefits, Veterans
--
Administration Pensions, and retirement pensions into which
zhe individual has made payment, or is eligible .to receive
,parents by virtue of the previous participation by the individual,
spouse or head of household. All Veterans Administration funds, in-
eluding those given to families with limited income are included
as government benefits. Benefits paid on behalf of a child are .
considered as income accruing to the parent.
d. Check other if the fa3ily receives income from any other source.
It includes funds Pram individuals such az alimony, child support,
etc: Child support is considered as income accruing to the parent,
not the child. Other income could also include income from assets.
17. Annual Inde - total of Column (4) Part 1, Section D.
18. I:iaoa from Asset, - total of amounts listed in Column (4), Part 1,
Section D., ;:hick are identified in Column (2) as income from assets.
E. Assets and Eliz=ibilit r:
19. Total assets - total. of Column (3), Part 1, Section E.
20. Eli,7ibility Incone
a. If Total assets (item 19) are 86,000 or less, enter the figure
;31 in (ite= 17) annual income.
b. If Total Assets (item 19) are greater than 86,000 and income from
Assets (item 18) is less than 10% of Total A nets, then:
1. Subtr-act income from Assets (item 18) from Annual Income
(i tern 17).
2. To the re tilting figure, add on =ount equal to I;Y; of t::e
3. H.-tter t?.e total in (item 20)
c. 1iTota-, Assew5 (item 19) are Greater than 567000 and Income From
assets (iteza 18) is g:ea:er than 10,�') of assets enter the figure
sho n in (itL-m 17) Annual Income.
17
e _
r "
21. Income Li,-it - Dower Income Families: (805)
Income limits will be provided by HUD Field Offices.
22. Income Limit - Very lots Income Families: (5O",S)
Income limits %rill be provided by HUD Field Office.
23. borer Income - If item. 20 is less than item 21 (but more than item
22) the family is lower incoJ:e.
24. Vert• Lour Income - if item 20 is less than item 22, the family is
very lour income
F. Allowances
25. kledi-al and Unusual. Expenses - Total of medical and unusual,. expenses-
.. Part 1 Section F, lines Mand (4).
26. Total Allowances - Sater total from Part 1, Section F, line (5).
27. Income after Allowances - Aa ual Income (item 17) less Total
287 29, 303 31 and 32 - For Office Use.
14 of 17
919'79
AP.PMjDIX I
14 or P
00079
APPE MIX I
A. Income shall include, but not be limited to:
41) Tne gross mount, before any payroll deducttonz, of mages and
salaries, overtime pay, co mal sions, fees, tips and bonuses;
(2) The net income f rca operation of a business or profession or from
rental of _eal or personal property (for this purzpoze, expenditures for
business expansion or amortization o: capital indebtedness shall not be
deducted to determine the net income from a business);
(3) Interest and dividends;
(4) The full amount of periodic payments received from social security,
annuities, insurance policies, retirement funds.) pensions, disability or
death benefits and other similar types of periodic receipts;
(3) pa,=enzs in lieu of earnings, such as unemployment and disability
compei:sation, worlmen's compensation and severance pay (but see paragraph
(B) (3) of this section).
(o) Public Assistance. If the Public Assistance payment includes an
amount specifically designated for shelter and utilities, the amount of
Public Assistance shall be included as income;
(7) 10% of a lump-sum additions to family assets when over $0,000, such
as inheritances, insurance payments (includ" payment:, under health and
accident insurance and :�rorknen's compensati�, capital gains and settle-
ment for personal or property losses.
(S) Periodic and determinable allowances, such as alimony and child sup-
port payments, and regular contributions or gifts received from persons
not residing in the duelling;
(9) All regular pay, special pal and alto-wanes of a member of the
Armed Forces (whether or not living in the dwelling) who is head of the
family or spouse.
B. The following items shall not be considered as income:
(1) casual, sgornaic or irregulars gifts;
(2) mounts s:hich _-re zpecific4Ly for or in reiabursetaent of the cost
of wedi c=:
APPMIX I (continued)
(3) Amounts of educational scholarships paid directly to the student
or to the educational institution and amounts paid by the Government to
s veteran for use in meeting the costs of tuition, fees, books and
equipment. Any amounts o; such scholarships, or payments to veterans,
not used for the above purposes or which are available for subsistence
are to be included in income;
(4) The special pay to a serviceman head of a family array from hone and
exposed to hostile fire;
(5) Relocation payments made pursuant to Title II of the Uniform Relocation
Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970;
(6) Foster child care pz*=ents;
(7) The value of coupon allotments for the purchase of food pursuant
to the Food Stamp Act of 1964 which is in excess of the amount actually
charged the eliible household.
MFINITION OF A PULT--TIS STUDEN''T
1. A full-time student is one who is in full-time attendance at an
educational institution if he is carrying a subject load which is
considered full time for day students under the standards and practices
of the educational institution. However, a student Trill not be considered
in full-time attendance if:
A. He is enrolled in a junior college, college, or university in a
course of study of less than 13 school weeks duration; or
B. He iz enrolled in any other educational institution and either
`Lhe course of study is less than 13 school weeks duration cr his
scheduled attendance is az the rate of less tban 20 hours a week.
"Educational Institution" is defined as follows:
A school, college, or university is considered an "educational
institution" if: '
(a) It is oper-ate-d or directly supported by the United States,
uy a State or loca=l government, or by a political subdivision
of tile ",overn--ent unit; or
16 of 17
00081 -
It
UO8l .1t has been u
proved by a State or accredited b
Stmt--recognized or
national"•- ,7 a
(c) It is unace_edited, but its credits
accredited aeric
b;; at least t' re aec Y3 or
three acc*- ;toy . epted on trUnsfer
1rLL ll 1
scheduled attenaance »ae
defined � follow=
„�,ducational Institution►" is �t�d�zc3tional
A school, colleges or universiVJ is considered an
institution" if: ♦� C
yZ,�� suVp�o4"ted by th United Stutest
rer. seni, or by a politicfs3. subd%viSion
is operiLed or direr
State or loLx1 go.
of the got ern^.ent unit; or
16 of 17
(b) It has been approved bj a State or accredited by ,a
State-recognized or nationally-recognized accredited agency; or
! (c) It is unaccredited, but its credits are accepted on transfer
b;; at least three accredited iu.titutionz on the wnMe basis
as if the credits had been transferred from an accredited
institution.
Under this definition are included public and private high schools,
trade or vocational schools, and colleges and universities, which sweet the
requirevents of either (a), (b), or (a) above.
2. A person atteading a rebabiXitation vocational school qualifies
as a full-time student if the period oL attendance .is sufficieat to qualify
under 1.
SQUECE: Social Security Handbook
Sections 351 and 352
17 of 17
00004
d IC for n;p
N -
APPLICATHN FOR L•LII481uTY
PART 1 /AOT M nwornza O rtauaIRim
A thl,Lst 11ae411L�1107: Mil! ___.__.. .•____ _ ._ A /YyLif I�fiN111gC
LPostaais 00000000
4 Ap4wt We
P1e'ai1 Admen - •-- . . .. _ .._. _...__ ° ub flll a at ❑
t Ii.Ma.'I�ew1a 1•SOwsb ALwnc01►D
3 Aeaff aA M60 sono
C FeOdT hr,'IT.111Le 1f.•a.ark/.•ub...•In_A•...Ii d..w w i.I;q,ICMrd..`.w.1�:�•••••A.b+u j
1:0914 - NAME
f�Ly MEAN Acir us
Na• , m ur to w !•StalLIO '
--+ ------ -• ---- -• s.Fant'S"
1-ftdlt ssa IZ e1. 0 -
L
1 Usee d to Lbo CI
IAnr Aealifaw��./1I10eY a.w.10Aea fro/
! ft4se ssICdr❑, _ li. !!J d t:A ❑
0. ban a &mce oll'i1LIo 0 0 r Ow
01[10111. sworn"Ve AM ME or rloore _&MLTA/rgtK A!1[IMii II`-1 11, L:�Gift
1111• al[elLeli A�IiKI�AT[O
LL as•�Llof l:�xfs ❑ PLW Ov=O"b
4. IL ApdNM
1 -r • IL 11 ❑❑ .
16 Swad bum
�---.-=__.... -- •----•— ---._. 1�.�1.----•--- t::wes De:•.ifn Cj.s�..Ifs QOtflsw
i... .- U— •---— u A�ITS 13 D8- L31313
❑Da�a ADDITIONAL ir.sL OF:mas:"" n fici::4 IreAss.-IS
E. ASiE13: If•e1.h NNr.Ne.•er s.N�.....t1as.a Nrw, E Ana rd Eb.- i;f
r•w�r
Daeulo./q. oeie11l�Tlm1 A10arNT
IL UsA=131313 1313[a
• III Ii1 ,�I
b�Liot WOW
_.t____-- _-- . -- _------ —i--- ---- Ci D D D D 0001317-
K wa Ira I6--3 R Wq Ira t
F AI1i�DNeiT: I 1313111313 [3013131]
rAw�T
F. rrlc:a. EIa•�13 D C1
M N11pp1e11 O[TRTu1'i1011 Ye01C10L ` I/IIgYµ I. mud Loi
pl . i11 111 ! W
N IL Teal Aft-c-I es V. IIo-m r."�r fl1■ USIM
i rte_ _ ____ ..f __ __ _ . _ —_ • `_�
ZL - -1313131L 131313
M=AoaiDe AL FA"S rfrrefssi.Rn
III Tod CAW EeRe n Odd aftne 31................................... ._.. . . .._.. )
131 ToW AucwWtCd•a[TAss:sILlr.I Irs3319A1L1I=III................ . �.— JL • :-s i:�-►e�L�7:
131Toll I vml EI.-+-::Ilem. crsm b ................................ _�-._.. __ ❑f..�i�
14 AIhs7Ke bf 0=131I=3 a Pad IL I!a IM................................. 32 000 a f"1
13) ioW Auor'sxeT i i:U cI Mees t 3.U 0
_._
• /ANT 1 •r...,er::-.::+-•s•:s /Rat a
,�
Ap 16
'N
•L-
Staff Report
CO\TRA COSTA COUNTY
CaNMUNITY DEVELOPMENT NEIGHBORHOOD
CONSERVATION PROGRAM
I, INTRODUCTION
As part of the approved Community Development Block Grant Program
for fiscal 1975-76, the Community Development Advisory Council
recommended, and the Board of Supervisors approved, the programming
of 5150,000 for a Housing Rehabilitation Program in two Target
Areas in the County. Under this program, funds would be made
available to eligible individuals, who are both unable to secure a
marketable rehabilitation loan and unable to repay even a principal-
only loan, to bring their residences up to rehabilitation standards.
The Advisory Council submitted to the Board proposed policy guide-
lines and recommended Target Areas in October and December of 1975
to guide implementation of the 1975-76 program in the form of
Rehabilitation Grants.
The Board of Supervisors referred these recommendations to the
Government Operations Committee, which requested a report from the
County Administrator's office concerning the details of such a
program and the various policy options open to the County. Pur-
suant to that request, a staff task force was established under
coordination of the Planning Department to study the Advisory
Council proposal in relation to other past and present Neighborhood
Conservation and Housing Rehabilitation programs in the Bay Area.
While the County's First Year Program is to be limited in scope, a
wide range of programs were studied to ensure that modifications
could easily be made in future years as the program develops.
Programs researched included the former Federally Assisted Code
Enforcement Program (FACE) , the Section 312 loan and Section 115
grant programs, as well as ten other on-going rehabilitation pro-
grams in various cities and counties in the Bay Area. This re-
search was augmented by discussions in the form of three meetings
of a Staff Task Force, consisting of Staff from several county
departments, those participating cities in the county proposing
similar programs in the Second Program Year (1976-77) and the City
of Concord, as well as from the cities of Berkeley, Hayward,
Oakland, and Richmond which have prior experience in these types of
programs.
00084
a ..
Based on this research and the meetings of the Rehabilitation Task
force, several basic components common to most ,'neighborhood Conser-
vation Programs Were enumerated and assessed. This present report
briefly describes each of these components and recommends detailed
guidelines for the initial implementation of a rehabilitation
financial assistance activity in the Community Development first
program year (1975-76). These recommended guidelines are also
intended to address the fact that the county has programmed $250,000
in the Second Year (1976-77) of the Community Development Program
to be allocated to five Target Areas in unincorporated areas of the
county, and that several cooperating cities in the county also
propose to embark upon similar programs in the Second Year.
The program proposals for the Second Year ranged from a straight
Code Enforcement program, in one of the cities, to a combination of
Grants or zero-interest loans and reduced-interest loans in the
county and several other cities.
II. COMPONENTS OF NEIGHBORHOOD CO4SERYATI0N PROGMIS
A completely integrated Neighborhood Conservation Program normally
includes the following activities or components in concentrated
Target Areas: (1) Code Enforcement, (2) Housing Rehabilitation
Financial Assistance, (3) Public Works Projects, (4) Community
Facilities, (5) Public Services and Education, and (6) Local Partici-
pation by Neighborhood Residents. Each of these components will be
briefly described here, followed later by more detailed guidelines
for their implementation. Addressing each of these components
together in a concentrated area produces a mutually reinforcing
effect -- leading to both physical and social upgrading which are
major objectives of the Community Development Program.
Code Enforcement
This activity normally consists of enforcement of existing building
and housing codes applicable to existing structures in the Target
Area. Code enforcement can be used by itself to upgrade the housing
stock in areas where sufficient private capital exists to remedy
deficiencies. In those areas where individual owners cannot afford
or obtain private rehabilitation financing, code enforcement can be
coupled to governmental assistance in the fora of loans and/or
grants in order to finance correction of at least the most serious
health and safety hazards.
Housing Rehabilitation Financial Assistance.
This activity can consist of aiding persons to find existing sources
of rehabilitation loans and/or providing a program of grants and/or
low interest loans to finance correction of code deficiencies and
some general property improvements to arrest deterioration in the
00085
r,o ,,
Target Area. The combinations of types of loans in terms of amounts,
interest rates, length of term, eligible costs, etc. are considerable,
but most recent programs have centered around certain criteria and
if - t . 1
U L1M 1{.n0.lL. 1&. LI&Ua- a«..a:> uneLe lnuivldual owners cannot afford
or obtain private rehabilitation financing, code enforcement can be
coupled to governmental assistance in the form of loans and/or
grants in order to finance correction of at least the most serious
health and safety hazards.
}lousing Rehabilitation Financial Assistance.
This activity can consist of aiding persons to find existing sources
of rehabilitation loans and/or providing a program of grants and/or
lova interest loans to finance correction of code deficiencies and
some general property improvements to arrest deterioration in the
00085
y n
Target Area. The combinations of types of loans in terms of amounts,
interest rates, length of term, eligible costs, etc. are considerable,
but most recent programs have centered around certain criteria and
limits presented below as general policy guidelines for the loan
program. The Advisory Council recommendations for• both the First
and Second Year Programs fall in this category of activities, the
First Year is aimed at the "very low" income households with expansion
to "moderate" income households in the Second Year.
Public Works Projects.
This activity includes but is not limited to needed street improve-
ments, curb and sidewalk improvements, storm drainage improvements,
traffic control, street beautification programs, elimination of
barriers to the handicapped, and sewer and water connections.
Public Works' projects should be coordinated with the housing
rehabilitation effort to reinforce the general atmosphere of rejuve-
-nation and upgrading of the Target Area, which will lead to attracting
private funds to augment and eventually supplant the public financial
program. The initial effort to supply needed public works can be
funded bath from Community Development funds and from General
County Funds in the form of coordinating some of the County's
normal yearly public works program to address needs in the specific
neighborhoods chosen as Target Areas.
Community Facilities.
This activity includes neighborhood and senior centers, parks and
recreation facilities, historic preservation, and other service
facilities which can offer needed programs and space to the neighbor-
hood and surrounding residences. These facilities are eligible
expenditures from the Community Development Block Grant Funds and
an effort should be made in future funding years to coordinate
planned community facility expenditures with the needs in the
selected Target Areas.
Public Services and Education
This activity can consist of a wide range of public service activi-
ties ranging from housing and financial counseling, mini-courses on
home maintenance, to referrals to county and private agencies for
other social services. Other services might include the packaging
of multiple rehabilitation contracts in a neighborhood to ensure a
maximum amount of work with available funds by keeping costs as low
as possible. The County OEO proposed and was allocated $50,000
during the first program year to initiate a program providing some
of these services. This function will be modified as the rehabili-
tation program develops to ensure the longi,-term effectiveness of
the taoney invested and to serve as a preventive tool to forestall
future decline in the targeted neighborhoods.
j 3
00086
t >
v., r .C,
Local Participation. .
This activity appears to have been a key factor in either the
success or failure of past neighborhood conservation programs.
Local participation refers to the active involvement of Target Area
residents in the program to elicit both their support and ideas
concerning the components and needs for such a program. Neighbor-
hood Conservation Programs should utilize existing leadership in
the Target Area for these purposes as the program is implemented.
A suggested process for this involvement includes the following
steps:
(1) Form a committee of block representatives to serve as a
Neighborhood Council;
(2) Have this group disseminate the initial information and
later call a first neighborhood meeting;
(s-) Define both the benefits and responsibilities involved
when a household volunteers for code inspection and
possible financial assistance;
(d) Solicit sign-ups by those present for entry into the
rehabilitation program to form an initial contact list;
(5) Encourage local input as the program is implemented,
through continual reassessment of needs and allowing for
local options such as recommended priorities for needed
public works improvements.
Each of the major Neighborhood Conservation Components is important
to the long-term success of the Program. The emphasis placed on
each will vary from area to area and over time as needs dictate.
The objectives and guidelines below suggest an orderly way to. start
a sound neighborhood conservation program, beginning with a limited
program which can be expanded in future years as more experience is
gained and more financing becomes available.
III. OVERALL PROGRAM OBJECTIVE
The primary objective of the Community Development Block Grant
program, as specified by law, is to provide "decent housing
and a suitable living environment...principally for persons of
lou and moderate income". Specific objectives include:
(1) "The elimination of slums and blight and prevention of
blighting influences and the deterioration of property";
d
00087
(2) "The elimination of conditions which are detrimental to
health, safety and public welfare, through code enforcement,
demolition, interim rehabilitation assistance, and related
activities"; and
_ (3) "The conservation and expansion of the Nation's housing
stock in order to provide a decent home and suitable
living environment for all persons, but principally those
of low and moderate income".
These broadly worded objectives encompass the intent and
purpose of several previously funded Federal Housing and
Redevelopment programs which have been consolidated. by the
Housing and Community Development Act of 1974. The County's
Neighborhood Conservation program is designed to incorporate
these objectives and build upon several of these past programs
which have been successful in several other Bay Area localities.
The Federally-Assisted Code Enforcement Program (FACE) is one
of those previous programs which accomplished neighborhood
conservation by combining housing rehabilitation (with loans
and/or grants) with installation of public improvements such
as streets, curbs, tree plantings, etc. The successful charac-
teristics of the FACE program and those of the former Section
312 loan and Section 115 grant programs are incorporated .in
the recommended policy guidelines for the First and Second
Year programs described below.
1V. FIRST YEAR HOUSING REHABILITATION PROGRAM - HARDSHIP LOANS FOR
REHABILITATION ASSISTANCE, AND PUBLIC SERVICES AND EDUCATION
PROGRAM.
Hardship Rehabilitation Loan Assistance Program Component.
A. Introduction
It is expected that 30 to 40 hardship loans will be made
in the First Year (1975-76) Program with the $IS0,000
programmed for loans and administration in two concentrated
Target Areas. The day-to-day administration will be the
responsibility of the County Building Inspection Department.
The loan program will be closely coordinated with a
Housing Counseling and Services Program also funded with
Community Development funds. All loans made under this
program will be approved by a Loan Panel, in accordance
with the following guidelines which may be amended by the
Board of Supervisors from time to time as circumstances
and experience dictate.
S
0008
B. Objectives
The loan funds expended under this program are intended
to create, stimulate and maintain a desirable urban
environment within the various communities in the county.
Specific objectives include:
s
in the First Year (1975-76) Program with the $150,000
programmed for loans and administration in two concentrated
Target Areas. The day-to-day administration will be the
responsibility of the County Building Inspection Department.
The loan program will be closely coordinated with a
Housing Counseling and Services Program also funded with
Community Development funds. All loans made under this
program will be approved by a Loan Panel, in accordance
with the following guidelines which may be amended by the
Board of Supervisors from time to time as circumstances
and experience dictate.
s
S
00088
r . T w
°9a
B. Objectives
The loan funds expended under this program are intended
to create, stimulate and maintain a desirable urban
environment within the various communities in the county.
Specific objectives include:
1. The elimination and prevention of blighting influences
causing the deterioration of property and neighbor-
hoods; and
2. The elimination of conditions which are detrimental
to health, safety and public welfare through rehabili-
tation of residential and related structures, and
demolition or removal of assessory structures; and
3. The stabilization and enhancement of older neighbor-
hoods in order to encourage future investment from
the private sector by bringing existing structures
into conformance with local Rehabilitation Standards.
In order to attain these objectives, this Rehabilitation Loan
Program is aimed at the hodsing stock of the very low income
households, with possible expansion to include moderate income
households in future program years. For purposes of this
program, very low income is defined in accordance with the
income levels in use for the Federal Section 8 program at the
time of the household's application for assistance.*
C. Eli�ibility Requirements
This section sets forth the eligibility criteria and require-
ments for receiving a Rehabilitation Loan. These criteria
assess both the structure and the applicant from the stand-
point of need and eligibility.
1. General Requirements
All single family structures and owner-occupied 2-4 unit
structures which are located within a designated County
Neighborhood Conservation Target Area will be eligible
for rehabilitation loan assistance. The property must be
in need of repair to cure hazardous conditions and/or
other code violations.
2, Eligible Costs
Work and items of repair eligible under this program are
to be completed as available funds allot:, in the following
order of priority:
*See Appendix A for a current table of income and household size which
meet these criteria as presently used for Section S housing.
6
00089
%;;.
a. To make repairs and improvements necessary to the
structure to correct health and safety hazards;
b. To make other necessary repairs and improvements,
including exterior painting, in order to conform to
code standards applicable to existing residential
structures to ensure safe, decent, and sanitary
housing;
C. To correct any incipient deficiencies which would
make it impossible for a structure to be brought to
and readily maintained at code standards;
d. To remove unrepairable secondary buildings, structures,
and other blighting influences located on the property;
e. To replace built-in cooking appliances when required
for safety reasons;
f. To make other general property repairs if funds are
available and when the amount spent does not exceed
40 of the loan amount.
3. Eligibility of the Applicant
In addition to being the owner of a single family unit or
the owner-occupant of a 2 to 4 unit dwelling in need of
the above repairs, the applicant for a hardship loan must
meet the following requirements:
a. To qualify for a Hardship Loan, the borrower must
meet the Federal Section 8 Program definition of a
very low income household with an income of 50% or
less of the median income for the SMSA.
b. The owner-landlord, in the case of rental property,
must conform with Federal non-discrimination regula-
tions and agree that, upon receipt of a loan from
the county, rents and other charges shall not be
increased beyond the total cost of the loan and of
any actual increase in taxes. Any such increases
should be prorated equally over the period of the
loan.
7
00090
r
mono*
D. Loan Amounts, Term, and Security
For the purposes of this program, Hardship Loans are defined
as 0 interest loans. A minimal repayment of $5.00 per month,
collected quarterly, will be provided; the borrower may volun-
tarily pay a larger amount at any time. (This requirement to
be established only following positive findings of adminis-
trative feasibility.)
1. Loan Amounts
a. The maximum amount for a Hardship Loan shall not
exceed $4,S00 for a single-family dwelling, with an
additional S1,S00 per unit allowed for up to three
additional dwelling units.
b. The Hardship Loan plus existing indebtedness against
the property shall not exceed ninety-five percent of
the appraised after-improvement value of the property
at the time a loan is approved.
2. Loan Term and Security Requirements
The Hardship Loan is due and payable after 20 years or
upon sale or transfer of the property, but may be repaid
in full at any time prior to such date. The borrower
must agree to provide security for a Hardship Loan in the
form of a lien against the property for the amount of the
unpaid balance of the loan.
E. Priorities for Award of Loans
Applications will be evaluated and processed as received,
based on the eligibility criteria and requirements stated in
Section II of these guidelines. The evaluation will consist
of an initial determination of the needed repairs of the
structure followed by a determination of the eligibility of
the applicant. Upon consideration of such factors as ability
to pay for all Code Violations and the effect of non-code
compliance on the neighborhood, a loan may be granted to an
applicant who, with the aid of a loan, can only afford to
correct life-threatening hazards on the property. For eligible
rental structures, all other factors being equal, preference
will be given an owner who agrees to enter into Section 8
contracts with the present or future tenants upon request of
the tenants.
s
-00091
F. Loan Panel
A Loan Panel composed of one Managing Officer of a Bank, one
Managing Officer of a Savings and Loan, and a designee of the
County Administrator, shall make final decisions concerning
the awarding of all loans. The form and content of the loan
packages will be determined by the Loan Panel in conjunction
with the staff of the Building Inspection Department in order
to best conform with these Guidelines and other legal require
ments. The Loan Panel will be provided with staff services by
the Housing Coordinator and other County staff, as the need
arises.
Public Services and Education Program Component
Supportive Services will be made available to the Target Area
residents as needed and available. Such services might include
home maintenance counseling and/or mini-courses, referral services
to public and private agencies for other forms of assistance,
financial counseling by a qualified professional to ensure the
viability of the loan package being prepared, and other supportive
services. These services could be utilized based on either requests
of individual households, or on the request of a neighborhood
organization to supply needed resources to meet local community
goals. The financial counseling in the form of title searches,
lien clearances, and -payment provisions would be offered to each.
household as a matter of course. -Other financial services would be
geared to the requests and needs of the individual household.
9
W092(]
V. SECOND YEAR NEIGHBOWIOOD CONSERVATION PROGRAM - REHrtBILITATION LOAN
ASSISTANCE, PUBLIC SERVICES AND EDUCATION PROGRAM, CODE ENFORC0.11EXT,
AND PUBLIC IMRKS PROGPWI
Rehabilitation Loan Assistance Program Component
A. Introduction
The Second Year (1976-77) Program contains $250,000 for
an expanded rehabilitation program in up to five Target
Areas in the unincorporated areas of the county, as well
as proposed expenditures for similar programs in five of the
participating cities of the county. These programs will utilize
both the Hardship Loans for the very poor households (as
in the First Year) and reduced-interest-rate loans for
moderate intone households. The inspections and work F
write-ups arit to be administered by the County Building
Inspection Department, with the financial packaging and
administration being contracted to a private lending
institution. All loans made under this program will be
approved by the Loan Panel or Committee of the financial
institution in accordance with the following Guidelines,
which may be amended by the Board of Supervisors from
time to time as circumstances and experience dictate.
The loan assistance program will be closely coordinated
with a Housing Counseling and Social Services Referral
Program also funded during the Second Year.
B. Objectives
The objectives are the same as for the First Year Hardship
Loan Program, except that the Target Population is expanded
to include both very low income and moderate income
households.*
C. Eligibility
1. General Requirements
The requirements are the same as for the Hardship
Loan Program.
2. Eligible Costs !-
In addition to the items listed for the Hardship
Loan Program, the allowance for the addition of a
room to alleviate overcrowding would be included (in
priority between eligible cost items c and d) as
follows..
*See Appendix A
10
00093
I
"TO provide for or enlarge a room or finish
or basement in order to alleviate a condition of attic
overcrowding.re
'- Eli ib- of the A
I--i-cant
The requiV�. _.«.. ...
Loan Program-
2. Eligible Costs
hip
1. addition to the items ceuded listed
the additions of a
Loan Progranj, the al in
rcrowding would be incl
room to alleviate oveible cost items c and d) as
priority between elig
follows:
*See Appendix A
10
ODU93
z.
t
i
"To provide for or enlarge a room or finish an attic
or basement in order to alleviate a condition of
overcrowding."
3. Eligibility of the Applicant
The eligibility requirements for the Hardship Loan
specified in Section 3a of the Guidelines remain
unchanged with the following added requirements
applicable to borrower(s) applying for reduced
interest loans:
To qualify for a Rehabilitation Loan at below-market
interest rates, the borrower(s) must: (a) meet the
Federal Section 8 Program definition of being a
'"low" income household with an income less than or
equal to 80% of the median for the SMSA, and
(b) have a credit record evidencing willingness
and ability to meet and service the debt incurred.
D. Loan Amounts, Term, and Security
The amounts, term, and security requirements for the
Hardship Loan remain unchanged and constitute the first
subsection of Section D. The following definitions and
terms apply to the below-market rate Rehabilitation Loans
(hereafter referred to as Rehabilitation Loans),
For purposes of this program, Rehabilitation Loans are
defined as loans requiring monthly payments of both
principal and interest based on the amount of money
borrowed. No prepayment penalties will be charged.
1. Loan Amounts
a. The maximum amount for a Rehabilitation Loan
shall not exceed $7,500 for a single-family
dwelling with an additional $2,500 per unit for
up to three additional units.
b. The Rehabilitation Loan plus existing indebted-
ness against the property shall not exceed
ninety-five percent of the appraised after-
improvement value of the property at the time
the loan is approved.
2, Interest Rate
The interest rate will be below the existing market
rate, in the range of 3 to 5 percent. This is to be
determined in negotiations with private lenders.
11
00094
n`
S. Loan Tera and Security Requirements
The term of the Rehabilitation Loan shall not exceed
20 years and will be tailored to the borrower's
ability to pay. The Rehabilitation Loan is due and
payable upon sale or transfer of the property and
must be secured in the form of a lien against the
property for the amount of the unpaid balance of the
loan.
E. Priorities fQr Award of Loan
The priorities remain the same as for the Hardship Loan
Program.
F. Loan Administration
The Loan Panel Section of the Hardship Loan Program would
be replaced by a contract with a private lending institu-
tion, which would have its own internal committee to award loans
based on these Guidelines.
Public Services and Education Program Component
This component will remain similar to its design for the First Year
with changes made based on experience of the First Year.
Code Enforcement Component
In certain areas or with specific types of residential property
such as larger apartment complexes, a single purpose code enforce-
ment program may be appropriate. Such a program would operate well
in areas where owners and investors have enough confidence and
ability to invest private capital to up-grade the property to meet
rehabilitation standards. Existing Building Department staff could
be used with additional staff funded through the use of Community
Development funds to carry out the inspections and enforcement
procedures. Staff assistance could also be provided to help locate
sources of financial assistance in the private sector. This type
of program should be concentrated in areas in which there is a
strong indication that decline will be arrested without significant
displacement of occupants in the absence of any relocation program
for alternative housing.
Public Works Component
Public Works projects can greatly reinforce the sense of activity
in a neighborhood and benefit the overall appearance of the Target
12
00095
VVUw '�
Area. In the Second Year Community Development Prograr., $10,000
has been probrammed for frontage improvements in the North Richmond
Area, as a first step toward coordinating public improvements with
the Rehabilitation Program.
VI. SUBSEQUENT PROMMI YEARS
Based on experience gained in the first two years of the
Community Development Program, further changes and additions
will be recommended as needed for future program years. The
above policy guidelines are designed to be flexible enough to
allow for amendment as circumstances dictate. The overall
goal is to develop a systematic and well coordinated Neighbor-
hood Conservation Program having a proper balance of the six
components described earlier in this report. The- sequence of
this long-term commitment consists of initial heavy involvement
in Target Areas by utilizing Federal and other outside sources
of funds, with investment reduced as each area becomes stable
in its ability to attract sufficient private sector funds.
C.C.C.P.D.
3/10/76
13
aoOQjZ
, .
APPENDIX A
INCOME LIMITS FOR "MODERATE" INCOME
AND "VERY LOSE" INCOME HOUSEHOLDS
FOR REHABILITATION FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE
(Schedule of Maximum Income Limits for Section 8)*
P"NWUAL GROSS INCOME
Persons Low Income Very Low Income
Per Family Families Families
1 $ 7,750 $ 4,650
2 9,950 6,200
3 11,200 . 7,000
4 12,450 7,750
5 13,200 8,400
6 14,000 •9,000
7 14,750 9,650
8+ 15,550 10,250
"Low Income" families are defined as earning not more than 80% and •'Very ,Low
Income" families not more than 50: of the SMSA median income of $15,536. HUD
has further refined these figures to define a "family" for income purposes, to .
consist of four persons and makes adjustments for larger or smaller families.
HUD adjusts these figures from time to time and the County program will use
the most current available figures.
*"Moderate" income households for purposes of the Community Development
Program are defined as "Low" income for Section 8 housing purposes.
0009'7
00091
I
STAFF RECO+NEINDATIONS FOR A FIRST YEAR HOUSING REHABILITATION►
PROGRAM - HARDSHIP LOANS FOR REHABILITATION ASSISTANCE
A. Introduction
It is expected that 30 to 40 hardship loans will be made
in the First Year (1975-76) Program with the $150,000
programmed for loans and administration in two concen-
trated Target Areas. The day-to-day administration will
be the responsibility of the County Building Inspection
Department. The loan program will be closely coordinated
with a Housing Counseling and Services Program also
funded with Community Development funds. All loans made
under this program will be approved by a Loan Panel, in
accordance with the following guidelines which may be
amended by the Board of Supervisors from time to time as
circumstances and experience dictate.
(The loans will be administered in the two concentrated
Target Areas designated in Horth Richmond and West Pittsburg
in order to meet the requirements of law and to assure
the greatest possible impact of the limited funds in the _
Fizst Year of the program. most past successful programs
have utilized small areas for rehabilitation assistance
pro;r =s.)
B. Objectives
The loan funds expended under this program are intended
to create, stimulate and maintain a desirable urban
environment within the various communities in the county.
Specific objectives include:
1. The elimination and prevention of blighting influences
causing the deterioration of property and neighbor-
hoods; and
2. The elimination of conditions which are detrimental
to health, safety and public welfare through rehabi-
litation of residential and related structures, and
demolition or removal of assessory structures; and
3. The stabilization and enhancement of older neighbor-
hoods in order to encourage future investment from
the private sector by bringing existing structures
into conformance with local Rehabilitation Standards.
0 �0198
5
6
G
4
WNW
i
In order to attain these objectives, this Rehabilitation Loan
Program is aimed at the housing stock of the very low income
households, With possible expansion to include moderate income
households in future program years. For purposes of this
program, very low income is defined in accordance with the
income levels in use for the Federal Section 8 program at the
time of the household's application for assistance.*
(These objectives reflect the intent of the law as well as
sound objectives of the other 12 programs studied in the Bay
Area. The use of the Federal Section 8 program income defini-
tions ties the program to a well-defined set of income criteria
which are adjusted by HUD periodically for our area, based on
local housing costs.)
C. Eligibility Requirements
This section sets forth the eligibility criteria and require-
ments for receiving a Rehabilitation Loan. These criteria
assess both the structure and the applicant from the stand-
point of need and eligibility.
1. General Requirements
All single family structures and owner-occupied 2-4 unit
structures which are located within a designated County
Neighborhood Conservation Target Area will be eligible
for rehabilitation loan assistance. The property must be
in need of repair to cure hazardous conditions and/or
other code violations.
(The designation of 1, 2, 3, and 4 family structures as
eligible structures is based on the fact that 10 of the
12 programs studied in the Bay Area use this range as a
viable category for older neighborhoods. The major
policy intent is to attain stable neighborhoods which
will attract more private investment in future years. In
order to do this, a relatively small number of 3 and 4
unit structures must be maintained so as not to be a
major blighting influence in the Target neighborhoods.
In this First Year Program, income limits most likely
will rule out Hardship Loans for most 3 and 4 unit struc-
tures. This is an overall policy guideline which allows
some flexibility and which will be further implemented
with interest-bearing Ioans in subsequent years.)
2. Eligible Costs
Work and iters of repair eligible under this program are
to be completed as available funds allow, in the following
order of priority:
*See Appendix A for a current table of income and household size which
meet these criteria as presently used for Section 8 housing.
2 00099
z UUUM
6 M
a. To cake repairs and improvements necessary to the
structure to correct health and safety hazards;
b. To make other necessary repairs and improvements,
including exterior painting, in order to conform to
code standards applicable to existing residential
_ structures to ensure safe, decent, and sanitary
housing;
C. To correct any incipient deficiencies which would
make it impossible for a structure to be brought to
and readily maintained at code standards;
d. To remove unrepairable secondary buildings, struc-
tures, and other blighting influences located on the
property;
C. To replace built-in cooking appliances when required
for safety reasons;
f. To make other general property repairs if funds are
available and when the amount spent does not exceed
40: of the loan amount.
(The eligible cost items and priorities are based on the
most cu=only addressed problems .in the other Federal and
Local Rehabilitation Assistance Programs. The priorities
proceed from the most serious health and safety code
violations to a modest amount of general property improve-
ments to help address both the safety aspects of the
program objectives and the visual blighting conditions
which affect overall neighborhood appearance and stability.)
3. Eligibility of the Applicant
in addition to being the owner of a single family unit or
the ok-ner-occupant of a 2 to 4 unit dwelling in need of
the above repairs, the applicant for a hardship loan must
meet the following requirements:
a. To qualify for a Hardship Loan, the borrower must
meet the Federal Section 8 Program definition of a
very low income household with an income of 500 or
less of the median income for the SMSA.
3
110
mom
b. The okner-landlord, in the case of rental property,
must conform with Federal non-discrimination regula-
tions
tions and agree that. upon receipt of a loan from
the county, rents and other charges shall not be
increased beyond the total cost of the loan and of
b. The owner-landlord, in the case of rental property,
must conform with Federal non-discrimination regula-
tions and agree that, upon receipt of a loan from
the county, rents and other charges shall not be
increased beyond the total cost of the loan and of
any actual increase in taxes. Any such increases
should be prorated equally over the period of the
loan.
(It is intended that the Hardship Loans will address the
most serious housing problems of the very low income
households i.-3 the Target Areas. These households will
generally meet the Federal Section 8 definition of "very
low income." At the same time, the program should not
foster unnecessary rent increases which would displace '
existing renters in multiple family dwellings. Therefore,
rent increases would be limited to actual program costs _
to the landlord.)
D. Loan Amounts, Term, and Security
For the purposes of this program, Hardship Loans are defined
as 0's interest loans. A minimal repayment of $5.00 per month,
collected quarterly, will be provided; the borrower may .volun-
tarily pay a larger amount at any time. (This requirement to
be established only following positive findings of administra-
tive feasibility.)
1. Loan Amounts
a. The maximum amount for a Hardship Loan shall not
exceed $4,500 for a single-family dwelling, with an
additional $1,S00 per unit allowed for up to three
additional dwelling units.
b. The Hardshil. Loan plus existing indebtedness against
the property shall not exceed ninety-five percent of
the appraised after-improvement value of the property
at the time a loan is approved.
2. Loan Term and Security Requirements
The Hardship Loan is due and payable after 20 years or
upon sale or transfer of the property, but may be repaid
ii: full at any time prior to such date. The borrower
must agree to provide security for a Hardship Loan in the
form of a lien against the property for the amount of the
unpaid balance of the loan.
a
00101
_1
(Given the very low incomes of the households in this
initial program, they would find any but a very minimal
payment .to be a hardship. Yet it has been found that
some continuing contact has assisted in engendering and
maintaining pride in ownership leading to better long-
terry maintenance of the repaired property. The require-
ments of a $5.00 per month payment and time certain for
repayment of the loan have proven to be sufficient to
accomplish this goal in other programs. This policy is
recommended with the condition that if administration is
found to be too difficult, the monthly payment provision
can be deleted. The maximum loan amounts are based on
current estimates of the costs that will be encountered
in the typical structure that enters this program.)
E. Priorities for Award of Loans
Applications will be evaluated and processed as received,
based on the eligibility criteria and requirements stated in
Section II of these guidelines. The evaluation will consist
of an initial determination of the needed repairs of the
structure followed by a determination of the eligibility of
the applicant. Upon consideration of such factors as ability
to pay for all Code Violations and the effect of non-code
compliance on the neighborhood, a loan may be granted to an
applicant who, with the aid of a loan, can only afford to
correct life-threatening hazards on the property. For eligible
rental structures, all other factors being equal, preference
will be given an owner who agrees to enter into Section 8
contracts with the present or future tenants upon request
of the tenants.
(It was the opinion of the Housing Rehabilitation Task Force
members from cities with current rehabilitation programs that
applications should be processed as received, rather than
"batched" for consideration at one time. The basis for this
rec ormendation was twofold: (1) "batching" would tend to '
overload staff during one peak period; and (2) applications
normally come in slowly at first with many households waiting
to see the results of work on neighboring houses before enter-
ing the program themselves. It is desired to encourage land-
lords to enter into the County's Section 8 existing housing
rent subsidy program, which is now operational in the County,
by giving priority to rental structures which are available
for Section 8 contracts.)
S
W�
F. Loan Panel
A Loan Panel composed of one Managing Officer of a Bank, one
Managing Officer of a Savings and Loan, and a designee of the
County Administrator, shall make final decisions concerning
the awarding of all loans. The form and content of the loan
packages will be determined by the Loan Panel in conjunction
with the staff of the Building Inspection Department in order
to best conform with these Guidelines and other legal require-
ments. The Loan Panel will be provided with staff services by
the Housing Coordinator and other County staff, as the need
arises.
(.fin independent Loan Panel is recommended on the advice of
several Task Force =embers to remove the decision on awarding
loans from the County staff members having day-to-day opera-
tional responsibilities. This Panel protects County staff
from any charges of collusion and serves as a check that the
legal and financial packaging properly protects both the
County and the household.)
C.C.C.P.D.
3/10/76
6
001000
00103
POLICY SU'tiURY OF 12 HOUSING RUMBILITATIOY
PROGRAMS 1N THE WXY AREA
AS OF FEBRUARY 17, 1976
t
3
i
. r
i
C.C.C.P.p.
2/17/76
00104.
1 SDI T I DU 41. PROGRAMS
PREVIOUSLY SUGGESTED
t
SKI ON 312 SEI-'I@C 115 PROPOSED COEWIY )WIFIED
1 MLIMMITERIA CMSIDERATIOMS Low C'-ASTS PiOGIbW CRIMIA
1. TAR=AAA DELIM&TIMS
'
concentrated : z s z
• Predominantly Residential Yes Yes _ Yes Yes
IND IVIDO aL PROGRAMS
1 PREVIOUSLY SUGGESTED
! SECTION 312 SEC-'IOK IIS PROMEO COMM MWIFIED
POLICE/CRITERIA,MSIDERATIM6 UPJ* C .ANIS raco+W C1trwtJ4
I. TARL'£7'AREA DELINEATIONS
` Concentrated x z x x
• Predominantly Residential its Yes _ Yes Yes
'
It. LOW VERSUS GRANT PROGRAM '
• Grants Only w Yes Yes 0%Hardship
• Loans poly Yes w Ifo 1O°ms• f
• Combination of Grants 4 Lows +USee its w:3se 312 Ifo i
•Atormts 512.000 53,500 54,500 • 54,5000•
• Interest 3% !Lt f I!A 0+1 1
Maximum Tera 20 years MA ISA One Upon Sale
Ill. ELIGIBLE ERPF111DITURFS
• Rehabilitation to Code Standards s s z
• incipient Violations of Codes A ; z z e
' Additional Rooms Alam Oft-%- riling Exists z ; z
• Land Acquisition to Brim= to Zoning Cede z - - -
�j • Replace Stove/gefrigerator x x - Safety Only
! ` General Property Improvements i Painting s - - z
• Removing Blighting Conditions an Property s - z x
` Curbs and Cutters - - - -
•
Architectural Fees x
Permit Fees : s - s
' Flood Insurance - - - z
' Other Related Fear z
`Termite Inspection
tt IV. ELIGIBILITY
t • Structural !
` - Tjpes of Structures (i.e.. SF. .I4ltiple) 1 to 4 DU I to 4 tri 1 6 2 DU Ito 4 CU
All SF•Ownes-
-Ober rersus Renter Occupancy Omer-Occupied Omer-Occupied Owner-Occupied Occupied 2-4 DU
` Individual
- Income Limits 231 (d)(3) _ - - 65:of Median S0% of Yediaa
Asset Limits - - - -
- Mandatory Counseling Program - X.
.. ..
i V. WULWARI VERSOS KJODAIORY M)CLI\Y Voluntary Voluntary
' what if a significant number in Target i
Area refuse inipectiea?
' Ghat if violations are found. but house- Enforce only
hold does not qualify for Laaa/Grant or Serious Safety
t
Hazards
is only partial'
Vt. MCiITiES FOR AKUD12X ClWNTS11O"
' licalr9 or Safety Hazards First First First Process by
of Receipt
' Otter Code Violations Secord Secend Second
' Inc=e Levels Thud Third Third
: fate of Receipt Basis Fourth
Hardship
1
i V11. APPEALS PROCESS
' Is o-.•Needed Outside:Lams: Chuoaels` Yes Xo
• Who and Moat! appeals Boardtlus
o= Panel Appeals
1
t Process)
i •SS.00 a conch palvents
e•6r. to SI.SOO extra per units 2. 3. and 4 in multiple due-Rings ()0•so5
I
2.
LAWS UMCL TY OF BERKELEY PROGRAMS
' QAr
s RUITENI= i P117S:CALLY
llIP70YEEKT MUNICIPAL 01113UP 4.:n
MUCV1017FRIA M%SIIIMTiOKS PROG WIS EONK PICOGRAM SUL02 PROGRA.4
I. TARGET AREA CM13UTlMS
Concentrated City-ride Yes Modal Cittes area
Pre:aeinsatly Residential Yes Yes Yes
II. tams 1TASUS QULW P0OGIU11l
• Grants Only llo Kp r UO'
• Loans Only Yes - Yes Yes
Combination of Grant.- i Lwas llo so
Avounts 515.000 (55.000 extralwt) SIO.000/llalt S1S.000/11111t ;
S3.s00 0 0t . 515.000/0welling 510.000/0relling
interest 0t to mast 11 to Racket 11 to Market
•
Malmo Teta 30 years IO years 10
Ill. ELIGIBLE E1ftwI71NNES
I
Rehabilitation to Code Staodarh x x x
• incipient violations of Codes x
• i
Additional Rooms tura OrarcromAin Exists : x: x
Laid Aoopdsition to Bring to Zoning Cole - -
• Replace Store/Iterigerater - luils•Ias luilt-Sas
General property logprosewasts l; Painting x 401 401
Rtw►n'e a:t.ghtin Conditions on Property s s x
• Cutis Ii Gutters - City Frog.
CitPro
Y g•
• Architectural Fees - Staff Staff
t ' Perait Fees - -
i ' Flood laauraace - - -
t 'Other Related Fees Title las.
1 ' Tenaite Inspection x x x
I�'. s:1.1G111131T � '
Structural
- TApea of Stru.:t:m (i.e.. SF..f.ltialtiple) I to 4 W 1 to 4 W 1 to 4 0U
0►Der versus Renter OCcrtlamey Ower-Occupied Either Owner-OeeupLed
62 Yrs/Dtsabled
Individual
- lacane Units Skase None Ione
-Asset Lints
- !iWatcry Caaascliag Prvdras City's*,lit" - -
•
V. \ot.url %litsm!LlvntraFt 103CAM Voluntary Voluntary voluntary
%drat it a si3mifirast awilocr in UW*
' Area refuse inspection'
%Nat if violations are fer mA. but ba"ho-
f bold Bars got gaalify for toaaxtaat or
i' financing is oalF Aortia!'
1'1. ITUA.Tits FOR AALARi1I%U a-k%1SA113A1S
iHealth or Safety HA:arls Se%ool second First
ether Cole violataans Third -
Itcone Le.vls Fourth
• ._:e of z;r;rsp: 84sas First
I Ilssslship First
1.1I. APPYALS rIRticm
ti • Is one avr.!1S*Atssde %orrsaal Chasrcls* yes 50 SO
aha and t1ati, Irdep. Caasittee Moan Passel plus (Loan Papal plus
:,Omt Appeals Narsta. Appeals
Process) n Process)
VV11• OS
CITY OF BER [ELET PR06RAN 5
Y
POLICY/CRI1".RIA CMIMATIOU REPAIR FRO MM AIDIVAL
1 CI IS
1. TARGET AREA BELIMT104
Concentrated Cir-ride YK
P. I. tautly Residential I&L Yes-1 4tlples
•` 'Star of Decline
It. LOW VL•M GRAIL!PROGRAM
Grants Gall Ro {
• Ton
Too
Combination of Greats i Lamas No F 1 No r
Rooters S2,SSONait ' '
. =10,000/Ibait �
SM.W91struettun S .000/S nae
• Iatamt I1 is iladet ; City Rorrouias Rate+Lb
•
Mutual Teta S Yom _ ZO yes" '
111. ELIGIBLE E1PIWIIHRES _ ' ' ' t
• Rdaabititation to Code Standards dataedow Condition: s ! i
Incipient Violations of Cad" _ s
Additional Rsons bl+ea OVererorUM Esists _ '
Land Acquisition to basins to Madmj Cade
Replace Sto%w"Criterator Bu11t-Ins ; Bunt-ism
General property loprovements li Painting 4n
Removing Altotias Conditions on Pe+operV a x ;
Curbs t Cutters City Pros.
City Frog.
Architectural Fees staff
Staff
• Permit Fees
t
Flood lnsuraooe - -
Other Related Fees
Tarmite Inspection a ' s
1
l IT. EtbclelLrn .
Structural t
e - T*es of Structures (i.e.. SF. .Wlcaple) SF i 11altiple 71n1tiple
i�
-O►aer versus Beater Occupancy Elder Rut"
Individual '
- loceae Units Rees Reso
-Asset Units SAW i
-Mandatory Counseling Proseas
_
V. litRtAiAaY\EatSIIS!!\171ATxiY Pb1-A%"
Voluntary— Voluntary
• b ' *bat ii a significant racer in Target
Area reflse imspectlame
b7nat if violations are fond. but dwse-
bold does an qualify for Loam/Grant or
financing is only partial? :
VI. PRIORITIES MR ANWING GR<\TS/LUU
• 'ha tb or Rafety Hazards Fiat First
n
Other We Violations
iacrae Levels '
Rate of ItWitipt basis
• Ilardsd:ip
1�1 till. APPEALS iR.o=
i ' Is nee Heeded outside'*hall Cnwa IS? so �
t ' An ani Wut? ILean panel plus (10'a reset plus
: worst Appeals Aermal Appeals
• reaciss) process)
• tp
00107
: a-
IIIOITIDOAL PROGRAMS
RICIUM tvc:att CITY
FOLIC T CRITERIA OM3ID:P4TIO1S roams l'zeatiK
` 1. TARGET AREA DELIS ATIMS
t
'Concentrated a s
• Pre"inaetly,Residential yes Yes
•� ' Stage of Decline
1 11. LOU VERSUS GLINT PROfitAlf
• Grants Only No
• lanes Only Ito yes
• Combination of Csasts A Iona yes Ifs
'
Amounts $4.000 - Grants 54.000
i $6.000 loans
• Interest A O1 to Market
•
Maximum Teta 15 ran 10 years '
111. ELIGIBLE EVEWIT111RES -
• Rehabilitation to Coda Standards z s
' Incipient Violations of Codes z z ,
' Additional Roans When Overcrowding Exists -
Land Acquisition to bring to Zoning Code
• Replace Stove/Refrigerator _ -
�; ' General property Improvements i hinting z x hist :
!. • Repaving blighting Cooditions on Property z .
t 'Curbs i Cutters Oahe by City
• Architectural fees Staff -
+� ' Permit Fees z
t ' Flood lasuraaee
'Other Related Fees - -
Termite Inspection
Iv. EL1GUILITY
' Structural
-Types of Structures (i.e.. SF.ZFAdtiple) SF SF
- Owner versus Rester Occupancy Oxer-Occupied Owner-"Led
' Islividual
- Income Units See. A S12.We/fear 6
:u Point System
i -Asset Limits
-Mandatory Counseling Program -
r T. VOL.IATART iMRIS?tWATIM Pft%-a'1 voluntary Voluntary
' Wh3t if a significant number in Target
1 Area refuse isspactioe.
• ant if violations are found. but house-
hold Alpes not gmslify for Lmaq/Grant or Partial Finaneies
financing is only Partial' is okay
Vl. PAICXlTIES MR KW I%till%T5/WW's
• firalth or Safety Jb--trds first
' other Crate Violattoas Second
' Inane t eels Third
' rate of Receipt basis First
' Haadshup
i
VII. APMALS PP711ISS
' is o"Seeded Outside %or=al Clwaraels' NO .•a
y
' aha and &bat' City Cana-cil City Cs aciI
e
00103
{�.
I X D I V I D 0 A L PROGRAMS ;
POLICY cRITER1A OMCSIDERATIan SAV JUM COMlY FL.IYytRD F'ROGRAII i
I. MWET AREA DELDEITIOU
' Concentrated = _
' Predominantly Residential fli=ed use Yes
StaEe of Decline ._ ... ._ _ Redllmmd Areas _ _ r_ •• - ._ _-._.. _.
;
I1. LOU VERSUS GUN!PROGRAM �
' Grants Only so Ifo i
' Loans Only Yes no 'r • l
• Combination of Grants i Loans Db
,
• Amounts 510.000 512,000 Loans
13.500 Grants
1 ' Interest 4n ? i
' Its,tisa,m Teta IS years 20 years i
III. ELIGIBLE EIPWITORES T i
'
Rehabilitation to Code Standards• X Hazard I i
' Incipient Violations of Codes = Ito }
. • Additional Roans *AS OvercrordLos Fsists - Ho f � � I
t
' Land Acquisition to Wag to Zoaim=Code - No
Replace Stove/Refrigerator - Ho i
' General property Improvements i Painting : s plat ! '
' Remove Misting Conditions on Property - s
• Curbs 5 Gutters - Ot;-wr CD Program ;
• Architectural Fees s start r
• permit Fees = liaised
' Float Insurance = valved
Other Related Fits valved
is
' Teratte Inspection
i
IV. MOBILITY
` I 3
Structural �
- Types of Structures (i.e.. SF.M altiple) 1 to a Fill 1 to d Du �.
- Aver .versus Renter Occupaxr osmer-Oocopicd axr-Occupied ' ,
• Individual `
- Incwm Units S12.400 (Fam.of i)
-Asset Units
- Mandatory Counseling Program
V. 1'OUISTARY VERSUS XMIAIMY rMOGLAX Voluatarr Voluntary
Ghat if a significant number in Target
Area refuse inspectiaa! .
' lthat if violatioas are fctssd. but house-
hold does rat qualify for LoanXnat or
financing is call partial!
1 VI, rRIORITIIS Wit ALIADI%C GW7S/LOX%S ;
' llralth or Safrty !!a_ards First First
i
• Other "e violations Second
! • Intoe Levels Third
i • F.+t- of Rcteirt iasis
ILanfsS,p
Vil. AMA" rROCM
' is one deeded Catside Normal CAaneels! NO
' lho and %hat!
1
i
M109 .
t Ahat if a sigaifiea.It nuaher is Target
arra refuse inspection`
' t%at if vialarioas are fcu'*3• but !muse.
hold docs rat Quaufy for t"WCrant or
t
financing is rely pattiatT
�` i
NIORITIFS Fol %ukR01\G Cr%%7SJLGk,%S
ilralih or Safeti Ifa:atds First
First
' Other Cate 1'i0isti.ins
t
Inco..e Lcvcls 7Rir3
' 114t- of roc:e"ht oasis
!U rlship
Vii. APPEALS rfiOC£SS
NvcdcJ a-tside las;,r_tl Ch,%Ztn,ls'. !Its
' 4ha and that`
1
F�1P4s
LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS OF DIABLO VALLEY
Statement to the Hoard of Supervisors
April 12, 1976
Housing Rehabilitation Assistance
The League of Women Voters of Diablo Valley has been
• supportive of the County's use of Community Development
funds for housing re,.abilitation. We believe the main-
tainance of the existing housing stock is a necessary
element of a total housing program for Contra Costa County,,
and we commend the Board for recognizing its importance.
We feel the policy and implementation procedures now
being developed for the operation of this Housing Rehabili-
tation Assistance Program must be carefully drafted with
adequate consideration of the opinions of all those
involved in making recommendations.
Therefore, we urge the Board to reassign this program
to the Government Operations Committee for a study session
with representatives of the Planning and Building Inspection
Departments and the Community Development Advisory Council's
Housing Committee. Reviewing all recommendations in this
.informal setting, including those offered by the public
tonight, would resin: in a better understanding of the
thoughts of those involved and result in a more effective
program.
We feel consideration must be given to assignment of
responsibility for implementation of this Rehabilitation
Assistance Program with the idea that it is the beginning
of a more comprehensive housing program containing all the
components outlined in the staff report. `Pherefore, we
feel a Fousin^ Department should be' established to develop
and coordinate these components so that hottsing efforts in
the County may be carefully plarLied and adequately staffed.
-fes / Z
T VE D Katherine Gueldner, President
RECEDiablo Valley League of Women Voters
APR/2,.1970
Charlotte Flynn
J. 2, OL=j Housing Chairperson
ague BOAJO a suatnnSM
CL01110
NT COSTA
Micro;i{rrted with board-order
/ N ukaill'a A Wl111 L 4 Flu
i
i
R.E , .E EDS=
APP. 12 ING
J. it otS;Gri
-L CUR BOA r suPSM'1542S
town..
By.. vary
oolu
W,crof ilmed with board order
P icrobIrred witty Uoucu u,u
' t
ZL
ILL
CI J- P
-7P J � r ♦ I
' —re- �-•
;0! ,
Z�
/i
001,12.
Now-
�l
:x
/I Ile
o i
4F A
% � � i _!'.-.,- .�=art i� -�•---►----� � �! -'t-
,..--y
el
E
t � �
i
1� 1
1
r
l 1/
'r] f Com.
l
00113.
00113.
0 1W9WWRWW%F-9"WM MW
And the Board adjourns L%113 regular adjourned
meeting to meet on April 13, 1976 at 9;00 a.m., in the
Board Chambers, Room 107, Administration Building,
Martinez, California.
• Ke , C an ---
ATTEST:
J. R. OLSSON, CLERK
f ���. DeDuty
00114
r
SUMARY OP PROCEEDI IGS BEFORE THE BOARD
OF SUPERVISnRS OF CONTPA COSTA COU11TY,
REGULAR ADJOURNED PSETING, VO-NDAY, APRIL 12,
1976, PREPARED BY J. R. OLSSON, COW.-TY
CLERK AND EX-OFFICIO CLERK OF THE BOARD.
Closed hearing on Cormunity Development Housing Rehabilitation Program and referred
sane to Government Operations Committee (Supervisors Dias and Linscheid) for report on
00114
4 �„•�,t, s'�.."mss y '':
'-"""" SUMARY OP P40iEDIUGS BEFORE TILE BOARD
OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, '
REGULAR ADJOUMED MEETING, YONDAY, APRIL 12, _
1976, PREPARED BY J. R. OLSSOH, COU?tTY
CLERK AND EX-OFFICIO CLERK OF THE BOARD.
Closed hearing on Community Development Housing Rehabilitation Program and referred
sante to Government Operations Committee (Supervisors Dias and Linscheid) for report on
April 27.
Instructed Director, Human Resources Agency, to review budgets of departrents in
the Agency other than Social Service and submit to County Administrator additional
alternatives for resolving funding problem.
0011 ►
a
t
The
preceding documents
consist of 115 pages.