Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 05161989 - IO.6 I.O. 6 TO: Board of Supervisors - ,s FROM: INTERNAL OPERATIONS COMMITTEE _ vl DATE: May 8, 1989 sT9 COU-�'t SUBJECT: REVIEW OF HOUSING REHABILITATION PROGRAM AND APPOINTMENTS TO THE PROGRAM'S LOAN AND GRANT REVIEW PANEL S-, cffi c Request(s) or Recommendations(s) & Background & Justification REI: `IENDATIONS: 1. Reappo. '`he Housing Rehabilitation Program's Loan and Grant Review Panel for two year terms endii. ember 31, 1990: Barbara S. Lacy 1420 Parkland Drive Concord, CA 94521 Victor M. Mena 2112 Cedarbrook Drive Fairfield, CA 94533 2. Request staff from the Building Inspection Department to invite Bernardo"Bernie" Bautista to apply for the Loan and Grant Review Panel. 3. Request staff from the Building Inspection Department to interview the following candidates for the Loan and Grant Review Panel and report the results of the interviews to our Committee on May 22, 1989 at 10:25 A.M. CONTINUED ON ATTACHM T: YES SIGNATURE: Rec m ation of Count inistrator Recommendation of Board Committee p rov Other: nature(s): TOM POWERS NNE WRIGHT McPEA� Action of Boar on: May 16, 1989 Approved as Recommended x Other Vote of Supervisors I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE AND _ x Unanimous(Absent — ) CORRECT COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN AND Ayes: Noes: ENTERED ON HE MINUTES OF THE BOARD Absent: Abstain: OF SUPERVISORS ON DATE SHOWN. cc: County Administrator ATTESTED /G, 1999 Director of Building Inspection PHIL BATC LOR,CLERK OF THE BOARD Mickie Solis,Housing Rehabilitation Coordinator SUPERVISORS AND COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR Building Inspection Department BY: _,Deputy Clerk - clvm:eh(io6.bo) f '! • l William P. Jennings 144 Roslyn Drive Concord, CA 94596 Jillian Del Pozo Venturino 4312 Skyline Place Pittsburg, CA 94565 Bernardo "Bernie" Bautista 1303 Center Avenue Martinez, CA 94553 (If Mr. Bautista wishes to be considered) 4. Acknowledge receipt of the attached report from the Building Inspection Department and express the Board's appreciation for the Department's having reviewed with our Committee the accomplishments of the Housing Rehabilitation Program. BACKGROUND: On April 4, 1989 the Board of Supervisors authorized our Committee to review the operation of the Housing Rehabilitation Program which is operated by the Building Inspection Department with funds provided by the Community Development Block Grant Program. On May 8, 1989 our Committee reviewed the attached report from the Building Inspection Department which does a very thorough job of outlining the purpose of the Housing Rehabilitation Program, who is eligible and the specific objectives of the program. While the staff advertise the program widely throughout the County,each Board Member may want to keep a copy of this report so you and your staff can answer constituent inquiries and so you can refer eligible individuals to the program. We were pleased to see that the program is operating as well as it appears to be and are, therefore, prepared to recommend appointments to two of the seats on the Loan and Grant Review Panel. We will recommend appointments to the other two seats after interviews have been completed. u t CONTRA COSTA COUNTY BUILDING INSPECTION DEPARTMENT Inter-office memo DATE: May 3 , 1989 TO: Internal Operations Committee Contra Costa County FROM: R.W. Giese, Director Building Inspection Department By: Mickie Solis, Housing Rehabilitation Coordinator SUBJECT: Review of Housing Rehabilitation Program Thank you for the opportunity to refresh your minds about the Contra Costa County Housing Rehabilitation Program. This 1989/90 year will be the 15th year for this program, the program has been in existence since 1975/76. In response to the following questions, attached are the Community Development Neighborhood Preservation Program, Housing Rehabilitation Program policies, adopted by the Board of Supervisors on July 17, 1984. (See attachment #1) 1. What is the purpose of the Housing Rehabilitation Program? 2. How exactly does the program work--describe the full process by which an individual is assisted by the program. The following will answer the other questions; 1. How much money is invested in the program on an annual basis? All funds received for this program are Federal Community Block Grant Funds, each allocation is invested with private financial institutions for the purpose of leveraging our funds, all investments are returned to the program for additional funds to loan under the program. Past allocations have been 650, 000. 00, 550, 000.00, & 450, 000. 00 2 . What is the source of the funds which are used? These are all Federal Community Development Block Grant Funds, there is no cost to the County for administration of this-program. 3. Indicate what results have been achieved by the program during the past two or three years. The program has reached over 10, 000 owner/occupant residents each year for the prior three years. There were 211 applications during r the period of April 1, 1986 thru March 31, 1989, of these applications we assisted 165 applicants in repairing their homes. This is an average of 55 a year. In prior years 1981, 1982, & 1983 our CDBG allocation was about 1 million dollars and our average applicants assisted was about 100 a year. In the 15 years the program has been in existence we have provided over 8 million dollars of financial assistance to over 900 homeowners of Contra Costa County. Each year the program is monitored by the Housing Urban Development, independant evaluations are made and a single audit is also made. Attached are the reports for the past three years. (See attachment #2) 4. Describe who is eligible to be assisted by the program and how an individual finds out about the availability of funds. Very low, low and moderated income households, these are defined as households having an adjusted gross income of not more that 80% of the PMSA income, as adjusted for household size. This table incorporates the most recently HUD published income limits for the Community Development Block Grant Program. (See attachment #3) The program is marketed in 21 target areas throughout the unincorporated areas of Contra Costa County also included are the cities of E1 Cerrito, Pinole, Martinez, Pleasant Hill, Brentwood and Lafayette. These target areas are chosen based on the tax rolls and neighborhoods in need of repairs. (See attachement #4) Pamphlets are mailed every other month to any 2 or 3 of the target areas, a minimum of 10, 000 pamphlets are mailed each program year. Also, as each home is in the process of being repaired, yard signs are placed on the property advertising the work is being done through the assistance of the Contra Costa County Neighborhood Preservation Program. Pamphlets are also distributed within the immediated neighborhood of the home being repaired. (See attachment #5) Town meetings are also held throughout the County, this includes senior citizens centers, homeowner associations and any other groups concerned with housing. Newspaper articles are published at least twice a year. Most of the applicants hear about the program from each other. 5. Describe what role the Loan Review Panel plays in the program, what are their exact duties and how do they carry out those duties? Attached is the description of the requirements for the Loan Review Panel. They meet at least once a month to review all applications that have been approved for financial assistance. (See attachment #6) Each member reviews each file to determine that all HUD regulations and program policies and procedures have been made, they review to determine that the house is in need of repairs, they review all loan applications, appraisals and lot book reports. They initial each file once it has been reviewed by them and the chairperson signs the application. 6. Attach applications from each member of the Loan Review Panel who is seeking reappointment and provide clarification as to whether it is appropriate for an individual who is not a resident of the County to serve on the Loan Review Panel. Attached for your review are the applications for the two members requesting reappointment to the panel. This loan review panel requires 5 members, at this time we are short 2 members and need reappointment of 2 members, loans have not been approved and will not be approved until at least the 2 reappointments are made. (the files need 3 Loan Review Panel approvals) The loan process of this program cannot continue without the review of the Loan Review Panel, it is important these reappointments be made as soon as possible. (See attachment #7) The Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors adopted the policy governing appointments to boards, commissions and committees on March 29, 1977. (Maddy Act Provisions) Section 4 of the policy states "Appointees must reside or work in the County" . (See attachment #8) This policy has been followed by the program for 15 years. Three members of the Loan Review Panel must have financial background, because of this requirement, I believe it is appropriate to have members that do not live in the Contra Costa County, but work in the County especially in the financial world of the County. They are aware of what the Housing & Finance needs are of this County. At this time I would like you to consider two new appointments to the Loan Review Panel. Applications are attached. (See attachment #9) William P'. Jennings - Financial Background 144 Roslyn Drive Concord, CA 94518 Jillian De Pozo Venturino - Citizen Representative, Pittsburg. 4312 Skyline Place Pittsburg, CA 94565 Thank you again for the opportunity to present this program to you. I would like to recommend Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors set aside a specific day, week or month to recognize the Building Inspection Department's County Neighborhood Preservation Program for the outstanding service that has been provided to the residents of Contra Costa County, I would be willing to have a presentation available to the board. n CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Community Development Neighborhood Preservation-Program Housing Rehabilitation Program Policies (Adopted by the Board of Supervisors on July 17, 1984) I. INTRODUCTION f The following sets forth policies for residential rehabilitation financial assistance in the form of low-interest loans, and zero-interest loans, as authorized by Section 105, Title I of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974 as amended. The program is available throughout the Urban County, however several Housing Rehapili'tation Target Areas have been established in the County for purposes of implementing a marketing plan for this program and its components. Agreements with financial institutions are in effect to implement and service the loan components of this program. H. OBJECTIVES Primary Objective The primary objective of the Neighborhood Preservation Program, and in particular the housing rehabilitation component, is to assist in the development of viable communities by providing decent housing and a suitable living environment in the community - principally for persons of low and moderate income - consistent with provisions of Federal assistance provided in the Housing and Community Development Acts of 1974 as amended. Specific Objectives 1. The elimination of slums, blight, and the prevention of blighting influences causing the deterioration of property and neighborhoods. 2. The elimination of conditions which are detrimental to health, safety and public welfare, by rehabilitation, demolition, or removal. 3. The stabilization and enhancement of older neighbhorhoods in order to encourage future investment from the private sector, and other public funds and programs. 4. The development of economically integrated communities, particularly as it relates to the enjoyment of the benefits of the revitalization process by low and moderate income residents. 5. The review of residential structures of owners participating in the voluntary Housing Code Enforcement Program for need of rehabilitation. In order to attain these objectives, a voluntary code enforcement program has been combined with a financial assistance program consisting of two-components: 1) low interest loans, and 2) zero-interest loans. The criteria for each program are geared to the household's income and ability to service an additional monthly housing payment. The intent is to reach the maximum number of households while ensuring a maximum return of the money for the purpose of marring future assistance available to other households. The guidelines for each program component are outlined below. Page 3 f. To remove unrepairable secondary buildings, structures, and other blighting influences located on the property; which may include the repair or replace- ment of dilapidated fencing; g. 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 duplex, in need of the above repairs, to qualify for a rehabilitation loan the applicant must: a. Be a household with an adjusted gross income less than the median income for the County as established by HUD for the San Francisco-Oakland .Standard Metropolitan Statistical Area (SMSA); and b. Have assets which, for elderly households, (age 62 and over) do not exceed $20,000, and for non-elderly households, have assets which do not exceed $10,000. Assets would include bank accounts, stocks, bonds, investments, and real estate holdings but not including the principal residence. c. Be designated as not eligible for a conventional home improvements loan; and d. Have a credit record evidencing willingness and ability to meet and service the debt incurred; and e. In the case of the second unit in a duplex which is a rental property, conform with Federal non-discrimination regulations and agree that, upon receipt of a loan from the County: 1)rents and other charges shall not be increased beyond the total cost of the loan, actual increases in taxes, and the percentage increase in the Bay Area cost of living index issued by the U.S. Department of Commerce; or 2) the units to be rehabilitated will be rented to low and moderate income families utilizing the Federal Section 8 Existing Unit Rental Subsidy Program. C. Priorities for Award of Loans Applications will be evaluated and processed as received, based on the eligibility criteria and requirements stated in Section b of these guidelines. The evaluation will consist of an initial determination of the eligibility of the applicant followed by a determination of the needed repairs of the structure. Financial assistance will be awarded to applicants in the order in which their application materials are completed for eligibility determination. 3Income will be based on the applicant's income for the 12 months prior to its application for financial assistance and reflect increases or decreases anticipated during the next 12 months. .Adjusted gross income is defined as a household's annual gross income less: 1) Uncompensated or uncovered medical expenses which exceed 3% of gross income; and 2) $300 for each dependent person in the household other than the spouse. Page 5 l I'J. HOUSING REHABILITATION ZERO-INTEREST LOAN ELEMENT A. Introduction The zero-interest loan element of this Program is designed to F -ovide financial assistance for the housing stock of households with very low income who otherwise cannot afford any increased monthly housing costs. B. Eligibility Requirements This section sets forth the eligibility criteria and requirements for receiving zero-interest loan. These criteria assess both the structure and the applicant from the standpoint of need and eligibility. 1. General Requirements Owner-occupied single family structures and duplexes5 will be eligible for rehabilitation financial assistance, if the property: 1) is in need of repair to eliminate hazardous conditions and/or other code violations; and 2) is owned by a household which has a qualifying income as defined in the following sections and which has been in permanent legal possession of the property for at least six months prior to applying for financial assistance. 2. Eligible Costs Work and items of repair eligible under this program are to be completed as available funds allow, in the following order of priority: 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 and modifications design to improve the mobility of handicapped or elderly persons, in order to conform to code standards applicable to existing resi- dential structures to ensure safe, decent, and sanitary housing; to enhance the appearance of the structure and of the neighborhood exterior painting will be included as an item of repair unless determined unnecessary; C. To correct any incipient deficiencies which would make it impossible for a structure to be brought to readily, and maintained at code standards; d. To replace built-in cooking appliances when required for safety reasons; e. To provide for or enlarge a room or finish an attic or basement in order to alleviate a condition of overcrowding as specificed in Chapter 4 of the Uniform Housing Code. f. To remove unrepairable second buildings, structures, and other blighting influences located on the property, which may include repair or replacement of dilapidated fencing; g. To make other general repairs if funds are available and when the amount spent does not exceed 4096 of the loan amount. 4See .Appendix A for current table of income by household size which meet these criteria. 5For the financial pUrposes of this program, duplex is defned as one structure w*lth two living units or two single farnily structures on one parcel. Page 7 b. A loan of up to 125% of the maximum specified in (a) above may be originated subject to the following: 1) -,General property improvements as allowed under Section IV B (2)(7) cannot exceed 40% of the loan maximum specified in Section IV D (1)(a). 2) The maximum amount by which the maximum loan amount specified in Section IV D (1) (a) above may be exceeded is the lessor of: a) $5,000 b) an amount derived by subtracting $12,000 (60% of the maximum loan amount specified in Section IV D (a)(a) above) from the cost of completing required code improvements (as specified in Section IV B- (2)(a-f) above). For purposes of the above calculation costs not allocable directly to improvements (profits, overhead, etc.) shall be included on a pro-rata basis in a ratio reflecting the code/general property improvement ratio. c. The existing indebtedness against the property plus the amount of the zero-interest loan, shall not exceed 90% of the appraised after-improvement value of the property at the time the financial assistance is approved. 2. Term and Security Requirements The zero-interest loan is due and payable after five years or upon sale or transfer of the property, but may be repaid in full or in part at any time prior to such date. As the end of five years, if the applicant household still resides in the same house and can demonstrate its continued, inability to repay the zero-interest loan, the loan term may be extended for an additional'five year term. If, however, at the end of five years the applicant has sufficient income to be eligible for the interest bearing loan component of the program, the zero-interest loan will be converted to an interest bearing loan under the then existing guidelines and policies of such program. All zero interest loans will be secured by a Deed of Trust, which serves the Promissory Note. Upon transfer of the property in the case of.inheritance, the finanical capabilities of the heir will be considered prior to requiring repayment. V. APPLICABILITY OF EACH PROGRAM ELEMENT It is the intent of this program that each household, as applicant, be evaluated for eligibility under the loan element first and the zero-interest loan element second to ensure that the use of loans is maximized in order to establish a revolving fund, for future program years, which realizes immediate returns of funds. For example, if the household can support payments on a low-interest loan given its income and credit history, then it would not be eligible for a zero-interest loan. The origination of a combination interest bearing loan/zero interest deferred loan is `permissive under these policies. In all cases, if the household qualified for a conventional market rate loan, it would npt be eligible for either of these program elements. VI. ADMINISTRATION %greements with financial institutions exist for implementation and servicing of the financial. aspects .of the program elements. implementation of the Housing Rehabilitation Program is- �'1e responsibility of the County Building Inspection Department in close ATTACEtMEM r z U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development 4r•' ~�G San Francisco Regional Office, Region IX 450 Golden Gate Avenue `'•.wsf..°° San Francisco,California 94102-3448 APR 51989 co rn WP 0 rnn Mr. Phillip Batchelor r o County Administrator County of Contra Costa 651 Pine Street P.O. Box 951 Martinez, CA 94553 Dear Mr. Batchelor: SUBJECT: Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program Program Number: B-88-UC-06-0002 Rental Rehabilitation Program (RRP) Program Plumber: R-87/88-UC-06-0223 Comprehensive Rehabilitation Monitoring Report During the period of February 6 through March 9, 1989, Mark Walling, Rehabilitation Management Specialist, of the San Francisco Office of Community Planning and Development (CPD) , performed a comprehensive rehabilitation monitoring review of your rehabilitation programs financed through use of the Community Development Block Grant and the Rental Rehabilitation Programs. The purpose of monitoring visits is to determine whether the grantee ' has administered and implemented its rehabilitation programs according to Federal requirements, as well as to provide a general overview of program performance. In this manner, and where appropriate, grantees can be assisted with production and management techniques that lead to more efficient program performance. The monitoring was a comprehensive review of the HUD funded rehabilitation programs administered by your community. Comprehensive monitoring is a process whereby HUD reviews all rehabilitation programs under your community's administration, to include in-depth reviews where appropriate. This process offers an opportunity to evaluate the community' s ability to use CPD' s rehabilitation programs efficiently and comment on a spectrum of administrative strengths and weaknesses. An in-depth review covers such items as: statutory and regulatory program requirements, program design, progress, eligibility, and an on- site inspection of completed projects to assess the quality of construction. } The period under review for this monitoring visit was from April 1 , 1988, to March 1 , 1989. The primary participants in the monitoring were: Dennis Fransen, Principal Planner; Skip Epperly, Administrative Assistant; Mickie Solis, Housing Rehabilitation Coordinator; Robert McEwan, Rental Rehabilitation Coordinator; and Janet Haroutunian Kennedy, Housing Division Manager; City of San Pablo (a County subrecipient) . A separate meeting with Mr. Jay Daley, Rehabilitation Director for the City of Pittsburg (a County subrecipient) , was held on February 10, 1989, to discuss the City's rehabilitation program, and assess the housing stock within the greater Pittsburg area. Mr. Walling held an exit conference with the County staff on March 9, 1989, to discuss the results of the monitoring. He was accompanied by Mr. Gerald Burke, CPD Representative for Contra Costa County. The County's programs are moving along at a satisfactory rate. In addition to housing rehabilitation efforts, the County is involved in a number of other housing activities. Among these activities are efforts to provide housing for the homeless and create more affordable housing. Information on HUD's goal to encourage more joint ventures for affordable housing (JVAH) were discussed as well . Region IX has a special effort for JVAH this year, and for further information, the staff was advised to contact Gary Hanes at (415) 556-4791. One strength of the County's program administration is its streamlined approach to the processing of rehabilitation applications. The staff provides maximum service while maintaining the minimum of controls. However, like the two-edged sword, this streamlined approach has a weakness. Our concern lies with the lack of a method which documents that the costs of the rehabilitation work is reasonable. This concern is also raised in our review of San Pablo's program. Each of these concerns are addressed later in our report. Enclosed are attachments to this letter which provide a report of each program monitored. The first attachment summarizes the results of our comprehensive assessment of the combined CPD rehabilitation programs administered by the County. The additional attachments assess the specific administration of the CDBG rehabilitation program, the RRP, operated by the County Housing Authority, and the City of San Pablo Rehabilitation Loan Program. These reports also provide a general up- date on HUD funded rehabilitation programs. Within the reports, both findings and concerns may be listed. A finding is defined as a program element which does not comply with a specific Federal statute or regulation. A concern is either a potential finding, or a discussion of an element which should be addressed to improve program performance. We have: raised one finding and three concerns which in brief are as follows: Findings: 1. City of San Pablo: The Lum Sum Deposit Agreement has expired and the funds must be returned to the County. Concerns• 1. Contra Costa County: Method for cost reasonableness. 2. City of San Pablo: Method for cost reasonableness. 3. City of San Pablo: Program efficiency. These findings and concerns are fully addressed in the enclosed attachments. - For ease of identification and response, the findings and concerns have been numbered sequentially within the attachments. Please respond to each finding within 30 days of the date of this letter. We appreciate the cooperation and assistance extended to Mr. Walling during the monitoring visit. The staff was positive, cooperative, and demonstrated a strong desire to meet the housing needs of the citizens of the County of Contra Costa. Should you have any questions pertaining to the contents of this letter, please contact Mark S. Walling at (415) 556-3317. Very sincerely yours, J C. Bruce Hibbard Director Rehabilitation Division Enclosure cc: Dennis Fransen, Principal Planner ATTACHMENT I SUMMARY OF COMPREHENSIVE MONITORING Our summary of the comprehensive monitoring visit is discussed here. The purpose of the summary is to assess five key areas which help to determine how well your community is maximizing the efficiency of its rehabilitation programs through effective utilization of CDBG rehabilitation dollars. The five areas addressed are: 1) responsiveness of the programs to the Housing Assistance Plan (HAP), 2) effective use of the CPD rehabilitation programs, 3) efficiency of program design and related administrative costs, 4) production progress, and 5) management of construction to assure timely completion and a high quality of work. 1. RESPONSIVENESS OF THE PROGRAMS TO THE UPDATED ASSESSMENT OF THE NEEDS INCLUDED IN THE HAP. Analysis: The administration of the rehabilitation programs shows a balanced approach toward the completion of single family, owner occupied units, and rental units. The County has completed 48 owner occupied units during the last program year. Since the inception of the Rental Rehabilitation Program (RRP) in 1984, the County has completed 152. units. The County's HAP goals show that over three years, 225 owner occupied units will be rehabilitated, and 150 rental units will be rehabilitated. The HAP also shows that under the units suitable for rehabilitation category, 83 percent of the rental units are occupied by low- and moderate-income families. Under the same category, 60 percent of the owner occupied units are occupied by low- and moderate-income families. Therfore, in considering the future allocation of rehabilitation resources, it is important to note that a larger population of low- to moderate-income families live in rental units. The County has made substantial progress toward the rehabilitation of rental housing through its use of the RRP. The program design, to include using CDBG funds as matching funds, has proven effective in attracting investors to the program. This year there is no cap as to the amount of funds that can be reallocated as bonus funds for good performance. Therefore, we encourage the County to continue its efforts . to meet the needs of families living in rental housing through use of the RRP. 2. THE EFFECTIVE UTILIZATION AND COORDINATION OF THE CPD REHABILITATION PROGRAMS ADMINISTERED SO AS TO MAXIMIZE THE POTENTIAL OF EACH. Analysis. The County is successful in that it has made use of two of CPD's rehabilitation programs: CDBG and RRP. We also urge the County to weigh the potential use of the Section 312 Rehabilitation Loan Program. This program, while currently not funded for FY-89, has the potential for assisting in the rehabilitation of a variety of properties. It can be a vital tool when considering a neighborhood approach to rehabilitation, providing low interest financing to owner occupied, investor, and commercial rehabilitation efforts. 0 3. EFFICIENCY OF PROGRAM DESIGN OF THE CPD REHABILITATION PROGRAMS ADMINISTERED, INCLUDING ASSOCIATED ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS. Analysis. The rehabilitation programs administered by the County appear to be well designed and operating at efficient levels. There is a degree of streamlining incorporated into each program. For example, in the RRP, investors are responsible for developing the work specifications and providing bids. Staff then reviews the specifications to ensure that work items correct noted deficiencies, and completes the process with an approval of the bid for cost reasonableness. Nevertheless, our review of efficoncy measures suggest some improvement is needed as discussed below in production progress. 4. PRODUCTION PROGRESS IN ALL PROGRAMS ADMINISTERED. Analysis. Production progress for the two programs administered by the County appears stable. However, we are concerned with the City of San Pablo's level of performance which, when compared with levels prescribed by Headquarters in CPD Notice 89-04, places the City below the median level of performance. (A copy of Notice 89-04 has been forwarded to your staff by separate mail ) . During our visit with the City, techniques for increasing production were discussed with the staff. Brochures on streamlining techniques and the rehabilitation of rental housing have also been forwarded to the City by separate mail . Our attachment on San Pablo' s CDBG program reviews the issue of performance in greater detail . S. MANAGEMENT OF CONSTRUCTION TO ASSURE TIMELY COMPLETION AND HIGH QUALITY WORK. Analysis. Construction management is a major key to the success of all rehabilitation programs. In our review, we found a need for improving the method for determining cost reasonableness. Where the quality of construction was reviewed, the work appears to be performed at a satisfactory level . However, we suggest that greater attention be given to major systems in danger of failure. This issue was reviewed in our CDBG Attachments. ATTACHMENT II CDBG REHABILITATION PROGRAM County of Contra Costa Report on Rehabilitation Monitoring of Visit of February 6, 1989 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT (CDBG) PROGRAM This report on the CDBG rehabilitation program addresses the following program areas: - Program design, progress, and compliance with the applicable laws, regulations, and terms ofthe grant agreement; - Project eligibility requirements, review for cost reasonableness, and quality of construction; - Accountability of program funds and review of lump sum agreements. Program design, progress, and compliance with applicable laws, regulations and terms of the grant agreement. Program Design Analysis The County employs four persons assigned to ' the Building Inspection Division to carry out the day-to-day operations of its owner occupied rehabilitation loan program. Ms. Mickie Solis, Housing Rehabilitation Coordinator, oversees a clerk and two Housing Rehabilitation Specialists. The staff appears highly motivated and demonstrates a strong commitment to meeting the housing needs of the communities they serve. The County offers two basic financial options to its clients. First, applicants earning less than 50 % of the median income are offered a deferred payment loan (DPL) . The terms of the DPL are: a five year term, a zero percent interest rate, and a maximum loan amount of $25,000. Clients earning between 50-80% of the median income are offered an amortized loan (AL) . The terms of the AL are: a five to 15 year term, a three to 1.0 percent interest- rate, and a maximum loan amount of $25,000. During last year's monitoring visit by Robert Ilumin, Rehabilitation Management Specialist, a concern was raised as to how interest rates were set for amortized loan applicants. Specifically, he noted that loan rates were based on the borrowers- ability to afford more debt, up to a maximum..50 o debt ratio. Borrowers unable to afford additional debt, and not qualified to receive a DPI_, went unassisted. During this year's monitoring, we noted the above method continues to be used to arrive at loan interest rates for applicants. Therefore, we again raised our concern with Ms. Solis and suggested some optional methods which might provide greater flexibility for the program. For example, we discussed a method by which housing expenses would be considered in determining interest rates. Citing a parallel , tenants receiving Section 8 assistance pay no more than 30 percent of their adjusted income for housing. Applying such a cap for setting interest rates could work in the following manner: (1 ) An applicant with housing costs exceeding 30 percent would receive assistance through a five year deferred payment loan, (2) Applicants expending less than 30 percent of adjusted income for housing costs would be required to buy an amortized loan, i .e. , up to the 30 percent cap, and (3) If the amortized low interest loan fell short of the required loan amount for rehabilitation costs, a deferred loan could be used to bridge the gap. Using such an approach, the method of determining interest rates would be simplified. For example, one interest rate could be used, say five percent, for both amortized and deferred loans. Such a policy would ensure equitible treatment of all applicants, and provide a solution that may provide financing to applicants regardless of their debt ratio, which includes consumer debt. Such a policy would reward borrowers who have highhousing costs, but have managed their consumer debt well . Alternatively, borrowers with high-cost consumer debt would not be given low interest loans based solely on their overall debt ratio. Marketing Marketing efforts are carried out using newspaper ads, brochures, project signs, and door-to-door delivery in assisted areas. These efforts appear successful and are generating a constant demand for services. Production, Progress, and Administrative Costs For the period in review, the County successfully committed its allocation of rehabilitation funds and leveraged some private dollars. The County has committed a total of $976,871 in program dollars for the reporting period. Private dollars combined with these funds to .yield a total of $1,117,355 in rehabilitation contracts. This computes to a leveraging ratio of 1:1.14. Administrative costs (staff salaries, benefits, and materials, services and supplies) totaled $218,841 for the period. When these costs are compared against total dollar output, an administrative cost per loan dollar (AC/LD) ratio of 20 percent emerges (i .e. , $0.20 of each dollar loaned is for administrative costs). For the Region, our more successful programs show AC/LD ranging between 20 and 30 percent. Therefore, the County is commended for efficient output where AC/LD is used as a measure. The staff consists of one managerial person, two professionals, and one clerical position. Our analysis shows that the program is carried out by four full-time equivalent (FTE) staff persons. (A FTE is defined as a person who works 37-40 hours per week for a 52 week period). Headquarters has published CPD Notice 89-04, dated January 11, 1989, of which the subject is: Productivity Guidelines for Community Development Block Grant Single Family Rehabilitation Programs. (A copy has been forwarded to staff by separate mail ). The Notice describes acceptable productivity levels for grantees (or subrecipients) in terms of the number of completed single family dwelling units. These levels are based on a survey of 171 entitlement grantees across the nation. For programs where the average cost of a rehabilitated units exceeds $10,000 per unit, the median number of units completed per FTE is 11 . Programs completing more than 15 units per -FTE are considered operating most efficiently. The Department is very concerned with programs operating at the lowest decile of the survey results, which is noted as 0 to 5 units completed per FTE. Our review of the County shows that 48 units were completed during the reporting period, which computes to 12 units completed per FTE (UC/FTE) . Eleven units were completed per FTE for units costing $10,000 or more. The average cost for all units completed computes to $18,276. The high cost of the construction typically increases the amount of staff time associated with each unit completed. Given these results, no concern is being raised concerning production output where UC/FTE is measured. A review of current progress shows that: 1 ) six units are pending loan approval , 2) 44 units were approved for financing during the period, and 3) nine units are under construction. The number of units pending approval appears low, and marketing efforts may need to be increased to ensure a sufficient flow of applications for the current year goals. Project eligibility requirements and file review for cost reasonableness and quality of construction. Analysis: The County is adequately reviewing income for low-and moderate- income applicants and meetinq eligibility requirements. , Our review of the project files shows that 1.00 percent of the funds were made available to low- and moderate-income families. Five site visits were made and are discussed below under our quality of construction review. Ten project files were reviewed with no findings made. However, a review of the County' s method for determining cost reasonableness raises a concern. CONCERN NO. 1: Review for Cost Reasonableness. The County uses a streamlined approach which maximizes the efficiency of staff resources. However, documentation supporting proper checks and balances is not always evident in the file to show that the costs of the rehabilitation work is reasonable. For example, the staff signs off on a checklist indicating that the bid was reviewed. However, there is nothing to indicate approval of the bid in terms of reasonableness for cost. A discussion with the staff indicated that an evaluation of costs for reasonableness is routinely performed, but no documentation is provided. Recommendation: While we do not wish to impede the streamlined approach used by the County, we must ensure that reasonable costs are being incurred as required under OMB Circular A-87. We have asked staff to provide file documentation which shows costs were reviewed and approved for cost reasonableness. At our exit conference the staff indicated that this process would be incorporated into the procedures. Quality of Construction. The quality of construction is considered above average for the projects reviewed. The working specifications and supporting general .specifications used in the program are well written and well thought out. However, one weakness was noted in that energy conservation improvements did not appear to be routinely performed, e.g. , water heaters and hot water pipes were found located in unconditioned areas without insulation wrapped around them. We suggest steps be taken to incorporate energy efficient improvements into the work specifications. Site visits to the following projects were made with no findings noted: 1. 48 Christine St. , San Pablo, 5 year DPL, 0%, $15,942; 2. 471 Michele St. , San Pablo, 15 year AL, 4%, $25,000; 3. 2069 Sherman St. , Pleasant Hill , 15 year AL, 3%, $24,991; 4. 855 Audrey Ct. , Pleasant Hill , 15 year AL, 3%, $22,300; 5. 1750 Giaramita St. , Richmond, 5 year DPL, 0%, $21,607. Accountability of Program Funds Analysis: The County uses an account with Great Western Savings and Loan to disburse contractor progress payments. Upon loan approval , CDBG funds are deposited under the applicant's name and loan number. Disbursements are made following written request and authorization by the contractor, owner, and housing rehabilitation specialist. We noted however, that the owner is only required to sign off on the last payment voucher. We recommend that the owner sign off on all progress payment vouchers, thereby accepting the work performed and reducing the County's liability that a payment would be released without consent for the work performed. Ms. Nona Garnett of the Auditors Office is the person responsible for maintaining accounting records of program transactions. Ms. Solis maintains Bank disbursement records and routinely reconciles these with Ms. Garnett. Program income is being generated by loan payoffs and a compensating balance lump sum agreement (see below). Actual program income received to date is $319,723. Projections for program income this year fall -between $200,000 and $400,000. A review of the financial accounting records was made with no findings or concerns raised. Lump Sum Agreements The County has a lump sum agreement with Great Western Savings and Loan which uses a compensating balance method to leverage private dollars. Program income from loan payments is returned to the program, providing additional funds for loans. A rev.iew of the lump sum agreement was performed at the request of the staff on January 6, 1989. The County was advised that the interest rate paid on deposited funds needed to be changed. The agreement stated that the interest rate paid by the bank would be no more than four points below the rate on one year Treasury -obligations at constant maturity. However, the regulations at 570.513(b)(9) (i )(A) states the rate must be no more than three points below the constant maturity rate. We were advised that this has been corrected. Additional information gathered during the monitoring visit allows us to note the following activities: Agreement executed October 21, 1988; Lump sum deposit of $655,000 was made on January 9, 1989; First loan approved January 9, 1989; Borrower Ballerstien, for $24,835; Total number of loans approved thru March 9th is seven; Total dollar amount is $132,591. Given the loan activity outlined above, the County is found to be in compliance with the 45-day lump sum requirement. In addition, it appears that a substantial amount (25 %) of the lump sum deposit will be allocated to rehabilitation loans within the 180 day period as required. PROGRAM PROGRESS -MATRIX __--^ ----__-_ Page one of two /r -t.. Community (�rT�(/feeL� ��S�� ( OU/V/ Report Period Proqram No. From: :/--/-PS:' To: I. REHABILITATION ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS 1. COMMITMENTS DURING THE' PERIOD: Enter the dollar amount for projects that received loan commitments during the period. Program Funds Actual Costs A. CDBG Single .Family (1 Unit) s Q7/o, 871 . B. CDBG Multifamily (? 1 Unit) C. Rental Rehab Program D. Section 312 Loans E. Other Funding Sources (1) F. TOTAL ALL FUNDS NOTES: (1) List other funding sources here: ._/-w l ,'f _�rq111112l 2. LEVERAGING RATIO: Divide Actual Costs by Program Funds. 1_8z:7. 3. PROGRAM DELIVERY COSTS FOR STAFFING AND RELATED COSTS: A. Staff costs: For each of the following categories, indicate the number of persons assigned to rehab, the full-time equivalents, and salaries and benefits costs for the period. Managers / Professionals / Clerical / Total_ 1) No. Persons . �_ — / �7 2) FTE equivalents 3) Salaries and Ben. _ Ad j Mated f or FTEs �s, ,�', ��L1�, S�� O C 5 B. Other Program Delivery Cost: Indicate the total non- staff expenditures for rehab delivery. $_ 2 = . �'/ ? C. TOTAL OF ALL DELIVERY COSTS: Add totals of costs from sections ...:A. & 3.B. : s Z 2 y/ 3. DELIVERY COSTS PER PROGRAM DOLLAR: Divide line 3.C. by line 1 . J. 7 II. PROGRAM PROGRESS: Page two of two 1. PROGRESS: Enter the total number of units under the appropriate dollar category. Use actual project costs, not program costs. Avg. Doll ars/uni t $1000 to 10,000 $10, 000 or More Total Units SF/Rental SF/Rental SF/Rental A. Units pending loan approval : B. Units committed: C. Units under const: D. Units completed: 3 l5/ tel �. AVERAGE COST PER UNIT: Indicate the average cost of C D86X FU,uQEA rehabilitated single family dwelling units completed during the reporting period. $ 1001'a-Z6 I 3. UNITS COMPLETED PER FTE. Divide lines II. 1.D. by the total number of FTEs indicated in Section I.3.A.2) on page 1. $1000 to 10.000 �10.5)00 or More Total Units No. Units ,75 /FTE //.Z /FTE /FTE 4. TYPE OF FINANCING USED. Indicate the type (s) of financing used in your rehabilitation programs. t )Grants Max. Loan amount (VI"Def erred Payment: Max Loan Amount $ 5� 0 C O ( )Forgivable ( NON-Forgivable ( )Term yrs. Interest Rate (v'Amorti z ed Loans Max. Loan Amount Term yrs. Interest Rate - '4 Other: Report Prepared By: Date: cc: Rehabilitation Services Division Program Manager (Note: File original with monitoring report) �.•t�a U.S.Department of Housing and Urban Development San Francisco Regional Office,Region IX a *8 450 Golden Gate Avenue San Francisco.California 94102-3448 ��4tOCVt� -- 20 APR 1588 Mr. Phi 11 i p Batchelor APR 25 1988 County Administrator County of Contra Costa CCWTRA COSTA CUU14TV 651 Pine Street P. 0. Box 951 BUIDfNn tN,9pFt;t0R Martinez, CA 94553 Dear Mr. Batchelor: SUBJECT: Report on Monitoring Visit Housing Rehabilitation Activities Community Development Block Grant Program (CDBG) B-86-UC-06-0002 Rental Rehabilitation Program (RRP) R-87-UC-06-0223 This letter serves to confirm the results of our monitoring visit to your community on March 8-15, 1988. This review of the County's Housing Rehabilitation activities authorized under the subject HUD programs was carried out by Robert Ilumin, HUD Rehabilitation Management Specialist, in cooperation with Dennis Fransen, Principal Planner, Skip Epperly, Administrative Assistant, Mickie Solis, Housing Rehabilitation Director, and Robert McEwen, Rental Rehabilitation Coordinator. The items identified in this letter were discussed with County staff on March 18, 1988. The purpose of the monitoring visit was to assist the County to improve productivity, efficiency and overall management of its Housing Rehabilitation programs. As part of this visit, the following areas were reviewed: A. Program progress and compliance with applicable laws , regulations and terms of the grant agreement. B. Eligibility of projects, cost and quality of rehabilitation. C. Cash and Management Information System (RRP) and account- ability of CDBG and RRP funds. No findings are being established as a result of our review. However, some concerns have been identified to improve the County's overall administration of its Housing Rehabilitation Programs. Page 2 A. Program progress and compliance with applicable laws, regulations and terms of the grant agreement. Excellent progress is being made under the County's CDBG and RRP Housing Rehabilitation program. We note that under the RRP, the County has committed 64%, or $500,181, of its total RRP grant award of $779,260. This commitment rate, when compared against similar grantees, was found to be more than adequate. Total number of RRP projects in the processing pipeline were 10, representing 52 units, for a potential RRP commitment level of $260,000 during the next 4 months. Under the County's CDBG rehabilitation program, we found a similar level of progress and noted the following level of loan activity under this. component of the County's rehabilitation program. For the period reviewed, April 1987,. through March 1988, the amount committed was $681,292 for 88 loan cases processed and approved. Currently, the County has 22 loan applications in the processing pipeline representing $444,607. Administrative cost was $201,973, or an average cost per dollar loaned of .29t, based on loans processed and approved between April 1987 to March 1988. Of the loan activities generated during this period, we have determined that adequate staff capacity existed to carry out and implement authorized housing rehabilitation activities (CDBG and RRP) in an efficient and timely manner. A review of the County's policies and procedures for both the CDBG and RRP programs found them to be in compliance with HUD requirements. We note that loan assistance under the County's CDBG program is limited to households whose incomes do not exceed 80% of the area median income. In addition, RRP projects were located in appropriate neighborhoods with rents below the established fair market rent for the area. Of the five CDBG single family loan cases reviewed, we found adequate documentation to support the income eligibility of property owners that were selected into the -program. 1. Program Concern - RRP A review of program documents found them to be in compliance with RRP program requirements. However, we noted that one document notifying tenants of the availability of Section 8 housing assistance should be revised to include information concerning the County's Tenant Assistance Policies. Page 3 The policies themselves need not be repeated on the document, but should indicate that a policy regarding the displacement, temporary or otherwise, of tenants affected by rehabilitation activities have been developed and is available for review. 2. Program Concern - CDBG We note that the County has established a loan committee to review staff recommendations on single family loan applications. Our review of individual loan files revealed several inconsistences on the loan approval dates. We noted that staff recommendations for loan approval , rather than the loan committee approval dates, initiated construction activities for several CDBG single family rehabilitation projects. In discussing these discrepancies with staff, it was explained that the loan committee chairman and other members, were not always available to formally review and approve loans. However, members that were present did, in fact, review loans presented by staff, but did not have the authority to officially approve loans whenever the Committee chairman was absent. Since the County has elected to establish a loan committee to review staff recommendations, the County should designate, perhaps by seniority, the loan committee member who can approve loans in the absence of the loan committee chairman. This will insure. that the loan review and approval process is not delayed because of absences and compliance with the County's loan approval process. 3. Program Concerns .CDBG We note that the County's CDBG loan program offers two types of loan financing for qualified property owners. The first type is a 0%, deferred payment loan for households earning less than 50% of the area median income. The second type of loan financing offers applicants with incomes between 50-80% of the area median income, an interest bearing (3% - 10%) amortized loan. We understand that interest rates are set according to the applicants ability to carry additional debt and is based on a maximum 50% debt to income ratio. Two program concerns are raised relating to the County's low interest amortized loan program. It is not clear from reviewing the County's loan policies and procedures just how interest rates from 3 - 10% are being. set; for example, what criteria is used to determine whether an applicant qualifies for a 3, 5 or 10% loan? It is recommended that the County make this clear in its policies, so that loan applicants are aware of any additional criteria used in setting interest rates. Page 4 The County may want to utilize a debt to income ratio table as a way of illustrating how interest rates will be established. For example, a table may be established in the following manner: 'Debt to Income Ratio % Rate 40 - 50% 3 30 - 40% 4 20 - 30% 5 10 - 20% 7 0 - 10% 9 As previously noted, County policy establishes that applicants with incomes between 50-80% of the area median income would be considered for an interest bearing amortized loan. However, for those with a debt to income ratio of over 50%, these applicants would be disqualified for rehabilitation loan assistance. While we recognize the County's right to establish such a policy for its program, we believe that the policy is too restrictive, particularly in light of the fact that a 0% deferred loan is being offered to other low income applicants in the County. We recommend that these applicants also be considered for a 0% deferred loan and that a review of the borrowers financial status be conducted every 3 or 4 years for the purpose of determining the ability of the borrower to qualify for the County's low interest amortized loan. We believe that this approach is more seasonable than disqualifying an applicant from the program, because of a high (over 50%) debt to income ratio. This alternative in our opinion will address HUD and County program objectives of providing rehabilitation assistance to low income property owners and the additional County objective of a reasonable return of program loan funds. B. Eligibility of projects, cost and quality of rehabilitation Five (5) CDBG and three (3) RRP projects were selected for in depth review. Based upon our examination of these projects, we have determined that they meet HUD and County requirements for eligibility, scope of work and cost reasonableness. In addition, based upon a site visit performed on the selected projects , we have also determined that work has been completed in a timely and acceptable manner. C. Cash and Management Information System (RRP) and accountability of CDBG and RRP funds. A review of this area find that procedures established for disbursing project loan funds were more than adequate, providing appropriate safeguards and controls. No findings or concerns are being established in this program area. l Page 5 Lump Sam Agreement: The County's agreement with Great Western Bank, executed on January 28, 1988, calls for the County to deposit $529,923 in CDBG funds for its rehabilitation loan program. A review of this Agreement finds it in compliance with HUD's lump sum requirements. We also note the following activities associated with the County's lump sum agreement with Great Western Bank: Agreement Executed - January 28, 1988 Lump Sum Drawdown - March 3, 1988. . .$529,923 First Loan Approved - March 10, 1988 Borrower: Allen Walker, $24,961 Total Number of loans approved in March: 5 Total Dollar Amount - $198,756 Based upon the loan activities outlined, the County has complied with the Department's 45-day lump sum use requirements. Conclusion Please be advised that the concerns and recommendations identified in this letter have been made to improve and refine County policies and procedures for the purpose of insuring full compliance with local and HUD program requirements. We appreciate the County's cooperation and courtesies extended to Robert Ilumin during his visit to your community. If you have any questions, please 'do not hesitate calling him at (415) 556-3317. Sincerely, C. Bruce Hibbard Director Rehabilitation Division Office of CPD cc: Mr. Dennis Fransen Principal Planner Mr. Mickie Solis Rehabilitation Director Mr. Robert McEwen Rental Rehabilitation Coordinator -U.S.Department of Housing and Urban Development Qom• t = San Francisco Regional Office,Region IX t * 450 Golden Gate Avenue oE�Eel, San Francisco,California 94102-3448 4 JAN Mr. Phillip Batchelor County Administrator County of Contra Costa `: P.O. Box 951 ] Martinez, CA 94553 "oma p�D Dear Mr. Batchelor: Gtr' k\�V�` � 1N� SUBJECT: Focused Monitoring CDBG Program B-85-UC-06-0002 County of Contra Costa On January 17, 22, and 23, 1986, Mike Daugherty of my staff visited Contra Costa County to monitor the County's administration of its CDBG Program. This year's review focused on the areas of program progress, maximum feasible priority to lower income residents, service area and rehabilita- tion benefit, assistance to for-profit enterprises, subrecipient manage- ment, and rehabilitation management. Program Progress Since your original CDBG approval in 1975, Contra Costa County has received annual grants totalling $38,654,425. At the time of monitoring, the County had drawn down $34,995,600, or 91 percent of the cumulative grant amount, for the implementation of program activities. This expenditure rate falls within the timeliness threshold established by HUD to encourage the prompt utilization of CDBG dollars. For a grantee 9 months into its program year, the standard is that no more than 1.75 years of entitlement funding should remain in the CDBG Letter of Credit. Your $3,658,825 Letter of Credit balance in early January is 1.1 times your latest grant and is well above the HUD performance standard. Your $1,355,000 Jobs Bill program has been closed out since out last monitoring. We appreciate the County's cooperation in the closeout pro- cess. We have no negative findings in this area.- The County is continuing its fine record of implementing activities in a timely manner. s -2- Maximum Feasible Priority All of the County's projects are designed to provide principal benefit to lower income persons. We found no instances of activities which fail to satisfy one of the benefit tests or which do not have the likelihood of satisfying such tests when the activity is completed. We have no findings in this area. Service Area Benefit The. purpose of this review is to insure that target area-wide projects do indeed serve areas where a majority of the residents are low and moderate income persons. As we found last year, complete income data, based upon 1980 census updates and HUD supplied demographic information, is available to support your service area benefit projects. The County has an in-house demographer to interpret and update census data on an as-needed basis. Each target area serves a population that is at least 51 percent lower income. We have no negative findings in this area. Rehabilitation Benefit Under Section 570.901 (b)(i)(iv) of the CDBG regulations, the rehabili- tation of a housing unit provides lower income benefit only if the unit is occupied by low or moderate income persons. We checked five rehabilitation case files and found that sufficient income verification, in the form of Social Security documentation, income tax returns, and employer reports, was present in each. Four of the reha- bilitation beneficiaries were of very low income. We have no negative findings in this area. The County's rehabilitation program provides maximum benefit to lower income residents. Rehabilitation Management During the period from January 1, 1985 through December 31, 1985, the County commited $1,277,714 for the completion of 50 single family residen- tial rehabilitation jobs and progress payments on 20 uncompleted jobs. Administrative costs of $258,6,17 were incurred during this same time period. Your administrative cost ratio per dollar of rehabilitation loan delivered thus equals $ .0.20. This amount is less than the $ 0.24 average administrative cost in our jurisdiction, and reflects a continuation of the improved production and consequent reduced overhead costs that- we found in our last monitoring visit. r r { r r r -3- We reviewed three case files and, in addition to the income verifica- tions, found the necessary documentation with respect to work write-ups, contruction contracts, staff inspections, and payments to contractors. We also did site inspections on three completed rehabilitation jobs and spoke with the homeowners. The rehabilitation work appears to have been completed in a sound, professional manner with close inspection by County staff. All owners were satisfied with their completed jobs and with the assistance provided by staff. During the past year, the County entered into a lump sum rehabilitation agreement with Great Western Savings. A total of $500,000 in CDBG funds has been placed in the account to date, and it is anticipated that an addi- tional $450,000 will be drawn down as soon as the original amount is depleted in the near future. Please remember to wait until the original deposit is fully depleted before making the next draw down and to inform this office of the date and amount of the additional deposit. Our review of the lump-sum agreement found that the technical require- ments of the regulations have been satisfied. The agreement provides for the commitment of private funds and provision of administrative services at reduced cost. Staff has also found that private funds are being com- mited at higher risk than would normally be taken. The term of the lump-sum agreement is two years, and the first loan under the agreement was approved within 45 days. Rehabilitation program records have been computerized since our last visit, and we were impressed by the range and depth of data that can be quickly retrieved. Many of the areas that we monitor, such as administra- tive costs, average loan amounts, and program income, are readily available, along with a wide variety of information necessary for the local administration and evaluation of the program. We have no findings in this area. Your rehabilitation program is being effectively administered. We appreciate the assistance provided by Micki Solis in gathering the information needed for our review, and we want to thank Micki, Bill Martindale, Mike Silva, and Dean Wells for their time and courtesy during our visit. Assistance to For-Profit Enterprises This is -a special area of concern nationally both because it is an administration priority to foster job producing economic enterprises and because we must insure that funds allocated to for-profit entities do indeed meet the test of providing principal benefit to lower income persons. -4- The County, through its subgrantee, Pacific Community Services, Inc., has loaned a limited amount of CDBG funds to leverage SBA 502 and 503 loans for the establishment or expansion of businesses that employ lower income persons. To date, four loans ranging from $15,000 to $22,000 have been approved and one $10,000 loan is pending. Each participating business, as a condition of its loan, is required to execute a non-financial employment plan agreement that specifies the following: 1. Hiring of one lower income employee for every $2,500 in loan funds approved. 2. The specific job title and salary of each job. 3. That recruitment, training, and referral services from the Contra Costa County Private Industrial Council shall be the prime and initial source for potential employees. 4. That the agreement shall remain in effect for 5 years. This is an excellent contract, and one that covers all of the items needed to insure lower income benefit. Our only suggestion would be that Pacific Community Services, Inc. , the subgrantee responsible for insuring contract compliance, be requested to do an annual follow-up review on each business receiving assistance to insure that the employment agreement is being honored. The results of the review should, of course, be provided to the County. As a result of the three economic development loans completed to date, your records indicate the creation of 21 new low and moderate income jobs and the retention of 36 jobs. An approved but uncompleted loan will create an additional seven lower income jobs for a CDBG investment of $17,500. We have no negative findings in this area. We commend the County for undertaking innovative approaches in the creation and retention of job opportunities for its lower income citizens. Subrecipient Management This is another special area of concern nationally because of the potential for waste, fraud, or mismanagement when CDBG funds are under the control of agencies other than the County. Contra Costa funds a. number of non-profit subrecipients to carry out a variety of public service and housing activities directed toward the needs of lower income residents. -5- Very comprehensive third party contracts have been developed by the County to insure that subrecipients comply with the CDBG regulations while meeting the performance objectives and budgetary restraints established for each activity. Our only suggestions with regard to the contracts would be the addition of an annual audit requirement to conform with the new Single Audit Act and the inclusion of more specific language relative to the disposition of program income, if any. We were pleased to see that the Community Development Department is vigorously enforcing the third party agreement requirement for the sub- mission of quarterly performance reports by subgrantees. It is now County policy to withold funds from agencies whose reports are seriously overdue. On-site monitoring by Community Development staff is ongoing, with the goal of reviewing each subrecipient annually. Letters and reports in the project files document the results of this local monitoring. We have no findings in this area. The County has developed good control mechanisms, including a very complete local monitoring guide, to insure that subrecipients are performing satisfactorily. We encourage you to continue your close attention to subrecipient management. In summary, our focused monitoring resulted in no negative findings. Your Community Development Department is doing an effective job of imple- menting the CDBG program in accordance with applicable regulations. The lower income residents of Contra Costa County are, of course, the ultimate beneficiaries of your delivery system. We appreciate the overall administrative attention provided to the CDBG Program by Dennis Fransen, Skip Epperly, and Jim Kennedy throughout the year, and we particulary appreciate Skip's time and energy in arranging this monitoring visit. Mike Daugherty may be contacted if there are any questions regarding this letter. Sincerely, Geraldine W. Franklin Program Manager, Team A Office of Community Planning and Development cc: Anthony Dehaesus,. Director Dennis Fransen Micki Solis Community Development CDBG Coordinator Housing Rehab Officer PROGRAM PROGRESS (REHAB) Period: 1-1-85/12-31-85 Locality: Contra Costa County (At least one year) - Total number of completions: S0 $ 876,611.:00 (Structures) (Units) (Actual) Total expended: (For completions & progress payments on work yet to be completed for the identified period) X1.,277,714.00 (Actual) Administrative costs: (Costs directly chargeable to the rehab program. DO NOT include general COBG admin costs.) $ . 258,617.00 (Actual) Average loan: $ 17,430.00 Average grant, $ 0 Cost per dollar of loan delivered: (Based on total expended) $ .20 (Actual) Case Processing & Construction; Total number of approved (Final underwriting determination $ funds . reserved) 20 $ 348,600.00 (Structures) (Units) (Estimate) Jobs in progress: (Under construction) 20 Applications in processing: (Initial eligibility has been established, awaiting verifi- cations, inspection, etc.) : 15 Applications• disapproved: 20 Applications cancelled by owner: 23 Type of rehab program: (DPL's, Grants, Amoritzed, etc.) Deferred & Amortized Source of funds: CDBG: X State: , Section 312; , Other; Staff Resources; Contra Costa County Building Inspection Dept (7-84) HOUSING AUTHORITY of the COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA 3133 Estudillo Street • P.O.Box 2759 Martinez,California 94553 tj October 29, 1987 n l :� ^ El Central Administration {\j o;r _ +✓ I (415)372.0791 Construction&Engineering Mr. Dennis Fransen CC�lT�A. COSTA C01-3N "k 15)372-7308 Development Principal Planner BU!-! Dl\,'G ^!SYECTCR (415)372.7391 Community Development Department r`Fiscal Contra Costa County Acctg.&Financial Services (415)372-8134 651 Pine Street �� Housing Operations 4th Floor, North Wing (415)372-7400 Martinez, CA 94553 Occupancy Officer (415)372.0796 SUBJECT: Independent Evaluation of the r Purchasing (415)372-5327 Neighborhood Preservation Program Housing Offices for Contra Costa County '2102 Buchanan Road Dear Dennis: Antioch.CA 94509 (415)754.2565 U 801 "J"Street I was asked by Mickie Solis, Program Coordinator for the County Antioch.CA 94509 (415)757-2925 of Contra Costa's Neighborhood Preservation Program, to conduct E.2425 Bisso Ln.,Suite 225 the Independent program evaluation requested by your office. The Concord,CA 94520 evaluation is based on goals and accomplishments from April 1, 1987 (415)687-8791 through September 30, .1987. There are four major program goals F1 333 Estudillo P.O.Box 2396 Street which were considered during the eval uati oon process: Martinez,CA 94553 (415)372.8621 1. Marketing of Program ❑1601 N.Jade Street No.Richmond,CA 94802 2. Application Process (415)232.8492 3, Rehabilitation (Contracting) Process r--'4th& Rosemary Ln. 4. Development of Financial Reporting System Oakley,CA 94561 (415)625.2245 El 875 El Pueblo Avenue During my ane-day visit to the office and physical inspection of Pittsburg,CA 94565 J (< projects two rehabilitation p ects I was able to assess the following: , 15)432.3523 C 2 California Street Rodeo.CA 94572 1. Marketing (415)799-4476 C 52 Pueblo Avenue The Marketing of the Program is a continuous effort in order to West Pittsburg,CA 94565 (415)458.3242 maintain flow of applications throughout the year. These are the forms of marketing approaches: A. Mailing: Four mailings totaling 12,000 brochures a year are sent to individual homeowners using the Building Inspection Departments Assessor's Listing of property owners in the eight target areas. To date, 6,000 brochures have been mailed. Mr. Dennis Fransen Page 2 October 29, 1987 - B. Public Advertisement: Program brochures are placed on information bulletins in County and City offices, community and neighborhood organizations such as the office on Aging, Neighborhood House and Senior Citizen Centers; and other public offices, such as Assemblyman Isenberg's office, etc. C. Town Meetings: Three town meetings have been held in the areas of Pacheco, Oakley (Supervisor Torlakson's office), and E1 Cerrito. D. Front Lawn Signs: Signs are posted in front of a unit undergoing rehabilitation. According to Mickie Solis, this method has been one of the most effective marketing tools which has resulted in new applications. Also, program inspectors distribute brochures in the surrounding neighborhood of units undergoing rehabilitation. E. Word of Mouth: Dissemination of program information by word of mouth also has resulted in new applications. Contractors are supplied with brochures to pass on to other homeowners. F. Media: The program is advertised in the Contra Costa Times 3 - 4 times a year. Once a year, an article on the program is written as part of Contra Costa Times Public Service Advertisement. Summary: Although the marketing of the program is concentrated in the target areas, other areas in the County may be eligible to participate in the program. The combination of the various forms of marketing is a reflected on the 25 to 30 calls a month received in the Neighborhood Preservation Program Office inquiring about the Program. 2. Application Process During the period between April 1, 1987 and September 30, 1987 there were 180 phone inquiries resulting in 60 applications. Of these, 36 applicants qualified for assistance and their applications processed. In order to determine applicant eligibility, there are three basic requirements: A. Place of Residence B. Ownership Occupancy C.- Type of Rehabilitation needed (Code Requirements, etc. ) If the applicant meets the basic criteria, an appointment is scheduled. At least one week in advance, each applicant receives a letter outlining information necessary to complete the application. Follow-up letters are sent to applicants who have not made appointment within a month. Mr. Dennis Fransen Page 3 October 29, 1987 Given the number of applications processed during five months of operation (April 1st to September 30, 1987). It is likely that another 36 applicants will be assisted by the program thereby asuring continuity. 3. Rehabilitation Process The Neighborhood Preservation Program had a goal of assisting 55 homeowners within Fiscal Year 1987 - 1988 of the Community Development Block Grant Program (CDBG). The following breakdown represents the status of the program indicated on the Housing Rehabilitation Monthly Report for September 1987: Bid Inspection/Out to Bid: 26 Ready for Loan Closing: 6 Under Construction: 16 Rehabilitation Completed 13 Prospective Participants (October 1, 1987 through March 30, 1988) 30 TOTAL 91 Part of the evaluation included a visit to one unit completed and one undergoing rehabilitation. Given the progress schedule shown above, the Neighborhood Preservation Program should meet the Project Goal of assisting 55 homeowners during fiscal year 1987-1988. 4. Develop Financial Reporting System A Financial Reporting System is already in effect in coordination with County Auditor staff. These are the basic goals in the development of the system: A. To establish program consistency in order to keep County Auditor informed of program finances. B. To readily identify Housing Rehabilitation as a separate account under _ the Tracking System. This task was accomplished in joint effort among County Community Development Staff, County Auditor, and Housing Rehabilitation staff. Mr. Dennis Fransen Page 4 October 29, 1987 The Neighborhood Preservation Program has been operating for 13 years. The program is now generating program income which is used as a revolving fund. There is a certain amount of funds which were carried over into the following CDBG fiscal year. These funds, however, are committed to applications which are at various stages of processing. For Example: The program has operated since April 1987 to October 1987 using last year drawdown and program income. This year's drawdown will insure continuity of the Program until October, 1988 assuming program income continues at same level . Program income, however, is not predictable and may vary from year to year. The evaluation of this program is based on a cursory review only. Sincerely, ANTONIO V. PIZANO Director of Development AVP/clm cc: Mickie Solis PNTOG-I CA 94509 (415) 778-3491 CITY HALL THIRD AND H PO 130 November 8, 148Z iC U i J Mr. Dennis Fransen, Principal Planner Community Development Department Contra Costa County 651 Pine Street 4th Floor, North Wing Martinez, CA 94553 Dear Mr. Fransen: As requested by Mickie Solis, Program Coordinator for the Contra Costa County Neighborhood Preservation Program, I am submitting an independent evaluation of the program. Antioch is in its first year as an entitlement city, and has con- tracted the services of the County Neighborhood Preservation Program to implement its housing rehabilitation goals. Since we are only three months into the current program year, there are no visible results to evaluate in the City. However, from discussions with Mickie, and review of a housing rehabilita- tion monthly report, I have gathered enough information to formulate an assessment and make a few suggestions in regard to several aspects of the program. MARKETING The marketing techniques appear to be cost-efficient. Tech- niques including front lawn signs, mailing of program bro- chures to target areas, and town hall meetings are appropriate methods of expanding information about the program. she timing and extent of use of each marketing method, also ap- pears to very be appropriate. TARGETING The method of targeting should be continued in order to in- crease the visible impact of rehabilitated homes in City neighborhoods. This effect should encourage other homeowners to rehabilitate their houses. J • Dennis Bransen November 8, 1988 Page 2 APPLICATION PROCESS The application process and criteria seems well coordinated and suitable in regard to determining applicant eligibility and designating loan amounts. There are, however, two areas of concern. The method of awarding qualified applicants does not seem to be the most equitable method available. It is suggested that a ranking system might be utilized in conjunction with an application deadline to distribute the loan awards to the most qualified applicants. In addition, the designation of 40% of the loan total for general property improvements seems high. Perhaps more loans could be disbursed to other qualified applicants if the terms of the loan amount for general property improvements were reduced, for example, to 25%.. REHABILITATION PROCESS The processing time of each case has improved considerably over the past three years. Implementing a requirement for contractor's to finish within 45 calendar days is an excellent measure to insure the success of the program and keep it within reach of its annual goals. The actual rehabilitation process appears to be very thorough, from the initial inspection to the disbursement of funds for the contractor. In summary, the size and scope of the program appears to be appropriate for its continued success. Sincerely, E I ) ERICA M. TIFF Y Assistant P11' ner EMT:s j.s cc: Mickie Solis r ITJ S ;r't .. 1.;•' +,:t _./ 1' ,t .` :.f`R 1�t� �; 1:`r?.` �.a•^•.t>• 4t f r •i iah E[ ip AT-"AC HKIENT,3 APPENDIX A INCOME LIMITS BY HOUSEHOLD SIZE FOR REHABILITATION FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE Adjusted Annual Gross Income Persons Very Low Moderate Per Income Income Household Households Households 1 $14,850 $23,750 2 16,950 27,100 3 19,100 30,500 4 21,200 33,900 5 22,500 36,000 6 23,850 38,150 7 25,200 40,300 8+ 26,500 42,400 0 "Very Low Income" Households are defined as having an adjusted gross income of not more than 50% of the PMSA median income, as adjusted for household size. "Moderate Income" Households, for purposes of the Housing Rehabilitation Assistance Program, are defined as having an adjusted gross income of not more than 80% of the PMSA median income, as adjusted for household size. This table incorporates the most recently HUD published income limits for the Community Development Block Grant Program in the Oakland PMSA. HUD adjusts these figures from time to time and the County program will use the most current available figures. JK:cg cd20/income.lmt 2/6/89 AT TALt-iMMPt'T . TARGET AREAS FOR NEIGHBORHOOD PRESERVATION PROGRAM 1. ANTIOCH 2. BRENTWOOD 3 . EL CERRITO (CITY) 4. LAFAYETTE 5. MARTINEZ (CITY) 6. PINOLE (CITY) 7. , PLEASANT HILL (CITY) 8. BETHEL ISLAND 9. BYRON 10. CLYDE 11. CROCKETT 12. EL SOBRANTE 13. MONTALVIN MANOR (SAN PABLO AREA) 14. MOUNTAIN VIEW (MARTINEZ AREA) 15. NORTH RICHMOND 16. OAKLEY 17. SANDHILL (OAKLEY AREA) 18. RODEO 19. ROLLINGWOOD (RICHMOND AREA) 20. VINEHILL (MARTINEZ AREA) 21. WEST PITTSBURG Ir �- f .: �r r— SaCRaIiENr —— QlIJT�o C i t COSIq �`�— Io 3050 i co 1 — — s r t�■ st — -c . •i La �r�` .t-,-Sri i' - Sr _-•fit'• 1 - •% t wr 9•' 7r"; 1-- ri '":� '-iy`= - �r.t 1 6�_t :.r• � �. a 3 r LI I ! ! S � A '� • C '� %�_ -•1.r4 w •Y=:_:_•-n l x iv:.: �1 4 :. - -i S " a°A"••!-T. `;;,7 =1 •- •-'..'_I i (1- r• crr`"r:=a\ .It c: r V; ><`- 14�i- i:• "• st _ `�- �i Its t. Q-...a:•...t> I j}t erA'L , Jn^S: .`�`'� sT :I •. .� _ L �.�'1\ lr.rOM st �'S" sr �•Y�� :ftri. :% �t�^!�� N i,•,,:, ..1 - ST !_ :'C�rCe ._'- -� -�_ ..J,.••j` Sr,; ♦ •J "� �� r•••':_\y - ��r•'�r S -I-� --':JfS"1 (V7 r•[•t r Yr_•e/'Lr- -( rte- ��J�a i •:J.,< �cb••v cl -.l re" O n ::�.Ii,•, .Frr: '�. L=-- /_ 7: ��� yr f•'a`.'•Cgp���^ -yl, .: � t•SE41YC •--- -ST :i�^:c,:: ;' � � C1�>„{Pu�Oa in YIC fGrir i f< r �'-�Ir ., _•- \ �` Fes. :C- i t _ 1 r , LY• v.r � ., 't..` f �' �vC I I `- nl CJI lrCtrsv gyc�r `r 2j cffl -I 1� -= -..:� s; .: te` 0 6 0 :� '-:j.,s r��/(/!1,11`\�� •fi_ I; -•_` ::•- '1_:t. �'O- �✓J°(:I •5+'. SI .r .I G4r. t :A:..i • iy ru. .�'r •a •Y/ •� —� !�— ��f:�i - �.'� V SN. -. S; trr=: ' i Jai wl.'- fl C:N t•� -( A.L. 'i` •''_•r 1 �`3,!I o}` :- t-r1a:r..°.vc�- _ ??7 s� t �•= .• •���y`��._ 1 '�• � _ ---— -i —— - —— - ,�t L -�.i;� �t� i�o� 7: •:.• i' - 1'.ASS Si G iAr.v%•.v <._' t _ _. ♦ _ ��� i r _ � r� r,: _ _.-_ �'• `-moi _ I Oii)1'J•,3 ; saavCCt r���rt •r `cNv �•� .r '• .r._ i •..._. Ct oT��""w-+•�..�^ �_�-.- 1 ,• ' 1 iZ C7 .�_ :� t _C��i.r••, lr. C-. C.7 Ca- _ _ - �i � I " rLnv.wv •- - j e0 lar.c t...".- ��� ..•�. _o• ' •JAS 3.� �,.ar•.fICL' ... •� � • -+a � Mr R` �..C. ,.�. Ct a c C a C. -.I '�-�a�f. t -- . -�I _z h- a`t. _I_, t r L:- �_- c FQ�i (•// .'�•ri _ c o � ° :� < .�c�,'.�,'�.f,':a�:` •) -_ t � `:cc•`.. it c�,• �•r�r _ ?,r.........:r• \\''=_I �%�:I, �T7c.` bc/ . u P• n C _ wr�_h ` rrw:r:'. =I 6 Iz - J 1 c�1.={v..a•. 1 t ,,n..CY _ $-14��tr`•r "°s / � ' :■�cc• '.r q` G,r.s.t•_,^< t ,c.;;o :ter '_ q.7 ;', k c.a ` A o �.., h.::-.In it bER7s �• ;+ •tr., c:oar ��•.� _ i 11 r c,.,er :,, , a �. "� f` r .•' ,s/4 •.�Lci t:: V C-:-� '' � - _ k � f K: R`. .. `^-Yom' ��..uf -�•� ��° or w�fr. I .y a CI �� F' i '��3 .'.�Oa� ,{ i/ •�.:.. o. r 1 f 30 J (� CITE Cf SRENT;%= _•_ �-- •-- 'SUNSET - ---- Cal ucl 7 YI - -�J. no • CHEER ' _ o, •-saw •JOSE -AV-• "*f STC- -St ._ .. E oT n z.• z —1---�--_-� i LA o IL 1 C. ct - 1 ' \ ,�s •r 'InTY ' _ S '• I AV �C'fIC " OAPITY AV ,�.�b�C c\\ ` _' BRFNT'N000 ' `_�1 i �' •wpm ' US>b - \� .,�/�: �.�>• . -�C car _,,;3 . •.1 f � Oat .�. +• _y ��tt yytt (, 7 � _ a ���{.anon=•.._.,, t„S� I \% `�0• at(':4AR:.+ J RD m r, ENI- WOOD `��'.'' �' •�•,• -`;�s�••�`�..�j T'.i�i yew - . �``�•� :''?'*:;;'`' •' '•:•'.iz.:;�:. `?moi==f fF::r• , ��• ••rG -•<`�•Y M'*�f;,:~:moi 1:.;':;�;`:�:,f�;;.,�';,`,,,t,�•'-,'�'�.; t\1 ' ., ti• ••;' ^s. :«tom' '..., r\••�'�:_"�E:�� �..�. .,. I�/'l:� 'r .r••�« �.• :r;\.k• _ :.� + it ��rr!/,:. •fit~•' f �,,�� l ••1 ! (\ 4 I �. .tea\�D �•r "1 t' ��Lf+'f•� 1:' `IA�,v f;y.'�`.:�.�� O •o,�' •.•. ..;.•••�''-��• ZO . r-, ��•t'"y1•• -•"'•.i"s'�'•• Xr� �'1�\a �.•..:-.. '/tea �� /e'I. • «!�'�`-"fit •. ..` ^ •`' r al• f y;: �y,,+-' �(''(�1:�s• -pit ,yam: ,♦ f/>, •...� �/,• •:� ' �� .;•:'~'+•+'t... '•\i'.'4 •`' i 'r.���. � .:. � Ji�•±� 'YI,!!rte•'. It • - it: i to U.••ti' .• '•`:Y ? I,Ya�% !-. It :: �•: t q•.l•.i'1'•% \ � �`;`t�:•i,l�;i�) /,-,, .,,;'ly. ..:1: t='*ter'' . �\tY•.:•,. .•,x. •�•'� '.'�• ''•- •\ .•. •�: ,-, ' r.• :" fry:�':!.a.;,,,: �t ,,'.•:.1.1-��:, `:`, ••��•.a a;,{•• ra.� ., >'. 1t- •s;.i,4+��'. :.': 'tom:.,•/ � ,l,�l•'K• / _ ._ t,. .•' 5•�yi.<` v. •.:r,., :t•�;, ;, .... � - '.\:;itis =%' - "y1'.•.� f f�:. '.G � :��:.- .'moi •tij;��It• .a/ , S{ t•/�Jf/mss,:./ �/i' 'r/�'/� -• "t C?�a.%'c��j. : ',ti/./%.uj�/.-/,.'�j��'•//tea'::.,/' :.�f..a.,�:v'%� %!�.�%'y.�✓ �1�;�:���' \r'....•.r�,! �,s ., / .,,� / `i:';,•::,:.\fir.-.,;P. : .. /�->,i �•r••.;,,�, `fv f ••.i •%I •c� a-• yid'• t N�rCd1t3�Rtt� -^'.' i s X49 C17'N cr op ell j �� ��c�aonYt000 P�Ec 1 ' �'< .nOAr all+w1(i•OM• ..Ic f •y\�/A��Ea~ <•'•'!� J �_- I OR '\;rv..i. .i t •Ir. ice•• •,,1•�•. SHELL i •� a✓ \� L::q -��`� .fir—•�+_ ;•_ ••�..:' ♦• �.�•.. �: 1 iL• Oir .. .it c.�;.� 'r. -fit. i�� i •.:" .� 1 1�fL Co. : : •'�1.^ F,1, rr�a•. r �_-«`y`n. ... ^� ��� , a I 1 / .,ter - -_•'----_._-_. aa<..p{nat r\•SL l'+ �'r �F� '•. ar,\.i:�_;s- •' •Y� .; [crlc 1yr t :� ..-_----�_-.«_..._ _ • r;£ .Q /�d tiro. � :'Y,' '!� .:`.: I.r �• '! •CI �^� L<r•%a• \�cCf`f��\,� + '�S�••A TjK ^• \ •�`Yi:•'a ��• -�- 1 �\/ •L• .rs�a `t:�`�..:t-L r � t w ^v \ V-'::.`•:. •`.t_ 1 ;; . f•,`a11i�`} •1..•.r..�%� _ r+os�����'� ,r �.%��;_- 1•�f. ki.: Ails YhQ 1=/—._««�--'_--_--'---- * � � .}+:. '� 4 'Jv �•it � .r'r •°.� ���(y^J�IJ�•�''�'/��•�. a{L SrCtr:��i ����!!:_. ,i� -rr ♦ ?� .�j� art: 1,,a w: � `_l+r. :\y�^J>'w, i.c �_-- 1 It cV. 7ss. ,� _ Y t CIO�+ Q•ft�� _t l(a.• <I !1 ^fsr >( 1 � • a' t t1w•Cr✓< � �i� �w L<[tt \Y:.,c:� +.a•�� ae r. � v -At�I,� � �tt 1'-rte• � :1 S •• • J LC 1• r. Cay Nl1 !fiL 'a :-I 1',•� `�� ,y bl t.' � _ `•-.may �G,:�y�(� �y 4 Ia QIW Y.tS� .Y' _ i 1 1 .:/:t,E2' 7 foo%1 ��• .-r' lar I.41 .+'•�. <ss -. r t .rte a+'f. � •• `:[: -- r� \: �`.-. r-r _• `«... -.� Vii•' Y� ^+ S�Jr�;?....S'..»_ .. • -.\ }• V 1 -- .�.a 1 rH:. s >(:T gl•.•ty,ti F�` i \tg / '�;a •,•h�. :r �y12Lr �t Jl� ll UTE } `.. I • yiZrt.rri: 1•''1 r/�•�E J' �r rl Q •fs og• 'G`: L •r• 1 a • � c , �L` >` ���.a Id:7.�,Z�F qac ( E E;�E f ,Q� •'�25 2 c>1 :\+�\ -b \ cam• t9 r aa` • ^-' 1 /j\� ^ `cr�INAMBRA 1 Gwrf,r tl.I/ D.[1.l SAN IwItO txr ,J 1 , RIGW/w � t - K �.S�.j.+!✓ _i — •}1 _. • _ M'Orr^ii y,\•t t' �s�i (i w cs N a oteley -: 9tr'4{x r a it e.wt. »• s'ai' is it 1 ,.- - a- tr ��a��Y�.•< ;�,,"'�. C";�r� t ! ' �//"' ''" � taJ r _' {ro,.a �.Z�' �o i'i - L7�•.1..•:. - .••�34 a f F +,� ///• C 4/•Sn '.�``'v t• 1 S a <t p� �. /`i/., ,qLa' _a' - i�r� t: •'""1 •�,.' I .wlat•Cl.'r 7 � �Ja ..r. a C � 0♦ 0 15`}1�1i♦:•S'- �y sem. � fHi': _.�_ ... _.. 4v i MC+w•. .v 4 �s i`- `•..a.a.`:i !,\L� Mme'? �� - � \ -, �'' '/.'`!.� rt4 i� n GF3D1�, r'"F�r .✓1:�.� .eav .al's ...� �� � paawa'T.7t��y 44r"'_`a .. � L.i.� _t � _ 9Fr ee i.:s .�.'. �+ ? `o "� a >� ,Iji �7a'i- � �~�`44\ • 4 � :-l�eR ,t`�1,.r e�.� - .�� r'1' may»• f ifaLw•t f �- '> {Cf` �P« a�a�a- -«_•_ :.s�'oo '.a` ti /' �$ +� CI�: tt �- r f� <�i Y �•r tv• FILE��CA 1 xY a al s.o • vN ? �.•.. �� •t'p1v. �� �'�"�:- �•1• !! 4 ._:• q - /u.i !xt +• �� Ltco_ _a'�i-• 21 0t \ �o;,V o`r3 ox • •' CI'a4,`. ,.r.,•J= ,..;+<.. r'Cf4 a+ 4+" , �'• i i'r �' ri.a tiff� •-•�����.t,.J i� rte- az:.irr ..---- +• • -tom^•' �,1 DIM r. .• � v � .0 - c~� > 't d,�• `L�' / t. `�4it•"'rasa's '• O`< `1-0�.y�� vt'�'«'?�t•.C4 fir o:tQpCtn to t.1 E �� � ti. _ a� � r. f a _ ;.aa r., o I ■, _ `4 _,_• _E'+1`� � :�' ,,a ja R` /�'"P 44r 0r '4r`i 1-``r` .•b ,EC�C{: `v4 rte` 1 f. �vr e1t Ol r• �Lo i4.J 3r t�`•'�: 0c..o•/Po 4+ + 'rF ' c a4• a c -G' ' c �' \' .* a+p x. Ti.,:a.:y G �' Y o 'PIP J >._�« 3 r+ o ..i siyar.e' *a µ0 < 1 s' 't3ew f. rte.-.i.".:-'/..� {`i..:'•• .__-.� 1\Q r.�/t:• C:' c�_t $ a.. i ila rt. � d y" ..G\E.O* b ( y °� r C.cilf". •44T`i 7.�4,t 4• - ty�,:. 7-Z-c _ G i1'«�SS'j ,l '6 at} fir♦ z ! .a �.._.�'^ it -li L.! �r.lc.. .+ r trwaw *-Vu � t 4.1 i��L >� f .. .! •:+,•r �`-.00:..w- +�"wE►L'tat `wl o on`a.� 'lo .�' 'c �.,:, -`s'r r-rJ �/f/rr�''P.�t•� r•M�t+InN t ivr Ct C a O'nEl /''� .,u ,!�%,.. r� � �;ct:.•� r _ :�.ey Y '..�`t5 __�—.... _� 'l. .r'"�ry, % �. 1�T ,S naMrrt.w r� d• c� C7�4 yl.a7 f4� i•. ': �.: x <S[1a•wwrr r£�'.f` _';:asi t'- _t;/ .�.. S ' ' �" - o@ ' -1CtS lD-c 3'- � �w�n,t.tts:.'•' 'J �• )A" c. a.._ ' L'``-�� ''%�""�:—7 t^\}`�tF�'t�f 3°sem,.. -,a,\ {o4NEttv�� `a�aN' •� �. '•` \ (� Ot� ;F�f �`/`:•. ti`+.'y r j: •T°t �'�� cr/ �,..u`� Mdn;ct tc70 Da ( [2` �]J ;:,•-o.c _ JV J ✓' `� __��l j\G�`i�f rr.n�..Y_`.�-_�,t5tr+ �J _�_�- 1 ._ f�'_1'1`:.t!_e 1��r"iC��Jrrµ.i •`'d''c '. r I ~ '� �•-�' D 51 vNG'ttl;• .. �t, t �0 2�� r 1-:�� _-..._... _._.._ O �.. ;. .x'1 t, r�`a t�.;� f'+e •,'.,x C -v a iS t f _ ti 2�f •. ii\._ t Far ,� .,1.3 *�Y v e• \ •�� � ,ti..t s'� � t r • D,�r _t a?S�•y.♦ 4�/-;JV:MIw .t aa't �• r._ O•o N•[t/or•�`. J~a r'• : . . .Di. cF'• (,Q�� cwcl Iww< .1` '`CICr 4 4 u C.' • t \ t •f 1rJ Li ' L1: NU"•s^"✓ '°o e'_'•. rr y r.. •: "�'•` .a.ota'et pp•t.ry,r 1. Q,*"'�_�'Y _,. �•�•CN !`�/iy "4 . _ tt tt{7� •Lr•t\w.m.l Lt L rr•C,�0 tt 'Y � ,1: �/ ° cp5f- •o . l6-:. ' ,ahtaRt �. _ � \ti`,,�;k' �r[w ar �l t ce r � 'a 'qtr LM. t:f.�...=: :vSan.Saa•t.a, :.cam ....a ,t^:t tDetrr ya. —_.___. r- r� -- r V:•J.:..� t/ztir \. �QG!C..,'^-,�''� �- .��a..:--Or_ ,.:r'',�',� `,r-—-'-- ..;a i � �.P'� "[• -.rte. "'+L1r`-A- ^�'r:. •r.twl. a `Z,;. +++<Lrooxraff.�� - . ....... -..: r:^ I �., .; a .+ td'u' aS s:a: eco �,/�+ 9 {!�. .�.^.^fy Y��'�'�[ �' t .�tt N¢4rU i•"E�I N�.: / ,.[.•eGt rl Ct y Q .�� P ♦� . Dt •7 (,.� 4cV'�•�V'.Xr�'-XXx•.[•4L�' .: '7::.., .. .f°a t , '.n c�.z'�°�--^ a '..s '+`'�'*F ~!� s�a ._ /A/01 i , ` 't�-�. �;ice:!e�•C ¢• � � '' ETy 4:lr t t ! Ar i ='f,-.,h' t ;•, y. '. 1.��r� :�:.:�• t':k1 ��' owe / -•,• , (salt./ct j .i o ysit=� 1..``.�iFtii �1�'0 t.t.> �- tQP/ •` .� 1 (`tee '. ,tt7tr".etttr�. ti^�a� .� a :�'• t•t.Ni ptA k •1 ,E/ f.!(� t 'r;:rat1 {\• � V '1?=".'r . L'�'Y X 41 NZ ' •t '�`a�:t .; 1:` ttatt�wi ♦ tNt• :`���- �`<1 1 �! 1 _ �4 I :�`•'':.• 1�^/.'•^i A ti:,. 1 �•+r a: '�1.t�"�?, t�:•t a1 '�,� \ tip V C% t, C p�.i\ ,a a."z",.,a varr.:<',._J;_t• ..N J� �� i"_:! :ary.i•a.." ya{7t��.//1� 1 .1°�' �` :� ...tg= ::�?....,�' a'18t•VO �t '..t\:1r •;�`� <!}v rr•'�'4:, 1�. � t JA •i••' r�1 at:• t:>t! L•ai v" i,SJ / 1% Q♦ { `�i.' f %tti�(• �; r:.�,'• �••..1. - C tic o. 7 tlS-r'.�.a"':a �' n( � r,• � I .. si •'.-t t�'�. A rfa s [� '�Tr is ,'i. •,il •v�,�a�• r2 _ nr<.oy���! r�f 'g \/y':. t st t'•lr• 7• t:l�`•' v la•\. ''"�rC,'J 1 .%'^."•. i"'t!t'rl ♦r.tT`: r.+•"" �;y:�11``-t `y / �t;.a J+ ti�� `'�,?�-'•�'` - .<: � itofa.-a ,` `�tom. tc ����• o. `t �r',� t"•'- �`•a - Y :" t .J.��� ti'.S;%,:, 'N.g^^ nr.t.: :t'='a.t��$ ', ' < t • ,�• ••'St t �s. 'Y:t�c^ ;at •i� )4 �.« :'l•':,�•1 •,+ •i . `4` : �yE� 'i.i.:.:Z re '� G V=, •r..N_.�1! i ,., 7At� t • ":iI .\ - ^:�'('f.p ; .:_�S 4�✓J i••...•-•"_ .aa+.u�^.`U*. ,<Sa'./Ca" _a t o``. .. 4^.:t.•tit�-�It t,, •��t�~{'•i� .: t.:.i�`t �^ �;I;:.i:.r.'Y'J"tN u\ i o� N � •.. atOq.....,.. .4-4, •4t ' l„t. '>.t. a0 .: LtNt,(f u't J< 2t ,:. 1 ..: _-I:j, fn,1 tQ to Jt....�e.i•l.-Nt.' 45 .1 ow .,•4.y't,i��'."'!�• =-:"""�":.te"�+:J.C< `^',•-�.r��•S J,= { ! 544': SLV t c\�.• it �I .w-.!• :�5* _ .ttr?' t..t= 4�t:,YN+a''� �.t ri': ., '!./-`.? .`%rt(.tawt� 'st }\}\\"t- I,`n �';t,{5..--L;.oaa`• 1,f' `, _'4' _ _ •: V.-«C.,.M t<•.t� ,- � �YaP•. .. >�,%y`y3s�o/� •t '" 'f ! \(/fL,-btl,' N,�• ,-�.'{^'cam t�✓'�>�.�t'ta.K<'Ca;Y �'i t.�,' 1l.•'t t7^�"Vtti:oC=t�,.' C' t.L tom,r �� �>,o �aJ `^ •'�� f• t.• � t F` � .t�+ �,V ''1. ;l• .4 t1 `•�F r-- it r Troct ��f i r - - AI _ = 0 1 I � y FAL, -�� -� 5►t0 v�l t, S%ole=f3;nt::" ':i-'•. •;\ t`_-' t � 3010 r r t •� 5s� ran s*. •>- •�` --'.1� --- '—————.—._—-- 1 ,CDU � 1 � `•-'• Y r 1 �1 quo.ro►rsr` Tract j iJ]( fr --••---- — . r --•---•-'--- s i a n d 1-PL a�'— Bethel: Tract iCLNC. RO 1 i �10I 7 r� 1� -- —___—_• Ix -2 Fianks Tmci _ \ �\ci� I 4�\•` �.��.rC c PRIt•AiE � _—._..._—. --_--- aGATEWA`r -- E •_�-- a —+- Bethel D r tt - ' '.��i ---•.. .... . Tr. tr as ad t ' —`-• .. .. .. Y T` ` CUfCH SLC-UcH RO J in LA t � 0 I 1 •Victoria - � KELLOGG C.--EK — I -- t:GFFuaN ^---- --- Istand —_...._ Ul — � . -.,moo I . •1 I :..—.._. 40 M 0MON*ort AA*C* I �� hL r CAMINO IABl.0 .Q2 i 6 i sO� t dip Island nt = Byron Tract 9•' CSS, agar ., \.PO \•! T RN ,4P\, R�A(•M R .�% CLIFTON A COURT—_._'_� _A`ir_ FOREBAY • � V w . S`• Cal sL.p51?— s► . --- �`•���•__ -res%�,•. --••-- f. `. - .•• .--_- •- GOIf COORS!- �- ••� �� ' a- t. 0 .t ... ........ ............................. ipo ol CROCY,E'IT HOUSING REHABILITATION TARGET AREA CttOCKETC NGIGUBOR1100D P12ESEttVtVrtON AREA ♦ V "♦t'�\`1/.t '„I ~� �. •-�''n •..fes . —"� � f-•�'''� of� . � _.... �-,:� � is \l R.t tii J�`+�.t t ,'.mac L• �1. � -"-•''� . •� ��• J,�,;�•^� �t ', U •,'•'•- ��o t I♦� r �~,`',.• t � y. -�r.. -_r K.' 'o t t /F�tir r t:.r":y� jp It -- •,,..- 1tteNt� .",•I•ir+• v,+ •:.•�v Ia •.,:• T •f '\ /4/ t'r-• -'rr r \ co, _ 4«r✓ t-.ti . o �� ,/ C• It. .- 1�. i o"{t)`t.i. s`• a.r, CL_jw O '-� •4`•,) v.. R. t• , �Jllw xj)y/ �� �l ! ,. ♦ l+i. .✓ �rAti• , ♦ ^7• `�: +. •.'•:.•:..y Nt{t1O "yayytr �Od')t •M r = /1•'• y �Y % ' + •.1 wr '",• '{� Q. \'«: -ems'-.�•✓"• 0 �:� .QQStl%��•-tl t; '')C� Ii l` ri�.`Jh• '♦ ��r •t .-t'•� .tn., r •�� .t '; ` � .. ..-" � �/> .!r jo •--r .,jam, C Y i t"we,i �, '�'••1 � '� �`'t) htry `C}J , A' � _`' i �, t � 41 L� CI .O.• a � � •TO IrIA t 4 , ie i c,'-- r t...K /// ,,,Et+• !l ' .1 ..rte••` lit-• ♦• r' i/-.,. �." / •, L .L: I -) �i V ++ .... Ij •r{t1 = c :5�,},. '•i-t:,. +•---.+'} ry n io%�� �Ylit:a,'fl � /, i:r r t"- •�,.•j. r.v '.'� :> ••mid �' ..I� - ..'" ., t• .<^� v �,a .S? ,` 1 ,••�.a .. e`��✓�✓` o r .)�` 1 i \'.4��jq t� �1)�+�r' 1 r{r•!V tz� ,�,•.P,«•-•`.i('��.: •••`• `�w i •�'a•'`�4 � N Y • ' t'_'•'-` ��a •1I.-j1�Y }` �•�. • :. :• _ e y > 4q � ;�r •q 1 •.,..• U`�F,11 _.. �C �� ` .�J., sj�• !•f^ ♦`��: • ' •� -`vr 4 •`'�' '�> ' �• r r J4••y"•t.y..-� ¢ t; ♦ a•s r�r+': •l e..fj,:.� " •�''`..' t •a to vttr'�•t,Y�••f ;a `4:, ` :r o � i`-.( a wGOM �w � C ��\ :y `..ti• f\:•'i'• -•.�•` :,c::Z •y,/" J ' •u`\.. o a, writ ' a ♦y jr1.-, r`�• -? `O ••�"�• r\ i1 •Q j •r, .�. 'tom:+' ..'c :.': . `c�♦C i 1 ✓. •^ i, 'aF », 'E''Z 1rt 1 \t`� _h': lr�i.: y ��// %i,;>•!i`:%'. G:'�-' �'i `� � ♦'ka`v' .- A '��, ` ic1 i*r pAtwY t•- yc oy.� j i _�*�;::'�:; ,� .,:;: ':!;:t-::-C,•:•.->: t J� sr...y ..Y •yt ;4::.. •' : `F /y" Vis. u ?' FL;S\�;'it'j�!yp{��t O :s r t�rt{i `' O' r •i/`'( � L• C 4 -4a�`J ♦c d �`�t,�'3�f„ 'L •Irt�. :i+: -•f�.i:��;�-`y'.:c. y�;:i'• 'V - ••.i ,+• .•t�.t"��E' �,++ 'xr..•`'`':i..L. I•`:� :�;:".' .�.:rs .�o,L,� «' •-, t • C i •rrx 4` 4' Ya ,4 ` I yi.•irJ \ ,�'t ,,:!�`:f':'='• •�•wR'.;ri"i.':��f>+;.'_ •� u C R aF :z: at.d.. .r fj h ♦ t' +r i(?�•+ \tP) �,,,.iir- i j.• •':�..-•�r:%•_-' uCn ���`Z � .,`.".\.; :.;.'�:•-......� �-:': ,... r..{ ♦w. i r et.• / ~" 7��' -L(,-y/� t' ` 'a. -ia. �:j g111`....L---G'ft�ti� t� 4 1:. ".y.: ..- �l%� $ .....�.�`I�• 1•mss` .5\�'• s•,`�`\••'J� t ]"•G '�'C �' .�•f n�^"µ '....'' t\ •)• _ .'a•.:�:•,•:.;' .-.���.�•' _ ' -A♦'�a ii\ �� i,'� �f.'••"Ctkj :' o >/'•7 {J 3 !3 1• ..�+ppL ,. ^". :. ,.. "y;:•...'�C'".rte .♦• t � i"".� -1 i�,,/f�f•4 •-�•1t.��•• ~V��„ ` •'i�'��•-:,. '�`:�::. :.� .:tl qtr•" •a,+�t`' C+ .a.�rj'� �'�.`."'� �•'.t- 74 r F� J L7 r ,tom. «J`•-^�" i ( ,4 '`R,''' 1'1rC�'c.`ra _t�. �r="• 1 >. c.��:( s `t" V fr♦ •'.`:" .a ^� y. ' j.r/ " ,;:� �; �. ,♦♦,r,1..S .i;�,v �` .+ l� b\t t,t,.l� sem. '"♦ i l�.F�4 r'l iri! •�'t i�'• '/' i?. :✓ [,a .: t ..�+y .��o ° �/♦a '�% �L1 .t.r o. `�.Q7;.'I� at f• •'d+rs..C•aIj -�`t: t `!� •� •�t':.C: ♦V Y•' aa'• •4-.�e.i oC ti'•�•� 't'� SC,•��' O,\\fr' - '\w/ , J ;iv-l�c'a - .••.••'� .'i-•�i ..-:. a.+ •.?••/ :I, -./ O •r -;w.'. •„'• t M.'i<4`Jt•^ /�"t\,.� 1` =G: .C..t i v�•'j1 .S•_-� :::;`:i:`;!'+;a::•,'r::�•�:..:.,•' ��oi:' /,�? .-a ii�� d! v c.:. s• �:C1=/`. ..t-o: `" i ��ii�x+y iIa t�J?� ;�. ::. •:•:,. ''• .I� (, •t4 ��''��`,;..} / /O/4 i.' C+`y` r'� -• 'a � ��•• � 00% •4,. tty,ii�R .. •t YyCL-� \31,� -.ti�-S''.-:'• .�� + s7� 1,„.7 y i ' �'! �r t � `/i\ tx j,+ rY f•n•s;r/ i„^,�.� .¢ '`JiLr. ',.N f ; .y •ter ..;\tMw.1 j•'..,•i�. ;.�.-.^ ••�:;:... 1 41��„ t '�>(_' �<//�\y��L.`+'� • •i• jtoa7r> filet y ,.;t: yJ{� lel:>;.. :i: �.l-' •...:?'� o.a, at i iL � � 1.. 'O`.`,,,J �. ° u r �~✓JS3t: .tC?�,:', `:�•'::`•- ., �• I• i 1 .. •ay l0'n / Ct .c.-•-'hyo Lam\ ;•> .11 « .:••i� ;%. •�-f - �� t t`�y :l��'�tN•. :w•' ambit :.r, , `' ` �:�`` !'� d, J•.,a -��j �/'a 1% •� '.:_.*^,t;..-. -` ' ,.::`.f >a1D j r'x�:.:.!��:t' V j y M,L ' '+ �.`-,• '� �'•7'F { y• ti.a `1;r:•- :y�;,:i:,; :tir.. 'f,�. .'.`�•- yFtet twt it•r,.ay <,/�• '.`?''' "' i;. -. <s/+ii.'".""-%•a::.'•i"pA!'t!`r •Jes'i ,j\rny,� .a,'tr�'\•` j.L•..•dy t•' .p.':g:'-::., .r.J}(4i:'.:Ys-Y -�J. J.f�t7,.•l t :.!,„`r¢¢/2'�)`(t•�J`•__yli.•i�o•3c'.t�-��/''a6�i�r`r'\�''' '' { ,l ✓ .qt \ `'\. 1,�i•',.• .�•t y, ^J,.G .i• >�} " !�:r qC::L L j •o s, o-_� .. Or \ i� 4;'',cJ �� Sl .x' y),t�^''' <� '<':°so � `C" �` '�• � O..:r``t �.:1�^r f• '• a` ��i\yt•' J`��^�v�-•..-r. 4_i�: '•.,ta t '$• `' _�' _ \af '�"� �J. `.'�t'• / :o �.' '!`i♦ :t q:' t rr •1. ha`, r0. ',i: _ •v, i Y,f j-.:.�:, \ J' t% i,\s `� `'� �`�-ti..,,;,,, `�' ��.;.o +3�•ter,... va t ,�'�� r•� rtc •\` �/�erf«J`�f.J I � `, 41<'`'>t�"'•l��l/-1/:'t• .\i �`rs°�"9' �����\^ V3 - -�,Kft/� ..._ "°r, '.;'.. • ��caa•O\l'. 4y� ,�'=f' {Y � �HS1S � 1 .. .r A. •)i "• i-? a d"ri �%' .•� L�P:.1 L'+:u L;,,,••/'. /J t\•,\•�.(,. ,t«' ,I+ �'°' ca �'i, �ti(' � o !! .res ."««�a r�.l•••• �••�;\/q`.'•o +-oL•--�-y`%` 'j,-;c'(/ �l .-�J� a,J/ t` Ott- , ✓ y a• o' ,, '� t a :• .;�:.t° /�, 'y�r� !` R• �\ •� 6 KC •r7vy'� ..` �, ' :•.• f, , O� �•- �1.L.l i}�.dl �!' i` at,`�J15 'w Y\ t v t ///jjj ttt a � O p ? 0 1 ,,.jt r t,.+•'I :�. ry''C �: 1t .;y ;.'�d�..:`-�4" 1 Itit•• •. rIAtval tv..- �r �?•�: \•F vd,.� A.' L%,. t� � .-t !� l/ JJj _ I,�t�`�„o-t- "r•« `••i�y,�.r. S � :• CJ ^ '�•�4��.+\:1`i, •ri fi.• P ` `oi� 'f J' O y` v Y `''` � .�r� Y u �5�, � /r.� ({�';��� .t, c1'�.-. >r o .ot a r \t''+ t 4'._ ,�`� 1*',,, ^'_��� 1;Y, a ;• �. \ t ='o. .lt ` �•, -./�" r r v' t\ . y^` i,Y o� r.`..F. T �.I, t. 4 Q"� .. .•... „ /Ir . �;, � ¢l�,.. �:, tr 3 -"� -..!^. •�y,1 J 1 .S t s o~ -' y) �6 n'i: f'ni:1.': 'I �: ` `'> J=\•' '/J %�; J t+„ :ir RJy�{Fr �"• �o(tnai �♦ ,i-C?::•. � .t�` ,.•' •,t.. :..., �r�. > ,�'t ' Yiy-'; , ' [? :l I.-� �..`�� ' > i> ,� i +O' i• w � `r � •�M•�«..,.- •\�,\�"'• .�?` �.-:•r'^��-o rt "'•.. ,� -c•>;,•� � t 't- !' l ,,fi�xc > I • l��� ��.:..•• � {� .f•....I:.> f`. j �• ` o` T o O/ t l..i•• •� �... '%.1t„. �_r• � ] W e"� f Q'.Y•rc.r. 1 L`1'�j`di,�}�,,•'J: •,�-• •�� - :t. ^'''''''�''"''+ .S rt;7 . :l j,• z .:• o :�.,� f f1y;.; 'i (.t;•+;t:•�j�. ,t.\ �.t...•.. `-•,r ' i�. ///"'�.� `- '� rt �. a, .!' `)+C`,`+J„�•,f rte,:.--"'i � . : Ofk • J ' •�_ l !\ ".i' '' 1 .\ Sc 111 ';� 5.1 +�:`r t7n 0'Gr- Ol i s ti 1 • i .r• 1 • s � � t 10 1 AR' E• t � r/ r t ,-•SVT • ..'"....�.""•�..••; ��,.+• �_•� 1 ,r r_ar.r \ 1"=750 ' \ ,`fit . `\\'`:\ \\ • ; tliN• i . 1 : I.I Y .iGh" .wIR F SCNOOI. O 7V /FW / I i t 1 1 t 1 t I I i ' YEROE- SCHOOL ¢� y vfROE AVE u � c t—JLLW MARKET AVE MAAR T • N N N N N N N y�j . - �i� Y`■pp`f111 h 11• < t ✓' � o � s s q s d •[ = N h Y n U b SILVER AVE H ...fl L Jill RMEEM v, z MFG w GROVE ..AYf .GROVE AVE CO i - 6 O • l { ! CRESEET e t r 1 i, Gf RTRUOE` AVE7111 111C �.i3:3:• 44 N N t •ALAMO AVE C£RTAU: YAW- T££0.c�" PRODUC �OU80CE AVE {Fr[ 3 L� `�-�� • � SSMYV 3'� ` SAMFORO AVE _ t * 1 wlltlARO AVE v t 1 w r' Got AwiE FVE 4� z, ILI C% 9L Ad A Jr 1-600 PIC tNu -ttP �i �� t J. eY i e —;,t-:!'2�.••�a .. ,r_= ::.>:r-•,,, .sem �,J R .' �_-- t t tom,,•.." .��-.:•-„++'_~, ;��:i ...................................... 1• 1680 L n r ION �1:IGlt6oxW00D 0��•�Lir_''(��1)�IMtr/� _ . ' ,SY, ����`�' '�./'. f f,.�" •�•' l�"�, 't,t .`S I moi' 4 -- IN t :�-.�•�R+«� _»` tom•"" ::I I:..•�t .. � :�'•..,__ '�.�. � I,: •nn !.r '�»- `�•` `_- µ — .',�+.`�'.'_ r.._ • : •� f • �, r� 4 f ..ter :� .� 1. �`{� �� ��'.',�' 'rte;•.��.�'�•`��'�' /�.' ••`•'i' ~ .�'"� `�i}�' •�' ••.• .i� �-•,,, f``fir lff=CO's R DJ5 �t.f tJ t✓,r� -- .'«S'Si..t � l�^i'.�•Sj•;l} ,'`�:v'� w \�i"y •%ti• .S�i �'�t�'�i'i� ';}'" '�':t.�}a�::;:� tt':�• `t'l:. "�r,^,t:.:�.f�tt .�):1=•�,• 'p."'1...�' �•i'tU'� 1 7 �t��1"��✓.-f•,v7,c l•:.:•I L`1't•;ir�_ ,f �t'c.•�t_?.�r_�F?.J �- `J' � '.tj`" .i-.1. ....r_�� y. ., J t. .r�: ;t{•, •'y..is�.��.���-� l.. _i� •{ .. :..frsl r•f'r:n• �-_ i nst O HILLTOP MALL ! b C M :Vr • 1 ;Aa vo �7 a L .3 " ' ._..DR HILLTOP Olt nILE u ,ia . 4 coo r_ "Da . y`y7c? GROO:'f n� '•- a GROOS Oa 1 7j; Lt . W MV• .r sze .T -ONLY, LEEDS T'o'� U 1Con L f. "'1� N to Z: •'I/", ���jioSe S.f•x Pte`,:. fit' '•.tee t .f Clu�7l�• 1iQ .� t+� �:lc • � ...—__.__.—._.__ n�'�•l.�f'.•'i ��y(,�`•(( H s�•?��•t nwlC^`•1 o L.., L����` -.... ` '-E+�C:7yf..�Orf1/� t•- o� �' �J!IELT o:fj�_ o,LF ct';• , _. ._..-..-__.__.. a!C''i i tff• 4 ••�[• J rt�. .f• wt:as + �Crt? 1_ •__. 4pt �Al 14 IN 0. i I .j • J I 1 A `721 Xf (� VO ct r •/� a� a� pr/` •' - /"� :.a� ; rr YO�•• � V ••�-a$�(u C�i\'"\ ��•.;j`Y r t• 5... '•'' _ •\aa ,A tltr t[r r = • - l 1 ;, : /;`cq l„���..�Y�^•I C/e`7a�''e •y-11� '� /.�•% ,`\ a\ * w.[o•y ,~/tea-_: .a• t`` ^' ,.!r C' ..t r..,[r aa11j S.., •ti•'t 0`o 01 �e� �,7��5 //" n !� tr•r.:n , f�Ctr�1ry •R.y v• y:/ •``,;tw //•�v .L 00.0 / at � 8 a. "Rt::riL 0/`� 1Jf /.e�i �'r - � h •• f ,`� 'r �[ rt ,>A � 1 `arc w DUSTIN N7lT _ Daa>Mtltt CTI `•\ 1 ��h G'1N Mb Q r \ t -•.- o � f�.fp[•r(� C.i, �''-t.• it ' [waN c[ �; .. r•t.�!�O`r Gltw{��O I i !. •,.��In ULO-Ill CT JI a.R ' 'S_' [ 1� £ N•- T=:\t 1_ 1 M{O°t.t1 lM J 1• i�w_( a.-Yom• l.w VA{tnCu 1 MytPHa CI �:='. :•• ..vs oa Ra, : :'.:e•gaa �w v a[r of a LI -�R'I_ 1. ,.^ tI•. `�S.O.a�til a j-f - .S7w •y!\\1.,t..a...w!.e. J It i y .,.a✓+,. \" W` Ct L tW.A;O _ i�.anoto cl —1>, %`-.�+.[` `..�:w,,-_ •; .._^,c .-... _- .i. ,r`'..y t:.v..[..c.,,,� 1 `(f. I �arii.t�_' �� � ` o [ C 1 v °•ter.�' 'l;i�: 1, .� ` - 18 0,1 _- ,• .Te a yle!'T.wa•- •Zi-- O • �'� 070 ♦Rt1Oto .a. t` 1 M1`� `•�-tom••!a L`=a.coo�1• :�� n "—,_Y ° ., `i�J� x i � \ :'\J�\'_ ,r �Tg[: = .. a'Ir �{ Cw �'/e �• r Ci+...:[•l�r + .°�••T JM1-�✓:- tE.<WTO Ot--�. .•� a -C•• �•.,rrr�:r.-�.•ick{ li�`-11VS .�_;pi_ ---__ r. i'i -!1 o *T I PO t.y R v dA. ... :" '^• b r -- '�'+ � �r` Y"•.;:c: =::': [:._��'�„" S. orm,��o�r'—i:;,0 7 '/�� n..�,r• K ..-) -,�•u' -�-� .;�- �t='�Y.f ''. —.dTO•a O iy � Y', __ •A'�C�'f. Al •' •\'+[G`AC t R vc •�• �': .tet vy°I I't:<'i rj;:.'y S"S�� U,4,A,_7�,.<0 ''-e:1:rt{ai O •,4(4 It:. [ Ot y. _. \ t. .I" �,y..�:� 1. V'-000 o_,!v '`�� ., v� a -=F�fTf�� _ .. E 1_: ItE~�-.�•=_L',:-•_ � °•ij %� \��• yy V oywlT`• 1/ '::I, 1 J q R♦ 1V ..'.Y Gt•.t[R : � � --� t• - is / rt• T♦ ../t I<'t`t� tid•, CMCRRt-- -.t•�u.. la`t ,u C(_ <�'�J;.. !" �—�[(f..•ir 7 ^ � •CCtiT=YJ ol C1 O �) �• w'A v,ll(1 �1 f` I.J _ -� S 1 IG': r �/• Gaff cc�. . . . . �� L_L • • '!.'.�ftp`�:,�•;�.:,4,•��.• �. '; •rte ,e ^ .;1::":�y.�_,Jt.}elf)' •'••. , .�;•; -,• may', :�.\., ,:>•p ;.`(_•.' `�,:;. r _• .,,..,` c •• ^�)..� _..� r fes';.-`'-` �.�..:.:'•�j�• rl_�e)•i+�••`) �.'"`:::�.�. - ••• `v� - •'.'+��•'�•• _ •�'\ •-yet - .•N• •' • 1x�Gx�G i. . N f` ; QQ � ® ti � N Q �" xQ . V o COmN � mU) :•iii i W d. ••••• i•i•i• W z 0�Uo a .: . • � Neighborhood Preservation Program BULK RATE P.O. Box 749 U. S. Postage Martinez, CA 94553 PAID Martinez,CA Permit No.95 Z a '' A 1 a C7 M 0 LO cc } a v \t ( C ti - Z p Q o (� ; � j f� F-o z M LL Oi= t ' J rjc inW Q O O m v 'W \ --t'�= W U to _ .� Q U dLc) !1 .*O O to Z 0 X 3 v 1 Q O Ir co h - J > mCL O ` E. x a � .` `� O 0 zh'`` \ Ir 0 0 0 0"7 Q ^ CZ a) ?S w0 m ~ CL� 3 � ° o cz cw E m w ay E o .cn � '" � C: 3 0 � aim E o � uoi x a) coo �, o m �� c U E o � c� 0 3 Q ° � E O a O ro o o Q Co ui =3 co c C n.� o O ro - " cow c a p � c � 'semo -J a 00 - M — Z caCc -oo � E ° OC r z — E O O �i 3 .r >, m c ° a) c p): O W Q a) U a U «. .- p M a z z � � -co � o C7 ca Q (D ° ocn ocz COcn cn `� a) c00 -0 A m z U ° 3 � � o w aE -o E Y � aU m Q o a � � w > ° o c D cn 0 Y u) E — cu > Y o o co a� o uoi E a o ° > E a) o ° ._ �s - rn >7 m ~ +x a) a) 0) coo E v m co m >- � � >, � o 3 c C f D 3 ° O O C Q E O a _j (n CO c0 a O i N a r W o o ` Q) m C to 0) � o f _ (� -a w U 3 Q a) a) C } E o o R - v w O a- 7 a) . - o w c m .n co H Eco a� z N p ao 0 E aci �' c = ° 0 3 N 0 C --0 0 _ � � c� O Q� DE cc _ Q Z ,, U U O ~ o Q a) N C CL O ° o ' j o O E .� N N . m ►- F- caN � O} � � ca p CZ > E mcg, ° ° -L a y z Q w vi `� '�, a) a) O Q z a) : o O E .. E o . ° L � '� co v v E w = m ° � co o � U) Q vi c 3 = o o ° co O c� EE co ° o a � � O p 3 Ic- accoEoE c to } o,cc Q >,UM 2 acocoEco a °� � 3c z w LL r N M [t t c a) aO OQm � cvp �UmQ) cCz LU oo o Nco vc 0 (n voi avi o CO � 0 > c c = Eco � � -0 c� c0 F- c c cap m a) mo — �= a) o0 ° � o u°'i roc a� E � � a) O `� 3 n o .E ' ° 3 a � L E °) WON l!wAad z N Q N o o o o d i E Q) Vo`zaui�eW w o ~ o ° > Co °coc`3n� c6-0 o O0 > - a)g _ C O > �o ° -CEo a6eaodn Q � � CO _ � >. >>, 'caM ' � CL o a31VUNine o � E :3 >1-C oozE °io moa � ° ° c - v ° ° o = E � — ° >, Ca oco E ° -a °O E c ° m y CD a -o . ' Cl. o ro on. o � o Ncc .� 0)oM aQ c ac � o o E -0 °i ,E :ZR >, o U Cl) >+ Q OC -0 c > O> U) - cTC ) co =3 — o ° _0E�Q :(3�_v EE W c coQ- E Q) oo0aE LU C ooO oo00o0 CS CC — - -o r 1- Cf U Q C U -0 o Q) z o) C r a) 0) E >, E •N m2 Q)C r.. u) co C!A O > .� co cn m o r c ao : c ° coa) o � c (z � L >, QU : DaCOo � 4 N � � nX tv D .i G3 (04 ~ CnT R w �8 -- 27 N O c � O � 9 Dv O ! 0 y G 7 N O CYO -,> O V G �� U N _{ c6 'G CO O c6 c� N C, O '' co O Q G iN �w omaN�N'p.G+� ` �" ° L S1 � ✓NN7O@ Q° O 0NGo.- W G 0 O G U O 'Q U cl- 11 N N3 O _ �OOO N 0 � 0 CO0 0G co O tQ O ° N q CO -0 C .O S yOG ©N ° ° O O O Lu i Q 0 � ONJ::� — .. @ R @ U O N i'— Qo N • 0 -0 C O 0 O p W @ T O T O N 4 CO �r 0 �✓r O N tail ° � � U3 � o' � °,c p me - 0 m 3; 00 NO ° U N S:- co .G �F N r o o 0 N Ul CO ° � � � ' m G .. .1 0) Q Y T y � Z ° °' -5r - N u! O N O Q Q ° RS �i - 0) -0— ooOg ° !'R Ul 9 0 G C3 , -Q "fl N N c6 y (� •• ,c6 N cd N N 'N N N v 0? � N a G '7 V N Nc6 � cG0O O 70 @ 4p Q pWO cll tlU O ++ =L ✓ .^ Q CL N O N N N O vc- ° -o Z s � oso �oW � Wmo � ca� U° ° OHO oGc°� o "- cNa m - G � CD 3 ° ;. ° cvy Niy } ' �� oo � N � N � J N m - ,- v a� v c6 E a� !-' U. � „ter. y — U �j�. W w 0 w d °' � � � o ° N ca _ @ 6 N o0 - W Q'c � � o °' � s �rN o 'n w 3 0 o o o x d tg c6 0 •�~s y'E U J O 0) O O fl N N co U L3 O I O G v c6 t3 00 0 Lor Q ° O Mme" o ° Q43) U N `o ° O M+ � N 111 Uc6 3U p � O Q o N Q N G Q? ul G o o 's? O 0 N y . O y � �~ �U OL co cocc -' G 00 0 p co 0 9 v c6 4�i C b s cb Q. N Oco t5 cll >; NO O co 0 CO _co G O O ~4 N N c6 ti- U.- c0 f W7 `� a o -0 ,o c0a Ul } -0 ,0 0 co 0 N Co o O G � x'0 N Q O O 0 O O@ co U coolow Q O G + CO x W N 9 c� ca E ,� C1 NUl 0 Q Go SE N No ° QY o o �' o = ° tea co p a- m � 2 'Y t� Ul '00V N a) C u1 U) O) d N a7« c0'0 E E Y o 0 p 0 0 L O in 00 7 D S O N ca L 'D pp� (cc� M� p E o v m o rpc > U U C a -p _ .X _ 7 7 O Q Q Ql y H9 T N O U y o u w � o � 0000 � Eo 3 L N> o 7 dcND N c _aa) L m NLDMN V CD (6 O a)M L = 7 U C U V ° 0 fb 7 3 7 N N N co co M co V r C U d Q1 0 `1 01 3' V x N Q T coN o� E d 6969'6 »weafn69 O N• ami rn "�t a o m ° > m COL c0 L E E a)w N C C0 N L 7 "T"Y p ° 30 a c Qa) o p m._ « vYrn m o D � c� o X , 0 8 E c L N O L o N .N Q 0 7 a) o O cc ra a; a) OCD J c ° U c V) j T O `•D y 7 y C EO a U a) p « C m 0 X03 of E °c co N= oocca' d rocs TToIq O - o - E a) ° N a) O c L r 3C a) °' E ca 0700 a) 7a) o ca ai co ~� Q) � L � �� cc J _ o > ca 00EQ Ym a) p r y �' E 3 °)_ p W D O O L CT m V N N O T Q -'" `) O of U co t0 > p N N O N C O O E a) ro O > T^ N O L a) a. ` a) (U c0 L Q V! N E t0 E co C C U C V).a C a) c co a) V) �' in � E c Too0c "—°° NQ) ° �� v°'icoon Dmrna 0 m O U 7 _ 0 E T T C C -, .r- N Q) y c9 O C Q p 7 C V) T.1 - t N Cl) V) cD 1l- M a1= c a) a) y C ._ Q O y cp Q O V c p '- ca E a) ° « E m d a� r ai Y 0 y a) E m L c uio._ c— � .T+ 7 E C 7 U N °0 >1 7 C0 ca O >>. N Q a) ECL a) x 7 O) j ? O c ° a) 7 u, z : L �' E >- x F-• _ = >.° m Q= ca d E 2 > L >- T.0�L F- O c 0 Q . o m Orn U L 0w O 0 Y a) O Z -C V N y .2 U N E � � O U � u) O O j O O C CO O m a a) C7 rn c .� H_ E o a) a) N a) C ro « 4) J L O E > i>'+ c 0 Y co W C O ca a)a) caa) — L Q Z w a) `nE c .. U m 3E ca O C C O O > L O O O) Z vCo � } a) o a H N1 MLu FA aE ca ca = c o � ai -p = Q s 3 cc m � > c c a) >, 0 1 O « co o o - ca E '0 @ E o to. cc - _ CL LL cE2 E a cco c o -o o � o1 CO � - cz > o > - a a) O U � > o a) oro ca' 0 00 0 � Q H a) d m o y a o a > ai co E �i E E -- t � .= n. cc � r ,c .D o Y a-) c W ® w Q (Da) Y41 a) U Z O > C O O E W z M LL co pc a O E C .� o c p C C C rn U 0 - `" co c° a E O a) a) cE O atevO m a oO a+ a a V O C > a:6 E M OE as O a ECC O) y O O co -6 O O 03 O Lo co m CO 00 cA n N ` a O > O _ 69 c c a ai ° 3 y `�' cn o O ° � :3 m c o c a) � a uj co a a) _ co O) O O Q) c0 m a) a) _ ro `n E c °o E a) cz c o c o 0 o E a) E 3 ro .� O N O 0) c 0 7 O cq N p ON N CO O ro r-0 C d C E .c a J Efl N F Q L O -r- -O N _ .. O U H O O (1) 3 Q >'A E U +-.. a a+ I' I 0)N C 0O W .O N ,> V Z@cc3 (1) o Y � m a) a•O E a O L a o 0 0 E t /VA I LN l Co LOAN REVIEW PANEL COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT (HOUSING) REHABILITATION PROGRAM MEMBERSHIP: Five - three members should be knowledgeable in the housing and finance field and two members should be citizen representatives. Finance field members must live or work in the County and the citizen representatives must live in or near the target areas of the housing rehabilitation program. ESTABLISHED: May 3, 1977, by Board Order APPOINTED BY: Board of Supervisors TERM: Two years ending December 31 FUNCTIONS: To evaluate and approve housing rehabilitation loans upon recommendation of the Building Inspection Department - the purpose of the Program, funded by the Federal Housing and Community Development Act, is to arrest deterioration of older residential areas by eliminating blight and correcting health and safety hazards. REPORTS TO: Board of Supervisors MEETING TIME: Once a month, Second Tuesday 8: 30-9 : 30 a.m. COMPENSATION: None FOR INFORMATION, CONTACT: L.T. Gunn, Asst. Director of Bldg. Insp. 646-2309 Mickie Solis, Housing Rehab. Coordinator 646-2337 Building Inspection Department, 651 Pine St; 4th Fl. Martinez , CA 646-2337 SEND APPLICATION TO: Clerk of the Board P.O. Box 911 Martinez, CA 94553 ref: LNGRANT. 1 rev.3-15-89 3sturn'Criginad application to: aplying for: ;IerkoftheB3wd- _ Loan Keview Panel '.0.Box 911 rizrtinez,California X4553 ! ECFV]M PERSONAL DATA SHEET Nominees for Advisory Boards and CanmissionPAR 2319 87 to the i B.GT�HE(O: Contra Costa County Board of Supery sorsacz,, o-•sooFcUPEPv,;oPs C'"i::'IA COSTA CO. Name: Barbara S Lacy Home Address : Phone: 1420 Park Land Dr . (415) 676. 7.399 Concord Ca 94521 Business Address : Phone: 902 Main St (415) 671 1675 Martinez , Ca 94553 Occupation: Vice President/Manager Wells Fargo Bank Martinez Office (Position includes reviewing credit) Educational Background: Race or national origin: High School /12th Grade Caucasian 30 years Bank employee/20 years as Bank officer United States Citizen Various college courses seminars etc . no degree Professional and Fraternal Memberships (including offices held) : None at this time Community Activities: Salvation Army Martinez Service Unit Treasurer Special Interests and Accomplishments: United Way-Committee chairman for North Bay solicitation of Business Pledges Host family for Japanese students Interest in serving on other Boards in area of: Human Services Children's Services Jail Facilities Aging Services �(ransportation Planning' & Zoning Police b Fire —}Manpower Medical Health Care Housing Mental Health Care Alcohol b !)rug Abuse to gnature PLEASE NOTE: Members of some County advisory committees are required to file a conflict of interest statement. 0WFOANIA ® i.. I ,pplying for: r;1RSl` GAWK / 1 i'I ,A,)CE �cQGR k 5 �02 CA�Ir-3T)11 VICTOR M. MENA G1o�sih �E�sb\1 �.�1torJ ' Financial Service Officer �RSONAL DATA SHEET MARTINEZ OFFICE 17 634 Ferry St/P.O. Box 71 �: Martinez,Calitomia 94553 tvisory Boards and Commtss4 C�T �' ' A (415)228-1111 t0 the I "'�•• ,,-%--= I .�--� County Board of Superv$sors MAR 2 "% Name vlr-t-c2 Mp1ti r,P.7�._ci. M�l R c:e.X.. ,: :a G. ��- A-Cu Home Address: Phon -177771z. 2112 Cc1n2b(Lct,1C F4ktV!{1c1 l CA 1 q�S 3 3 Business Address: Phone: ,,r) 2-25 %11 Go\;� lst e - -C Cn1 Qv.sS3 Occupation: Educational Background: Race or national origin: A,.41 i-t-:'Z oSJlelE♦ lolleti� �cRwl MEX\GC� S{. I.c_u.vG(LstrY, 100L-,Bea:CA- Professional and Fraternal Memberships (including offices held) : Community Activities: t-�- Special Interests and Accomplishments : _ 4t--0-"y au-E=. wc:RT Jr1F�Dc 1 Tj L C F •c i l.0�!•-E-57 W�V C A-I �a,0 0 Interest in serving on other Boards in area of: Human . -vices Children's Services Jail Facilities Aging Services :-Transportation Planning b Zoning Police & Fire Manpower Medical Health Care Housing Mental Health Care Alcohol b Drug Abuse � 3- 1 �- E7 Date gnature PLEASE NOTE: Members of some County advisory committees are required to file a conflict of interest statement. N 1L1�, s Bank, r f -TOR A.. MENA „r:.s 1 sc.elopment Officer gclte o(lice R M. MENA I Mot+n:Vianto tkivI-ard.Lafaycuc.CatiIornia 94549,Area Code(41 S)2"7072 SUM'LARY Financial/non-financial analysis, business development . strategic planning , commercial /consumer lending , marketing/promotions. EXPERIENCE 1980 to LLOYDS BANK CALIFORNIA, Oakland, Ca Present Assistant Manager .:j Corporate Banking Division _ Responsibilities include approximately 60% Business Development and maintenance of a 101MM loan portfolio. Emphasis on middle size businesses and professional firms. Sole responsibility for office commercial loan portfolio in areas including documentation, credit decisions and marketing. (1981 to Present) Commercial Lending Officer - Banking Office Responsibilities characteristic of the above with emphasis on cross selling and maintaining existing commercial accounts. Extensive training in business development and commercial lending. In house courses include product training, productive selling, analyzing financial statements, and formulating loan decisions. (1980 to 1981) 1974 to SLCURITY PACIFIC NATIONAL BANK 1980 Completed one year credit training program. Began as operations supervisor, promoted after l year to administrative assistant in charge of master charge and consumer loans. In 19-1 , Jir vuloued ::o Assistant Manager, responsible for consumer and real estate lending. 1964 to SEARS ROEBUCK & COMPANY 11:774 EDUCATION 1974 to Completed training seminars through American Institute of Present Banking and Louis Allen Management seminars. Completed in- house classes in commercial lending and productive selling. 1974 Earned B.A. degree in economics and international finance. California State University, Long Beach, CA SPECIAL Bilingual: English and Spanish S ILLS At::riv,'fiFS & Headed 1982 Branch United Way Campaign and member of the Lions IPS Club, Fairfield Chapter. :;F;`1.kLtdCF.S Available upon request Xl 11 FtCHIVl r t 1 I -rr or The- Board of Supervisors Contra Phil f the Boar .of the Board and County Administration Building Uosta Co(45)nty A�237;for 651 Pine St., Room 106 County Martinez, California 94553 Tom Powers, 1st District Nancy C.Fanden,2nd District — Robert 1.Schroder,3rd District �- Sunne Wright McPeak,4th District Tom Torlakson,5th District The County Board of Supervisors has established advisory boards and bodies to help inform and advise county government on a large number of programs serving the people living, working or visiting our county. Individuals of all backgrounds, training and education are appointed to the advisory groups. Some are selected because of their expertise in the subject matter. Some because they are familiar with needs and feelings of the users of these programs. Others because they have special skills and knowledge. The Board of Supervisors makes appointments from among those who submit applications. Ifzrete>este 4''' � t i�ti`�vee' tie,you ma3�a�isl Lo ,app icationf so, please do the offowing,Y 1. Review the listing of advisory boards, committees and commissions (see back of this letter), and identify those to which you might be interested in seeking appointment; 2. Complete and submit a separate application for each board for which you wish to be considered; and 3. File the completed application with the Clerk of the Board who will process your application. Applicants are requested to call the Clerk or the Supervisor of their District for information regarding current and upcoming vacancies. Phil Batchelor, Clerk of the Board y A-r-T &ANU1I # q r CONTRA COSTA COUNTY ADVISORY BOARDS, COMMISSIONS OR COMMITTEES APPLICATION FORM Name of advisory board applying for Housing R _habi i _a ion Program Loan Review Panel Application Form must be typed or hand printed. Name of Applicant: William P. Jennings (Bill) Home Address: 144 Roslyn Drive Concord, CA Home Phone: .689-5889 94518 Business Address: 1201 S. Main St. W.C. 94596 Work Phone: 947-5800 / Signature: /�J , �. Date: 4/17/89 ( L 4 Personal Experience, Skills and Interests Education/Background: See Attached Resume Occupation (student, for pay work, not for pay work, retiree or similar): See Attached Resume Community Activities: Member of the executive committee for the LBRT Challenge, the proceeds of which,are used to combat drug and alcohol abuse amongst teenagers in Contra Costa County. Special Interests: Skiing, Golfing, and remodeling homes. Information: 1. File completed application with Clerk of the Board, 651 Pine Street, Room 106, Martinez, CA 94553. 2. Members of some advisory bodies may be required to file annual Conflict of Interest Statements. 3. Meetings of advisory bodies may be held in Martinez or in areas not accessible by public transportation. 4. Meetings may be held either in the evenings or during the day, usually once or twice a month. 5. Some boards assign members to subcommittees or work groups requiring additional time. -------------------------- WILLIAM PATRICK JENNINGS -------------------------- 144 Roslyn Drive Concord, CA 94518 415-689-5889 res. 415-947-5800 bus. EDUCATION Merritt College, completed five of the courses necessary for a California Real Estate Brokers License. California State University Chico, B.S . Agriculture, 1980 ( Ag Business Option) Butte College, Ag Business major, "Deans List" Spring 1977 College of San Mateo, A.A. Business, 1972 WORK EXPERIENCE 1985-Present American Savings and Loan As a Loan Agent in Contra Costa County I 'm responsible for soliciting real estate agents and brokers in their offices for new loan originations, as well as packaging and preparing loan files for final loan approval . 1984-1985 World Savings and Loan Working as a Loan Representative in San Francisco,I was responsible for soliciting borrowers for real estate loans and preparing my packages for loan approval. While employed here I completed both Basic & Advanced Sales Training. 1983-1984 Brooke Grega and Associates While working for this real estate appraisal firm I was responsible for the appraisal of real estate properties. (1-4 units) 1982-1983 Uni-Lab Corporation Developed the Central Sacramento Valley for this new industrial chemical company. Some of my duties were soliciting and servicing accounts and training of new sales representatives . 1981 Standard Office Systems Sold photocopy machines by the Sharp Corporation while representing this company. Completed the Sharp Sales Training Course. 1977-1980 Open Circles Village Started with this company doing maintenance work while attending college. Worked my way to mana- ger, where I was responsible for running all facets of the business . (225 unit apartment complex) PERSONAL DATA Date of birth: 2/23/51, Age 36 , Height 6 ' 2" , Weight 175 , Married REFERENCES Mr. Scott White Mr. Ai Armand 166 Castlton Ct. 367 Conmur St. San Ramon, CA So. San Fran. ,CA 415-830-0736 415-583-8262 i TO; r" BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 1. 0. 4 - ----------L•..oA f� Contra FROM: INTERNAL OPERATIONS COMMITTEE Costa js w .oQ March 27, 1989 County �'�.., ,.�*` DATE: prrA•..... .. Request to Review Status of the SUBJECT: Housing Rehabilitation Program SPECIFIC REQUEST(S)OR RECOMMENDATION(S)&BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION RECOMMENDATION: Authorize the Internal Operations Committee to conduct a thorough review of the Housing Rehabilitation Program operated by the Building Inspection Department, including the criteria for appointments to the. Housing Rehabilitation Loan Review Panel. BACKGROUND: Our Committee was recently requested to approve reappointments to the Housing Rehabilitation Program' s Loan Review Panel. The Clerk of the Board' s records indicate that members of the Loan Review Panel should all be residents of the County. One of the members who is recommended for appointment lives outside of the County. In addition, our Committee has not had an opportunity to review the status and functioning of the Housing Rehabilitation Program for some time and, therefore, would like to make .use of this opportunity to meet with the Director of Building Inspection and his staff to review the purpose and functioning of the Housing Rehabilitation Program, who it is serving, what the source of funds is for the program, and exactly what the role of the Loan Review Panel is. We have tentatively planned to schedule this program for review by our Committee on May 8, 1989 . We will report back to the Board of Supervisors with our recommendations after we have had an opportunity to review this program with the Director of Building Inspection. CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: YES SIGNATURE: RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR X RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE _X APPROVE OTHER SIGNATURE(s): Tom Powers Sunne Wright McPeak ACTION OF BOARD ON April 4. 1989 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER VOTE OF SUPERVISORS I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE UNANIMOUS(ABSENT ) AND CORRECT COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN AYES: NOES: AND ENTERED ON THE MINUTES OF THE BOARD ABSENT: ABSTAIN: OF SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN. CC: County Administrator ATTESTED Director, Building Inspection PHIL BATCHELOR,CLERK OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AND COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR M382 (10!88) BY ,DEPUTY � ONTRA COSTA COUNTY ADVISORY BOARDS, COMMISSIONS OR COMM=ES APPLICATION FORM Name of advisory board applying for Housing Rehabilitation Program Loan Review Panel Application Form must be typed or hand printed. Name of Applicant: Jillian Del Pozo Venturino Home Address: 4312 Skyline Place Home Phone: 432-0298 Pittsburg, Ca 94565 Business Address: Home Federal Savings & Loan Work Phone: 254-1961 140 Brookwood Rd. Signature: Orinda, §A 94563 Date: April 18, 1989 Personal 6xrience, Skills and Interests f Education/Background: BA English, CSU Hayward BS Kinesiology and Physical Ed, CSUH Teaching Credential K-12, CSUH Occupation (student, for pay work, not for pay work, retiree or similar):_ Branch Manager, 'Home Federal Savings and Loan Asset (loan production) and Liability (savings) development and management Productivity and Profitability review and management Community Activities: Chamber of Commerce, Orinda Community Laison Committee with City Council Private Tutor, Children with life threatening diseases & Merchant Assistant with Glorietta Parents Club Auction if If it Sleepy Hollow Parents Club Auction Orinda Special Interests: Instructor for the Institute of Financial Education Special Events Planning Career Development Counceling Financial Planning ******See attached Resume that was prepared for application dated March 1987 Information: 1. File completed application with Clerk of the Board, 651 Pine Street, Room 106, Martinez, CA 94553. 2. Members of some advisory bodies may be required to file annual Conflict of Interest Statements. 3. Meetings of advisory bodies may be held in Martinez or in areas not accessible by public transportation. 4. Meetings may be held either in the evenings or during the day, usually once or twice a. month. 5. Some boards assign members to subcommittees or work groups requiring additional time. � Jillian Venturino 4312 Skyline Place Pittsburg, CA 94565 Jvlw 415/ 432-0298 VOW DOB September 14, 1957 HOME FEDERAL Married, No children 1 ►V►L L1Ju�C Sgt. Norm Venturino, Clayton P.D. How r*4deml O"nda office Savings and loan 140&wkuood Road Assocuu[on Orinda.California 94563.3034 R E S U M E 8/80 to Present HOME FEDERAL SAVINGS AND LOAN ASSOCIATION Branch Manager; Responsible for entire Savings and Lending operation. *Operations/ efficient client transaction processing. Personnel hiring, training and cultivating of a "value-added" personal responsive team. Maintain.a productive and profitable cost center for Home Federal's Consumer Services Division. *Lending/ accept, evaluate and underwrite real estate loans for one to four family units, according to FNMA .(Fanny Mae) and Home Federal's in-house underwriting guidelines. Counter offer in terms, options for which will benefit both the consumer and Home Federal without placing either party at great risk. Both Liability and Asset (deposit and loan) goals to be achieved on an annual basis for personal performance evaluation. EDUCATION AND TRAINING 7/81 OMEGA, lending training provided through Home Federal in association with UC San Diego. 10/82 Consumer Loan underwriting. Auto loans, overdraft protection, unsecured lines of credit evaluation. Provided=be Home Federal Retail Lending Division. 8/83 Loan Underwriters Workshop. Provided by the Regional loan processing center. 9/84 FNMA Underwriters Seminar. Provided by Home Federal Wholesale residential lending division. 9/75 - 8/79 CSU-Hayward Bachelor of Arts, English Bachelor of Science, Kinesiology 6 Physical Education 9/79 - 6/ 80 CSU-Hayward Teaching Credential Program State of California Teaching Credential-Partial (expired) PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATIONS Member of the Orinda Chamber of Commerce Committee member of the Orinda Cahmber/ City of Orinda Liason for Merchants Instructor; Institute of Financial Education hof -Stbo Lending Reference; Tom Fletcher, Loan Center Manager- Sacramento 916/ -9-6�9--