AgdaPkt 2005-04-11 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

.s.I.A-z, of the project's funding, or the specific time the project will be developed. Such general authorization, instead of approval for each specific project, has been upheld by the California Supreme Court. The City/Agency has never held an Article 34 election of any type, and, thus, does not have Article 34 authorization to develop a low-rent housing project. Moreover, FCH has advised, and Agency counsel has confirmed with the State of California Office of Housing and Community Development ("HCD"), that without proof of such authorization, the proposed FCH project would not be eligible to receive certain state assistance available through HCD's Multifamily Housing Program (hereinafter "MHP Funds"). Therefore, before FCH can proceed with the development of the project and become eligible to receive MHP Funds, the City must either (1) submit a ballot measure to the voters at the next general election stating the maximum number of low-rent dwelling units the Agency may develop, construct or acquire, which ballot the majority of the voters must approve; or (2) revise the DDA in a manner eliminating the applicability of Article 34, or creating an exemption thereto. As FCH's application for the next cycle of available MHP Funds had to be submitted on April 1, 2005, waiting for the voters' approval of low-rent housing would have seriously jeopardized the development of the project. Thus, the most feasible alternative was to revise the DDA. II. Reducing the Amount of Required Extremely Low to Very Low Income Units Since the DDA currently requires 100% of the project's 58 units to be affordable to low to very low income households, the project would be considered a "low-rent housing project" subject to the voter approval requirement of Article 34. However, pursuant to California Health & Safety Code Section 37001, the term "low-rent housing project" as used in Article 34 does not include projects wherein not more than 49% of the units are reserved for persons or families of low-income (Le. earning 80% or less of AMI). Therefore, to obviate the need for an Article 34 election, and to remain eligible for MHP Funds, the parties have proposed to reduce the total number of required very low income units from 58 to 28 (Le. 49% of the units), with the remaining 30 units (or 51 % of the units) to be reserved for families not earning more than 90% of the AMI (Le. moderate income). III. Effect of Proposed Revision Reducing Number of Required ExtremelyNery low Income Units The modifications to the DDA will reduce the number of low/very low income units the Redevelopment Agency will get credit for. Rather than getting credit for producing 58 low/very low income units, the modifications will mean that the Agency will get credit for producing 28 low/very low income units and 30 moderate income units. However, FCH has advised the Agency that it will also utilize tax credit financing administered by the California Tax Credit Allocation Committee ("TCAC"). As a condition of issuing tax SM:cje Redev Shë¥'edI2005 Staff ReportslO4-2005/Amended FCH DDA 2