Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1977 04-21 HCMCall to,Order Roll Call Horne Improvement Grant Program MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE HOUSING COMMISSION FOR THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER IN THE COUNTY OF HENNEPIN AND THE STATE OF MINNESOTA SPECIAL SESSION APRIL 21, 1977 CONFERENCE ROOM The Brooklyn Center Housing Commission met in special session and was called to order by Chairman Howard at 7:35 p.m. Chairman Howard, Commissioners Hastings, Haroldson Weitzel, Plummer, Turner. Also present were Council- man Bill Fignar, Director of Planning and Inspection Blair Tremere, and Administrative Assistant Ronald Warren. The Secretary reported that Commissioners Beikler and Duenow had informed him that they were unable to attend this evening's meeting and were, therefore, excused. He further reported that. Commissioner Magnuson had informed him that he had a meeting conflict this evening but that he would make every effort to attend the Com- mission meeting. Chairman Howard explained that this special Housing Commission meeting was called to review and discuss the Home Improvement Grant Program and to make a recommendation to the City Council regarding a priority ranking system to be utilized for awarding these grants. The Secretary briefly explained the Minnesota Housing Financing Agency Home Improvement Grant Program. He stated that the program was designed to assist low income homeowners in making various repairs to their property for the purpose of correcting defects affecting the safety, habitability and energy usage of their homes He further stated that to be eligible for the program an applicant must own and occupy the property to be im- proved, have an annual adjusted gross income not in the excess of $5,000, and gross assets, excluding the residential property to be improved, that do not exceed $25,000. He added that this State program also provides that at least 50% of the approved grant -1- 4 -21 -77 applications shall be for persons 62 years of age or older. He explained that these criteria have bee n established by the State and cannot be modified. He further explained that the City may establish priorities for awarding grant funds, based upon an assessment of need within its jurisidiction and that a priority ranking system consisting of an assignment of points for various factors has been recommended for the Housing Commission's consideration. Commissioner Magnuson arrived at 7:44 p.m. The Director of Planning and Inspection proceeded to review and explain the priority ranking system which consists of five factors: the relative income level of the applicant; the extent to which the applicant's proposal is deemed energy related; the extent to which the applicant's proposal consists of code related improvements bearing on imminent health and safety aspects; age of the applicant; and the extent to which the applicant's proposal will have a positive impact upon the neighborhood. He stated that the intent of this priority rating system is to prevent the start of blight in an otherwise non blighted neighbor- hood; begin arresting blight which may be evident in a declining neighborhood; and to attempt to restore an otherwise declining neighborhood. He explained that the overall purpose of the program is to achieve a maximum neighborhood and community benefit by providing means to eligible low income, primarily elderly, homeowners so that necessary rehabilitative efforts can be made that otherwise would not be economically feasible. Following the explanation a lengthy discussion ensued relative to the recommended point system for each of the five ranking factors. The Director of Planning and Inspec- tion stated that it is recommended that from 1 to 5 points be awarded to an applicant based on their income, with a person having an income of less than $1,000 being awarded the maximum of 5 points. Regarding the age of the applicants, he stated that it is recommended that 1 point be awarded for an applicant between the ages of 62 and 70 years of age and that 2 points be awarded for an applicant 70 years of age or over. He explained that imminent health and safety considerations would be give a maximum 10 point ranking, while energy related improvements would be awarded 3 points. He next explained the point assignment for the neighborhood impact factor stating that no points would be given for a requested improvement that has little or no neighborhood impact; •1 point would be awarded on the basis of a signifi- R cant impact in a declined neighborhood; 3 points would be awarded for a significant impact in a declining neighborhood; and 5 points would be awarded for a significant impact in a stable, non- blighted neighborhood. It was the consensus of the Housing Commission that the point systems for the income of applicants, the age of applicants, energy related improvements and imminent health and safety considerations were acceptable. A lengthy discussion ensued regarding the point system for neighborhood impact. The Secretary explained that this rating system is intended to apply only to this phase of the Home Improvement Grant Program. The Director of Planning and Inspection pointed out that this priority ranking system would not be cast in stone and that if another allocation for home improvement grants was authorized this ranking system would again be reviewed. Com- missioner Plummer stated that she would like a clearer definition for the word neighborhood. The Director of Planning and Inspection responded that the word neigh- borhood should not be used in the context of the neighborhoods designated for the Neighborhood Advisory Committees to the Planning Commission. He stated that a judgment would have to be made when inspecting these properties to determine the effect the home improvement would have upon a particular neighborhood in question. He added that a neighborhoot could be, for purposes of this program, a one block area, a four block area or perhaps even a few homes within a one block area depending upon the circum- stances. Commissioner Haroldson stated that he was not in agreement with the way points would be awarded under the neighborhood impact factor. He explained that under this point system a blighted home in a blighted neighborhood would get no points which does not seem to address the need for improving blighted areas. Commissioner Magnuson stated that he had no problem at all with the rating system and pointed out that because the amount of funds, approximately 15,000, is limited it would be very difficult to attack the problem of a blighted neighborhood in an efficient manner. He further stated that if the amount of funds was unlimited he would favor the neighborhood impact point rating system to be done in reverse, giving a higher point total to a blighted home in a blighted neighborhood. Further ciscussion ensued relative to ttie priority rating system with the Director of Planning and Inspection stating that this ranking or targeting is intended to be utilized if the application requests of eligible participants exceed the amount of grants allocated to the community. He explained that this ranking system would not necessarily exclude an eligible applicant living in a blighted home in a blighted neighborhood from being awarded a grant, but for purposes of this program that individual applicant would not receive as many points as an applicant whose proposal has a significant effect on his neighborhood. He stated that the fact that there are a limited amount of funds available, and also that any one grant cannot exceed $5,000, almost dictates such criteria. He commented that the entire amount of the City's allocation would have little or no effect in a truly blighted neighborhood. The Secretary stated that following the adoption of a priority ranking system by the City Council the priority system will be applied to the eligible applications and that these applications will be reviewed by the Housing Commission for a recommendation to the City Council for final approval of the grants. He further stated that the approved applications will then be submitted to the State, through the Metro Housing and Redevelopment Authority, for final certification. He added that once the State has approved the applications, an authorization will be received for the work to begin and when the work has been satisfactorily completed, as determined by a City inspection, the funds will be dispersed. Following further discussion it was the opinion of the Housing Commission that the priority ranking system be again reviewed if additional home improvement grant funds are available next year and also that other sources of funding for home improvement grants be explored. Chairman Howard inquired if it would be possible to obtain addresses of eligible applicants prior to the Housing Com- mission's review of the applications so that Commissioners would have the opportunity to drive by and review the properties prior to their consideration of a recommendation to the City Council. The Secretary responded in the affirmative. Motion by Commissioner Plummer and seconded by Com- missioner Hastings to recommend approval of the priority ranking system contained in the City Manager's Memorandum of April 21, 1977 regarding the Home Improvement Grant Program. Voting in favor; Chairman Howard, Commissioners Hastings, Weitzel, Magnuson, Plummer and Turner; voting against: Commissioner Haroldson. The motion passed. Action Recommending Approval of a Priority Ranking System for the Home Improvement Grant Program Other Business Adjournment Chairman Howard reported that the next regularly scheduled Housing Commission meeting would be on May 10, 1977 at which time the Commission will review Home Improvement Grants for a recom- mendation to the City Council and will also review the results of the Housing Commission's Home Renovation Workshop. He further stated that it is intended that the May 10 meeting be the last scheduled meeting of the Housing Commission until next fall. A brief discussion ensued relative to Kaleidoscope with a schedule for staffing the Housing Commission booth being determined. Motion by Commissioner Plummer and seconded by Commissioner Haroldson to adjourn the meeting. The motion passed unanimously. The Brooklyn Center Housing Commission adjourned at 8:48 p.m. Chairman