CC - Item 4B - Agreement Between The City Of Rosemead And The County Of Los Angeles To Provide A Gang Alternative Prevention Program/{o is �
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR
AND MEMBERS
ROSEMEAD CITY COUNCIL
FROM: BILL CITY MANAGER
DATE: JUNE 25, 2002
RE: AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF ROSEMEAD AND THE
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES TO PROVIDE A GANG ALTERNATIVE
PREVENTION PROGRAM (GAPP)
Attached for your consideration is an agreement that extends the Gang Alternative Prevention
Program for fiscal year 2002 -03. The contract has been reviewed as to form by the City
Attorney.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council authorize the extension of the GAPP agreement with the
County of Los Angeles for fiscal year 2002 -03.
COUNCIL
JUN 2 5 2002
ITEM No.iTE �C-
A
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page No.
1.
PURPOSE OF THE AGREEMENT .. ...............................
2.
STATEMENT OF WORK ................................... ...............................
1
3.
EMPLOYMENT STATUS .................................... ..............................2
_
4.
PAYMENT: ....................... ................ .............. ...............................
.2 •
5.
INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR ......................................................
3
6.
INDEMNIFICATION .....................:....................... ...... ......................'..3
7.
LIMITATION OF COUNTY'S OBLIGATION DUE
TO NON - APPROPRIATION ............................... ..`............................
3
8.
BUDGET REDUCTIONS ..........................:.......:.. ..............................3
9.
TERMINATION AND TERMINATION COSTS ... ..............................4
10.
TERMINATION FOR IMPROPER CONSIDERATION ......
11.
TERM ...... .............................:. .......................4
.
. i
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES '
AND
CITY OF ROSEMEAD
THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into this day of
2002, by and between the City of Rosemead, located at 8838 East Valley Blvd.,
Rosemead, California 91770, hereinafter referred to as "CITY ", and the County of Los
Angeles, hereinafter referred to as "COUNTY ", both of whom are collectively referred to
as the "PARTIES ". - -
WHEREAS, CITY desires to provide probation prevention and intervention services to
assist in reducing incidents of truancy and other serious behavioral problems; and
WHEREAS, COUNTY Probation Department has statutory authority pursuant to
Section 652 of the Welfare and Institutions Code to provide certain expertise and
resources in this area;
WHEREAS, the Chief Probation Officer has been delegated authority by the Los
Angeles County Board of Supervisors to negotiate and sign agreements to provide
these services; and
WHEREAS, COUNTY desires to participate in a joint effort with the CITY;
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual benefits and subject to the
conditions contained herein, the PARTIES mutually agree as follows:
1. PURPOSE OF THE AGREEMENT
The purpose of this Agreement is to maintain within the City of Rosemead, the
services of one (1) Deputy Probation Officer and support staff mutually agreed
upon by both parties. This Deputy Probation Officer will provide specialized
probation services for CITY. Probation services shall be provided by COUNTY
through this Agreement and shall be consistent with the laws of the State of
California and the guidelines of the City.
2. - STATEMENT OF WORK
A. COUNTY shall provide, on behalf of CITY, the services of one (1) Deputy
Probation Officer and related support staff with caseload court- ordered
juvenile probationers who are within the community of Rosemead, such
caseloads to conform to the standards established for the Probation
Department's Gang Alternative and Prevention Program. These students
will be mutually agreed upon by the Chief Probation Officer or his
3.
designee and the CITY. Further, the CITY will give input towards the
evaluation conducted by the Deputy Probation Officer.
B. CITY shall provide office space and telephone services within its
boundaries for use by the assigned Deputy Probation Officer.
C. In addition to the duties associated with caseload supervision, the
assigned Deputy Probation Officer will conduct crisis counseling in
individual and group settings with referred juveniles and parents.
EMPLOYMENT STATUS
The assigned Deputy Probation Officer is an employee of COUNTY and is
entitled to wages and employee benefits appropriate to what is provided other
County employees .who. are Deputy Probation Officers. It is additionally
understood that no term or condition of this Agreement can conflict with State
statute defining the status of the Deputy Probation Officer as a Peace Officer.
4. PAYMENT
CITY shall reimburse COUNTY for support services and 50% of the salary and
employee benefits for one (1) Deputy Probation Officer II and support staff
assigned by COUNTY to perform services, according to Paragraph 2,
STATEMENT OF WORK above. The billable amount is $50,726 plus any
adjustments to salary, employee benefits and /or overhead rates approved by the
Board of Supervisors during the fiscal year.
CITY shall reimburse COUNTY for 100 % of the salary for a Deputy Probation
Officer II, paid at one and one -half time, for all time worked beyond forty (40)
hours per week. It is at the discretion of the COUNTY with the agreement of the
CITY whether the Deputy Probation Officer II works in excess of forty (40) hours.
per week. The current overtime rate is approximately $46.54 per hour plus any .;
adjustments to salary, employee benefits and /or overhead rates approved by the
Board of Supervisors during the fiscal year. .
Within thirty (30) days following the receipt of an invoice from the Probation
Department's Business Management Office, CITY shall reimburse COUNTY for
the billed amount. These invoices shall be provided to CITY within twenty (20)
days following September 30, 2002, December 31, 2002, March 31, 2003 and
June 30, 2003. -
c
5. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR
This Agreement is by and. between COUNTY and CITY and is not intended, and
shall -not be construed, to create the relationship of agent, servant, employee,
partnership, joint venture, or association as between COUNTY and CITY. .
a
7.
INDEMNIFICATION
CITY shall indemnify, defend, and hold harmless COUNTY, and its Special
Districts, elected and appointed officers, employees and agents from and against
any and all liability, including but not limited to demands, claims, actions, fees,
costs, and expenses (including attorney and expert witness fees), arising from or
connected with CITY'S acts and /or omissions arising from and /or relating to this
Agreement.
COUNTY shall indemnify, defend, and hold harmless CITY, and its elected and
appointed officers, employees and agents-from and against any and all liability,
including but not limited to demands, claims, actions, fees, costs, and expenses
(including attorney and expert witness fees), arising from or connected with
COUNTY'S acts and /or omissions arising from and /or relating to this Agreement.
LIMITATION OF COUNTY'S OBLIGATION DUE TO NON - APPROPRIATION
COUNTY'S obligation- for its 50% of salary and employee ,benefits costs is
payable only and solely from funds appropriated for the purpose of this
Agreement subject to COUNTY'S legislative appropriation for this purpose. In the
event the Board of Supervisors does not allocate sufficient funds then the
affected services shall be terminated. COUNTY shall notify CITY in writing of
such non - allocation at the earliest possible date.
BUDGET REDUCTIONS
In the event that County's Board of Supervisors adopts a Fiscal Year 2002/2003
County Budget or a revised 2002/2003 Budget which provides for reductions and
imposes similar reductions with respect to COUNTY contracts, COUNTY
reserves the right to reduce its obligation correspondingly for. Fiscal Year
20021/2003. COUNTY'S notice to CITY regarding said reduction in payment
obligation shall be provided within thirty (30) days of the Board's approval of
such actions. .
,
9.. TERMINATION AND TERMINATION COSTS
In the event that CITY or COUNTY withdraws its participation in the project
described in this Agreement, such withdrawal shall be preceded by thirty (30) "
days' written notice to the other party. Notwithstanding, CITY or COUNTY may
terminate this Agreement upon the termination, suspension, discontinuation or
substantial reduction in CITY or COUNTY funding for the Agreement activity. In
such event, COUNTY shall be compensated for all services rendered and all
necessary incurred costs performed in accordance with the terms of this
Agreement which have not been previously reimbursed up to the date of said r`
termination. Payment shall be made only upon the filing with CITY, by COUNTY,
vouchers evidencing the time expended and said costs incurred. Said vouchers
must be filed with CITY within thirty (30) days of said termination.
10. TERMINATION FOR IMPROPER CONSIDERATION
COUNTY may, by written notice to CITY, immediately terminate the right of the
CITY to proceed under this agreement if it is found that consideration, in any _
form, was offered or given by the COUNTY, either directly or through an
intermediary, with the intent of securing the agreement or securing favorable
treatment with respect to the amendment or extension of the agreement or
making of any determinations with respect to the COUNTY'S performance
pursuant to the agreement. In the event of such termination, COUNTY shall be
entitled to pursue the same remedies against the CITY as it could pursue in the
event of default by the CITY.
CITY shall immediately report any attempt by a County officer or employee to
solicit such improper consideration. The report shall be made either to the ..
County manager charged with the supervision of the employee or to the County
Auditor- Controller's Employee Fraud Hotline at (213) 974 -0914 or (800) 544-
6861.`
Among other items, such improper consideration may take the form of cash,
discounts, service, the provision of travel or entertainment, or tangible gifts.
11. TERM
This Agreement shall be for a period of twelve (12) months commencing on July
1, 2002 and terminating on June 30, 2003.
Councilman Taylor stated that he voted No because of the mixing of Community Development
Commission and City monies, plus it is not clear how the money is divided.
Mayor Bruesch commended staff on developing a very readable and easily used document.
IV. CONSENT CALENDAR (CC -A and CC -D were removed for discussion purposes)
-B AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF ROSEMEAD AND THE COUNTY OF
LOS ANGELES TO PROVIDE A GANG ALTERNATIVE PREVENTION
PROGRAM (GAPP)
CC-C AUTHORIZATION TO ATTEND LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CITIES ANNUAL
MAYORS AND COUNCILMEMBERS EXECUTIVE FORUM, JULY 24, 26, 2002,
MONTEREY
CC -E ANNUAL ADOPTION OF CITY'S INVESTMENT POLICY
MOTION BY COUNCILMAN IMPERIAL, SECOND BY MAYOR PRO TEM VASQUEZ that the
Council approve the aforementioned items on the Consent Calendar. Vote resulted:
Yes:
Imperial, Taylor, Bruesch, Clark, Vasquez
No:
None
Absent:
None
Abstain:
None
e Mayor declared said motion duly carried and so ordered. .
CC -A APPROVAL OF PARTNERSHIP WITH THE LOS ANGELES COUNTY
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION FOR USE OF HOME FUNDS
Bill Crowe, City Manager, stated that the Board of Supervisors approved the partnership this
morning. Mr. Crowe continued that HUD will allow the City to pay the County administrative fees for this
project out of the City's HOME grant, and that authorization is requested to allocate an additional $21,105
for administrative costs.
Councilman Taylor asked why are we paying Los Angeles County Community Development
(LACDC) for their use of our City's HOME funds?
Lisa Baker, Grants Coordinator, explained that the City is asking L.A. County to do all of the City's
monitoring and to insure that they meet the entitlement requirements under HOME on the City's behalf for
this project. Also, should there be a problem with the project, the City is asking the County to do the
financial monitoring and /or to recapture funds. Ms. Baker continued that'under the HOME Program, we are
allowed to use up to 10% of our allocation for Administration and Project Delivery. This proposal will use
5% of the project cost and none from the annual grant.
CCMIN:6 -25 -02
Page 93
q0 z
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR
AND MEMBERS
ROSEMEAD CITY COUNCIL
FROM: BILL pkf/E, CITY MANAGER
DATE: June 18, 2002
SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF PARTNERSHIP WITH THE LOS ANGELES COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION FOR USE OF HOME FUNDS
At its meeting of May 28, 2002, the City Council, in a public hearing, approved a
reallocation of $262,800 in entitlement funds and $159,300 in unallocated HOME funds
for use in a partnership arrangement with a neighboring jurisdiction and instructed staff
to negotiate a partnership with a neighboring jurisdiction.
Accordingly, staff approached the neighboring jurisdiction of Los Angeles County. Staff
spoke with representatives of the Los Angeles Community Development Commission
( LACDC) regarding a proposed partnership. The LACDC has a project currently
underway for which HOME funds are needed. This project is for the development of
multi - family housing through the East Los Angeles Community Corporation (Community
Corporation).
' The Community Corporation is a designated Community Housing Development
Organization (CHDO) that develops affordable housing in the region. The proposed
project is in the same Supervisorial district as the City of Rosemead. The project is for
the development of eleven (11) rental units for families located at 952 S. Boyle Avenue
in Los Angeles. The units will be available for rental to families below 60% of median
income (e.g. $26,448 for a family of four). Under the terms of the proposed Agreement,
outreach for the project would be done for families within the County's jurisdiction,
including the City of Rosemead. Staff is proposing to enter into a partnership agreement
with the County for $262,800 in HOME entitlement funds and $159,300 in HOME CHDO
funds in order to complete the project.
COUNCIL AGENDA
JUN 2 5 2002
ITEM No. � . -e
RECOMMENDATION:
1. That the City Council approve the partnership with the Los Angeles County Community
Development Commission.
2. Authorize the City Manager or designee to execute all agreements.
Attached for your review are the following:
Background information regarding HOME funds
Draft Partnership Agreement
Letter from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development regarding
partnerships i
HOME Partnership, 2
BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION — HOME PARTNERSHIP
AGREEMENT, 2001 -2002
BACKGROUND
In Fiscal Year 1996, the City of Rosemead became an entitlement
jurisdiction for HOME funds. HOME funds are highly restrictive and
must be obligated for expenditure within twenty -four (24) months of
receipt of funds or they are subject to recapture by the federal
government. HOME funds are federal funds restricted to the
creation of affordable housing. Under this program, the City is
entitled to a formula share of HOME funds. The City's annual
allocation is a little over $500,000 per year. Of the total amount,
15% must be set aside for Community Housing Development
Organizations (CHDO's). Since 1996, the City was successful in
using HOME funds in the acquisition and construction of the
Garvey senior housing development. However, beginning in 1999,
the City has had difficulty in finding eligible projects in which to
expend the funds. The City has also been unable to use its CHDO
funds since the beginning of the program, since there is no CHDO
within the City of Rosemead and outreach efforts to qualified
organizations have been unsuccessful.
CURRENT PROGRAMMING
The City has created the Mortgage Assistance Program (MAP)
using HOME funds. That program began in FY 2001 -2002.
Although it is anticipated that, over time, this program will be
successful in using HOME funds and in promoting home ownership
throughout the community, it is anticipated that it will not fully meet
the obligation deadline for use of funds by July 2002.
In addition, due to the continuing lack of a practicing CHDO in the
community, the CHDO funds for FY 2000 and 2001 will remain
unobligated. The total amount of at -risk funding in the short term is
$262,800 in entitlement and $159,300 in CHDO reserve.
DISCUSSION
Staff met with representatives of the U.S. Department of Housing
and Urban Development (HUD) in order to discuss fund obligation
and expenditure. In that meeting, HUD staff stated that there was
no statutory requirement that HOME funds be spent within the
jurisdiction and further stated that the City had the opportunity to
partner with other communities in order to use these funds. HUD
further stated that the City could partner for both entitlement funds,
as well as CHDO set -aside funds. Based on this, the City has
moved forward with reallocating funds for use in a partnership
arrangement and has approached the County of Los Angeles for
partnering possibilities with these funds.
Through the use of HOME funds to create multi - family affordable
housing in the region, the City will be able to take credit with HUD
for the creation of affordable housing. These accomplishments will
be outlined in the City's annual Performance Report to HUD.
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES
HOME INVESTMENT PARTNERSHIPS PROGRAM'
PARTICIPATING JURISDICTIONS
COOPERATION AGREEMENT
THIS Agreement is made and entered into this 25" day of June 2002, by and between
the City of Rosemead, hereinafter referred to as "City," and the County of Los Angeles, "
hereinafter referred to as the "County."
WITNESSETH THAT:
WHEREAS, City and County desire to cooperate to undertake, or assist in undertaking,
the development of multi- family housing through the use of HOME Investment.
Partnership Funds ("HOME'), as authorized by the Housing and Community
Development Act of 1992, as amended , hereinafter referred to as "Act;" and
WHEREAS, the City and the County are designated by the U.S. Department of Housing
and Urban Development ( "HUD ") as Participating Jurisdictions under the HOME Program,
and the Act and HOME Regulations 24 CFR 92.500 permit two contiguous local
Participating Jurisdictions to enter into a cooperation agreement to conduct eligible
activities which serve residents of both jurisdictions; and
WHEREAS, the terms and provisions of this Agreement are fully authorized under State
and local law, and that this Agreement provides full legal authority for the City to assist in
undertaking the development of the project through provision of HOME funds within the
boundaries of the County;
NOW, THEREFORE, the parties agree as follows:
1. The City and the County agree to cooperate to undertake, or assist in
undertaking, the development of affordable housing and that such undertaking
would mutually benefit and serve the residents of both jurisdictions.
2. The City hereby authorizes the County to perform, or cause to be performed,
those acts necessary to implement the development of affordable housing by
the East LA Community Corporation, a California. non - profit public benefit
corporation ( "Developer "), for persons of low income, which will be funded from
the City's federal Fiscal Year 2000 HOME Program funds_ in the amount of
$422,100. Said funds are broken down into the following sources: $159,300.
7
CHDO funds and $262,800 in Entitlement funds. Said funds shall be used for
the exclusive purpose of developing the residential real estate located in the
unincorporated area of the County containing eleven (11) dwelling units for
rental located at and commonly known as 952 S. Record Avenue, Los Angeles,
California ( "Project ")
County warrants to the City that the Developer meets all the qualifications of a
Community Housing Development Organization (CHDO) as defined by the Act
and the HOME regulations.
The City and County shall ensure that any development which is assisted
using HOME program funds in this agreement must comply with all of the
following federal laws, executive orders, and regulations pertaining to fair
housing and equal opportunity, as set forth in 24 CFR part 5, subpart A.
Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, As Amended (42 U.S.C. 2000d); Title
VIII of the Civil Rights Act of 1968, As Amended "the Fair Housing Act" (42
U.S.C. 3601); Equal Opportunity in Housing (Executive Order 11063, As
Amended); Architectural Barriers Act of 1968, As Amended (42 U.S.C. 4151);
Age Discrimination Act of 1975, As Amended (42 U.S.C. 6101); Equal
Employment Opportunity Programs, Executive Order 11246, As Amended;
Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973; Title II of the Americans With
Disabilities Act; Section 3 of the Housing and Urban Development Act of
1968; Lead -Based Paint Poisoning Prevention Act (42 U.S.C. 4821 et seq.),
24 CFR part 35, and 24 CFR 982.4010); Davis -Bacon Act (40 U.S.C. 276a); -
Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act (42
U.S.C. 4201 -4655) and 49 . CFR part 24; HOME Affirmative Marketing
requirements; HOME Conflict of Interest provisions; Executive Orders 11625,
12432, and 12138 (Community Business Enterprise); Department of Interior
and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, known as the Byrd Amendments,
and HUD's 24 CFR Part 87; California Drug -Free Workplace Act of 1990.
City and County agree that County shall be the lead agency for the
development of the project and shall ensure compliance with HOME
requirements regarding environmental review, labor compliance, affordability ,
restrictions and monitoring requirements. City shall serve as a funding partner.
The City and County acknowledge that the Project is consistent with their most
recent Consolidated Plans, as approved by HUD.
The City and County shall ensure that the project serves low- income residents
from both the City and County jurisdictions. The County shall ensure that the
Developer affirmatively markets the project and specifically conducts outreach
5.
6.
7
CHDO funds and $262,800 in Entitlement funds. Said funds shall be used for
the exclusive purpose of developing the residential real estate located in the
unincorporated area of the County containing eleven (11) dwelling units for
rental located at and commonly known as 952 S. Record Avenue, Los Angeles,
California ( "Project ")
County warrants to the City that the Developer meets all the qualifications of a
Community Housing Development Organization (CHDO) as defined by the Act
and the HOME regulations.
The City and County shall ensure that any development which is assisted
using HOME program funds in this agreement must comply with all of the
following federal laws, executive orders, and regulations pertaining to fair
housing and equal opportunity, as set forth in 24 CFR part 5, subpart A.
Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, As Amended (42 U.S.C. 2000d); Title
VIII of the Civil Rights Act of 1968, As Amended "the Fair Housing Act" (42
U.S.C. 3601); Equal Opportunity in Housing (Executive Order 11063, As
Amended); Architectural Barriers Act of 1968, As Amended (42 U.S.C. 4151);
Age Discrimination Act of 1975, As Amended (42 U.S.C. 6101); Equal
Employment Opportunity Programs, Executive Order 11246, As Amended;
Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973; Title II of the Americans With
Disabilities Act; Section 3 of the Housing and Urban Development Act of
1968; Lead -Based Paint Poisoning Prevention Act (42 U.S.C. 4821 et seq.),
24 CFR part 35, and 24 CFR 982.4010); Davis -Bacon Act (40 U.S.C. 276a); -
Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act (42
U.S.C. 4201 -4655) and 49 . CFR part 24; HOME Affirmative Marketing
requirements; HOME Conflict of Interest provisions; Executive Orders 11625,
12432, and 12138 (Community Business Enterprise); Department of Interior
and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, known as the Byrd Amendments,
and HUD's 24 CFR Part 87; California Drug -Free Workplace Act of 1990.
City and County agree that County shall be the lead agency for the
development of the project and shall ensure compliance with HOME
requirements regarding environmental review, labor compliance, affordability ,
restrictions and monitoring requirements. City shall serve as a funding partner.
The City and County acknowledge that the Project is consistent with their most
recent Consolidated Plans, as approved by HUD.
The City and County shall ensure that the project serves low- income residents
from both the City and County jurisdictions. The County shall ensure that the
Developer affirmatively markets the project and specifically conducts outreach
to the residents of both jurisdictions who are eligible tenants for the project.
8. This Agreement shall be effective for the period of time required for the
development of the property and expenditure. of all HOME Program funds
obligated for the property identified in paragraph 2, above. In no event shall
this Agreement be terminated before June 30, 2003, except as a result of
action by HUD
9.1. The City and County agree that HOME Program funding for any activities in or
in support of.any cooperating City that does not affirmatively further fair housing
within its own jurisdiction, or that impedes the County action to comply with its
fair housing certification, is prohibited.
io. In the performance of this Agreement, the County shall cause City to be named
as an additional insured under any and all general liability policies obtained by
County or East Los Angeles Community Corporation with respect to the
Project.
11. The County must comply with Federal Lobbyist Requirements and ensure
that all persons and /or subcontractors acting on its behalf will comply with the
Lobbyist Requirements.
12. This Agreement supersedes any and all other agreements, either oral or in
writing, between the parties hereto and contains all the covenants and
agreements between the parties with respect to the conditions of said
services and funding in any manner whatsoever. Each party to this
Agreement acknowledges that no representations, inducements, promises or
agreements, orally or otherwise, have been made by any party, or anyone
acting on behalf of any party, which are not embodied herein, and that no .
other agreement or amendment hereto shall be effective unless executed in...
writing and signed by both City and County.
13. This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the
laws of the State of California, all applicable federal statutes and regulations .
as amended, and all applicable local laws.
14.. This Agreement may be terminated at any time by either party upon thirty
(30) days prior notice in writing to the other party.
15. Either upon the completion or termination of this agreement, the County shall
within sixty (60) days return any unexpended HOME funds to the City.
16. The Community Development Commission of the County of Los Angeles
( "Commission ") shall administer this agreement on behalf of the County.
17. The County reserves the right to determine the disposition of any program
income, including the County taking possession of said program income for
further use for affordable housing..
18. The County shall be responsible for enforcing the affordability requirements
of the project, including the tenant occupancy monitoring, lease requirements,
inspection for maintenance of Housing Qualify Standards, and any other
applicable HOME requirements. All project records shall be retained by the
County, which shall provide the City with copies of any project records, ii
reports and monitoring information the City requests.
i;
19. The HOME funds under this agreement shall continue to be part of the City
HOME formula allocation from HUD, and the City shall be responsible for
meeting all HUD requirements it engenders, including but not limited to IDIS .
set up, Commitment, Expenditure, CHDOs, match liability, etc.
20. The County shall ensure that the project complies with subsidy layering
standards and does not exceed HOME maximum subsidy limits.
21. The County shall be responsible for dealing with any disputes that arise with
the Developer regarding the project and the HOME funds under this
agreement, and any disputes between the City and the County shall be
mediated by a third party acceptable to both.
22. The invalidity in whole or in part of any provision of this agreement shall not
void or affect the validity of any other provisions of this Agreement.
s'
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the governing bodies of the parties hereto have authorized this
Agreement to be executed by their respective chief executive officers and attested by the
executive officer- clerks thereof as of the day, month and year first above written..
CITY OF
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES
By
By
MAYOR
Chairman, Board of Supervisors
ATTEST:
ATTEST:
City Clerk .
Executive Officer =
Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By
By"
Deputy
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
APPROVED AS TO FORM:'
City Attorney
LLOYD W. PELMAN
County Counsel
By Y
:.
By
Deputy
5
06/19/2002 22:11
9096204567
Frank Tripepi, City Manager
City of Rosemead
Attention: Donald Wagner
8838 E. Valley Blvd.
Rosemead, CA 91770
Dear Mr. Tripepi:
SUBJECT: HOME Investment
Deobligation of
Partnerships
CITY OF POMONA
PACE 02
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development
Los Angeles Area Office, Pacille/Hawaii
611 West Sixth Street
Los Angeles, California 96017
LUUL
Partnerships (HOME) Program
HOME funds, and Forming Local
Thank you for the recent opportunity of meeting with
members of your staff, Lisa Baker, the City's HOME program
consultant; and Donald Wagner, Assistant City Manager, to
discuss the City "s recent deobligation.of HOME funds and
ways the City could forestall future deobligations.
Among the things that were discussed was the
possibility of forming local partnerships. The City asked
for specific guidance as it prepares to explore this option.
While there is no codified regulatory guidance on this
subject, and though by no means all- inclusive, we.do
encourage the City to pursue such a partnership and offer
the following basic advice.
Jurisdictions should share a common boundary (our
understanding is that the City is considering entering into
a partnership with the County of Los Angeles - while the
relationship of the two entities is apparent, if the
proposed project will not be located within the City itself,
it should be open and accessible to City residents).
Benefit must accrue to the low- income residents of both
entities. A mutually acceptable joint partnership agreement
should be drafted, reviewed by legal counsel, and executed
by both entities. Such an agreement should address
responsibility for the project and compliance with all
applicable Federal regulation, foreclosure and /or default,
project funding, match liability, dispute.procedures, and
monitoring responsibilities. We would also encourage both
entities to spend some time ensuring that project files for
such a joint venture contain similar documentation and
background analyses - particularly regarding low- income
beneficiaries. Again, this advice should be understood to
06/19/2002 22:11 9096204567 i CITY OF POMONA PAGE 03
be supplemental in the context of HOME projects funded
jointly by two participating jurisdictions; in addition to
the advice given here, all HOME program rules would be
applicable.
While we will ultimately monitor this project at some
point in the future, we would strongly encourage both
entities to share the results of this venture with us so
that we may in turn educate others about its relative
benefits. Thank you for your continued commitment to the
HOME program and to keeping entitlement HOME funds available
within the Los Angeles County region. If you need any
assistance at all, or have any further questions, please
call Faye Barnes, the Community Planning and Development
Representative assigned to the Rosemead community at
213/894 -8000, extension 3336. Harold Butler is the Senior
Community Planning and Development Representative assigned
to the County of Los Angeles, he can be reached at extension
3311
Sincerely,
[a�n teiichi Itoga "J
ftP am Manager
Office of Community Planning
and Development
cc: Carlos Jackson, Community Development Commission
County of Los Angeles
Councilman Taylor stated that he voted No because of the mixing of Community Development
Commission and City monies, plus it is not clear how the money is divided.
Mayor Bruesch commended staff on developing a very readable and easily used document.
IV. CONSENT CALENDAR (CC -A and CC -D were removed for discussion purposes)
CC -B AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF ROSEMEAD AND THE COUNTY OF
LOS ANGELES TO PROVIDE A GANG ALTERNATIVE PREVENTION -
PROGRAM (GAPP)
CC -C AUTHORIZATION TO ATTEND LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CITIES ANNUAL
MAYORS AND COUNCILMEMBERS EXECUTIVE FORUM, JULY 24, 26, 2002,
MONTEREY
CC -E ANNUAL ADOPTION OF CITY'S INVESTMENT POLICY
MOTION BY COUNCILMAN IMPERIAL, SECOND BY MAYOR PRO TEM VASQUEZ that the
Council approve the aforementioned items on the Consent Calendar. Vote resulted:
Yes: Imperial, Taylor, Bruesch, Clark, Vasquez'
No: None
Absent: None
Abstain: None
The Mayor declared said motion duly carried and so ordered.
ftftft)&C -A APPROVAL OF PARTNERSHIP WITH THE LOS ANGELES COUNTY
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION FOR USE OF HOME FUNDS
Bill Crowe, City Manager, stated that the Board of Supervisors approved the partnership this
morning. Mr. Crowe continued that HUD will allow the City to pay the County administrative fees for this
project out of the City's HOME grant, and that authorization is requested to allocate an additional $21,105
for administrative costs.
Councilman Taylor asked why are we paying Los Angeles County Community Development
(LACDC) for their use of our City's HOME funds?
Lisa Baker, Grants Coordinator, explained that the City is asking L.A. County to do all of the City's
monitoring and to insure that they meet the entitlement requirements under HOME on the City's behalf for
this project. Also, should there be a problem with the project, the City is asking the County to do the
financial monitoring and/or to recapture funds. Ms. Baker continued that under the HOME Program, we are
allowed to use up to 10% of our allocation for Administration and Project Delivery. This proposal will use
5% of the project cost and none from the annual grant.
CCMIN:6 -25 -02 _
Page a3
.-
Mayor Bruesch stated that one of the benefits is that this allows the County to take small amounts of
money like this from various communities and accumulate it for use on large low -cost housing projects.
Councilman Taylor clarified that the City is giving LACDC $422,100 plus $21,105.
Councilmember Clark stated that this is money coming from the Federal Government and we would
lose it if it is not used. The County has projects that can use these funds and the City is merely passing it
through. It is not like we are giving them money.
Councilman Taylor asked if the $21,000 comes out ofthis money or is it an additional charge?
Ms. Baker responded that the City receives about $500,000 a year in HOME funds. Of that amount
10% can be used for Administrative and Project Delivery costs. The City is currently using only 5% of
Administrative and Project Delivery costs and has Administrative funds from prior years still on the books.
Ms. Baker continued that the County requested some funds since we are asking them under contract to
monitor some of our responsibilities as an entitlement jurisdiction. HUD stated today that administrative fee
costs would be appropriate since the County would be performing some of our monitoring requirements, as
long it did not equal the total amount of 10% of the City's Administrative costs. Ms. Baker stated that the
$21,000 is less than 5% of the annual grant.
Councilman Tayl&;asked if the City shouldn't be doing. some of the monitoring in order to have our
own accountability?
project.
Ms. Baker responded that the City has to monitor the County, but we do not have to monitor the
Councilman Imperial asked how the City benefits from this.
Ms. Baker responded that it will reduce the City's administrative costs from monitoring the project,
and the construction of the project will result in 11 new units of housing which will be open to the residents
of Rosemead for application. Ms. Baker pointed out that the Administrative Cost, is a one -time fee.
MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER CLARK, SECOND BY MAYOR PRO TEM VASQUEZ that
the Council approve the partnership with the Los Angeles County Community Development Commission
and amend the recommendation to include the additional allocation of $21,105 for Administrative and
Project Delivery costs; and authorize the City Manager or designee to execute all agreements. Before vote
could result, more discussion ensued.
Councilman Taylor confirmed that these amounts are for this year only. Mr. Taylor requested a copy
of all the guidelines. Councilman Taylor asked if this money could be used to help individual homeowners.
Ms. Baker stated that $1 million in HOME funds were used for the construction of the Garvey Senior
Housing project, and that there are sufficient funds in the City's Letter of Credit for developed projects. In
addition, those funds are being used for first -time homebuyers.
Councilman Taylor asked what is the potential of helping more first -time homebuyers next year.
CCN1IN:6 -25 -02
Page #4
91,4�
Ms. Baker stated that $400,000 will still remain from FY 2001, and another $500,000 will be
allocated for FY 2002.
Councilman Taylor asked what can be implemented in order to prevent the City from giving away
another $400,000.
Ms. Baker responded that HOME funds are very restrictive and that 15% is set -aside for Community
Housing Development Organization (CHDO). Ms. Baker continued that the primary function of the money,
,aside from the 15% set -aside for the specialized non - profits, is for the development of housing. The funds
can be used for construction, acquisition and rehabilitation.
Vote resulted:
Yes: Imperial, Bruesch, Clark, Vasquez
No: Taylor
Absent: None
�� ��Abstain: None
`The Mayor declared said motion duly carried and so ordered.
CC -D 2001 -02 BUDGET AUTHORIZATION TO TRANSFER $420,845, FROM: _"' ;:I-,_:.;_ =
UNAPPROPRIATED RESERVE TO ORGANIZATIONS 4100, 4110, 4130, 4180, 4200,
4310, 4330, 4630, 4640, 4650, 4720, 4830, AND 4840
Councilman Taylor stated he is going to vote No on this item.
MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER CLARK, SECOND BY MAYOR PRO TEM VASQUEZ that
the Council authorize a transfer of $420,845 from unappropriated reserves to cover additional costs incurred
during the current fiscal year 2001 -02 for organizations 4100, 4110, 4130, 4180, 4200, 4310, 4330, 4630,
4640, 4650, 4720, 4830, and 4840. Vote resulted: -
Yes:
Imperial, Bruesch, Clark, Vasquez
No:
Taylor
Absent:
None
Abstain:
None
The Mayor declared said motion duly carried and so ordered.
Councilman Taylor, referring to City Administration payout of accrued sick and vacation leave,
stated that a limit of two years should be placed on accrued hours in order to prevent the dollar amounts from
compounding and snowballing. Mr. Taylor stated the many cities have a policy requiring an employee to use
their sick/vacation time within a stated time frame or lose it. Mr. Taylor requested that staff research this
item and bring it back for further discussion.
V. MATTERS FOR DISCUSSION AND ACTION - None
CCMIN:6 -25 -02
Page s5