Loading...
Housing Minutes 07-09-2002• • APPROVED CITY p R SEMEAD C;e DATE_ MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING L ROSEMEAD HOUSING DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION JULY 9, 2002 The Regular Meeting of the Rosemead Housing Development Corporation was called to order by Vice-President Vasquez at 7:05 p.m. in the Conference Room of City Hall, 8838 E. Valley Boulevard, Rosemead, California. The Pledge to the Flag and Invocation were waived as having been completed during the meeting just adjourned. ROLL CALL OF OFFICERS: Present: Directors Clark, Taylor, Imperial, and Vice-President Vasquez and Absent: President Bruesch - excused APPROVAL OF MINUTES: None RESOLUTION NO. 2002-13 CLAIMS AND DEMANDS The following Resolution was presented to the Rosemead Housing Development Corporation for adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 2002-13 A RESOLUTION OF THE ROSEMEAD HOUSING DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS IN THE SUM OF $119,385.68 AND DEMANDS NO. 1352 THROUGH NO. 1353 MOTION BY DIRECTOR TAYLOR, SECOND BY DIRECTOR IMPERIAL that the Corporation adopt Resolution No. 2002-13. Vote resulted: Aye: Vasquez, Clark, Imperial, Taylor No: None Absent: Bruesch Abstain: None The President declared said motion duly carried and so ordered. 2. TENANT SELECTION PROCESS FOR GARVEY SENIOR HOUSING PROJECT Director Taylor delivered a prepared statement attached as Exhibit A and incorporated herein by reference. Mr. Taylor's comments included his belief that the Community Development Commission has the right to adopt fair guidelines for the tenants that will have RHDCMIN:7-9-02 Page # I • long term living residences and that the letter received from Goldfarb and Lipman contains many confusing comments about housing programs. Mr. Taylor stated that a good faith effort should be made to make U.S. citizenship a requirement for the senior housing project. Peter Wallin, Commission Attorney, stated that HUD funds are being used for the Garvey Senior Housing which entails following HUD regulations. Mr. Wallin stated that the Welfare Reform Act includes qualified aliens and citizens. Steve Copenhaver, GRC Consultant, stated that there are 20 categories of qualified aliens and that this is a difficult area to administer. Director Taylor asked how can this be changed or challenged? Director Taylor stated for the record that he will make a motion that the senior housing be limited to U. S. citizens or qualified aliens. MOTION BY DIRECTOR TAYLOR, SECOND BY DIRECTOR IMPERIAL that the Garvey Senior Housing be limited to U.S. citizens or qualified aliens. Before vote could result, more discussion ensued. Director Imperial stated that this issue should be challenged. Mr. Copenhaver suggested that the money might be better spent in lobbying Congress for changes. Director Taylor stated that there is nothing on the applications now that can even ask a question about citizenship. Michelle Kuraner, Levine Management, explained that the application process will entail processing 200 applications. Ms. Kuraner stated that the applicant is required to have a picture I.D. and Social Security Card. Mr. Copenhaver stated that the applicant has to provide documentation that they meet the minimum income requirements. Director Taylor called for the question. Vote resulted: Aye: Taylor, Imperial No: Clark, Vasquez Absent: Bruesch Abstain: None The Motion did not pass RHDCMIN:7-9-02 Page #2 • issue. • Director Clark stated that Mayor Bruesch should be present to discuss and vote on this Vice-Chairman Vasquez stated that he wants to help Rosemead's long-time citizens, but is reluctant to vote in favor of this issue. Director Clark requested that this item be deferred to the next meeting. 3. MATTERS FROM OFFICIALS - None 4. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE AUDIENCE ON HOUSING DEVELOPMENT MATTERS - None 5. ADJOURNMENT There being no further action at this time, the meeting was adjourned at 7:40 p.m. The next regular meeting is scheduled for July 23, 2002, at 7:00 p.m. Respectfully submitted: Corporatio ecretary RHDCMW:7-9-02 Page #3 APPROVED: • EXHIBIT A • Director Taylor's statement is incorporated herein by reference into the Rosemead Housing Development Meeting of July 9, 2002. Prepared statement written by Directory Taylor: ROSEMEAD HOUSING DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION MEETING JULY 9, 2002 I believe that the Rosemead Community Development Commission has the right to adopt fair guidelines for the tenants that will have long term living residences. I also believe that we have an obligation to provide housing for U.S. citizens. It is not fair or just to build low income housing for an open international housing program when many citizens of the United States have a need for low income housing and assistance. Regardless of any other nation the American system of government needs to provide for its own U. S. citizens first. In the letter received from Goldfarb & Lipman there are very many confusing comments about housing programs. Following are some comments from that letter dated May 14, 2002: 1) pg. 6, "The Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Act ("PRWORA" also commonly known as "The Welfare Reform Act"), does provide for state and local governments to bar certain classes of non-citizens from receiving housing assistance". 2) pg. 6, "On August 22, 1996, PRWORA became effective. PRWORA prohibits an alien who is not a "qualified alien" (as defined below) from receiving any federal, state or local public benefit." 3) pg. 7, "In addition to the Act's prohibition on public benefits to non-qualified aliens, PRWORA imposes limitations on benefits to qualified aliens. A qualified alien who enters the United States after the effective date of PRWORA, may not be eligible for a period of five years beginning on the date of the alien's entry in the Unites States for most federal means-tested benefits (e.g., benefits for which eligibility is based on the income and assets of the potential recipient of the benefit)". 4) pg. 7, "The broad definition of "public benefits" likely means that many subsidized housing programs may now be available only to United States citizens and qualified aliens. Additionally, agencies, local governments and housing developers may now be subject to a requirement to include immigrant verification procedures as a prerequisite to receive housing assistance". Page #1 • • 5) pg. 7, "PRWORA requires that the Department of Justice ("DOT') issue regulations requiring verification for persons applying for a federal public benefit within eighteen(18) months of the adoption of the Act. Proposed regulations were issued in August 1998. To date no final rule has been issued by the DOJ. HUD has declined to issue guidance for the implementation of PRWORA until the DOJ regulations have been issued. In fact, HUD has stated in the issuance of regulations implementing Section 214 of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1980 (which limits assistance to unqualified immigrants in some HUD sponsored programs) that entities responsible for administering HUD programs should not implement PRWORA until such time as HUD has issued regulations". 6) pg. 8, "In September 1998, HCD adopted regulations to implement PRWORA but they were declared premature by the courts and removed from the books. HCD apparently will not issue new regulations regarding agency or state assisted housing" 7) pg. 8, "It appears that the City may implement its own policies concerning PRWORA and local public benefits. Regulations issued by HUD and HCD could be useful to the City, but the City would not be bound by the HUD or HCD regulations". 8) pg_ 9, "Finally, if the Agency decides to move forward in implementing PRWORA for this particular Development, it will need to obtain County concurrence because HOME money is also being used to fund the Development. The County may object to the Agency's implementation of PRWORA due to the explicit directive it received from HUD to avoid implementation until HUD publishes its own rules. Indeed, like HCD, if the Agency seeks to implement PRWORA rules for the Development, the City, the Agency and the County could find itself liable for premature implementation". In reading the above comments, it is obvious that there is much confusion and no certainty about low-income senior housing guidelines and rules. The issue at hand is not to deny housing to any person, but to allow the needy senior United States citizens to have the first right to housing assistance. It is not my intent to adopt or use the PRWORA Act. My only suggestion is we adopt the guideline that U.S. citizenship be a requirement. At least until the U.S. Congress and DOJ decide what the rules are to be in the future. Page #2