HomeMy WebLinkAbout06/08/2000 G--~I_o ~
B A K E R'S F I E L D
David Couch, Chair
Patricia J. DeMond
Jacquie Sullivan
Staff: Trudy Slater ·
SPECIAL MEETING NOTICE
LEGISLATIVE AND LITIGATION COMMITTEE
of the City Council - City of Bakersfield
Thursday, June 8, 2000
1:15 p.m.
City Manager's Conference Room
Second Floor- City Hall, Suite 201
1501 Truxtun Avenue, Bakersfield, CA
AGENDA
1. ROLL CALL
2. ADOPT MARCH 23, 2000 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
3. PUBLIC STATEMENTS
4. DEFERRED BUSINESS
A. REVIEW AND RECOMMENDATION REGARDING DRAFTING AN ORDINANCE OR
RESOLUTION OUTLINING THE ANNEXATION 'PROCESS WITH CONSIDERATION
OF SUGGESTIONS FROM THE ANNEXATION TASK FORCE; REVIEW OF
DRAFT GUIDE TO ANNEXATION ~PROCESS
5. NEW BUSINESS
A. OVERVIEW DISCUSSION REGARDING THE DEVELOPMENT OF A POLICY OF
CERTIFICATIO.N OF LOCAL COMMUNITY HOUSING DEVELOPMENT
ORGANIZATIONS (CHDO's)
6. ADJOURNMENT
S:\TTS\Leg-Lit-Com AGN000608.wpd I:JL[
DRAFT
BAKERSFIELD
Alan Tandy, Ci~'Manager David Couch, Chair
Staff: Trudy Slater Patricia J. DeMond
Jacquie Sullivan
AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
LEGISLATIVE AND LITIGATION COMMITTEE
Regular Meeting
Thursday, March 23, 2000
1:15 p.m.
City Manager's Conference Room
1. ROLL CALL
Called to order at 1:17 p.m.
Members present: Councilmember David Couch, Chair
Councilmember Patricia DeMond
Councilmember Jacquie Sullivan
2. ADOPT MARCH 2, 2000 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
Adopted as submitted.
3. PUBLIC STATEMENTS
I~lone.
4. PRESENTATIONS
None.
4. PUBLIC STATEMENTS
None.
DRAFT '
Agenda Summary Report
Legislative and Litigation Committee
March 23, 2000
Page 2
5. DEFERRED BUSINESS
A. REVIEWAND RECOMMENDATION REGARDING REQUEST FROM MARTHA KNIGHT
FOR ADDITIONAL REIMBURSEMENT FOR WATER AND SEWER UTILITIES
Mrs. Martha Knight reiterated her desire to have the City reimburse her for expenses she
incurred in order to provide sewer and water utilities to the property the traded to her by t. he
City. She was aware of the City's legal stance but felt it was a matter of fairness to her for
the City to absorb the additional expenses she has (sewer) and will (water) occur relating to
utilities. She presented a bill from Lewis Construction in the amount of $5,600 for sewer line
installation and a fax from ConCastCo in the amount of $6,578.72 for work to be done. The
$12,178.72 total is what she is requesting the City pay.
City Manager Alan Tandy proposed a compromise. He suggested loaning Mrs. Knight the
$12,178.72, secured by a second deed of trust, which would be repayable to the City upon
the sale of the property. All Committee members, as well as Mrs. Knight, indicated their
support of this workable solution. Mrs. Knight indicated her desire to review the proposal with
her husband before making a commitment on her part
Councilmember Sullivan indicated this was a wonderful "win-win" situation. Councilmember
DeMond requested the proposal be put in understandable language and proffered to Mrs.
Knight. City Attorney Thiltgen and Deputy City Attorney AIIford will follow through on
directions from the Committee. Councilmember DeMond also requested that staff
procedurally ensure that the situation which occurred with Mrs. Knight does not reoccur with
other Bakersfield individuals in the future.
Councilmember Sullivan moved, and it was passed, for staff to handle the situation as had
been discussed.
6. NEW BUSINESS
A. REVIEW AND RECOMMENDATION REGARDING USE OF ELECTRIC BIKES ON
CITY STREET BIKE LANES
Rich O'Neil stated he had no objection to the use of e-bikes on Class 2 and Class 3 bike
lanes as opposed to the .bike path.
City Attorney Bart T. hiltgen explained that in general motor vehicles are .not permitted to use
bicycle lanes on a street but there are exceptions in the Vehicle Code (21209(b)). Therefore,
a .motorized bicycle (which includes e-bikes) may use the bicycle lanes on City streets.
Councilmember Couch requested that the City Attorney forward a letter to organizations in
the City which sell e-bikes informing them of this .fact and also one to Mr. Paul McGrath. No
further action was needed.
Agenda Summary Report DRAFT
Legislative and Litigation Gommittee
March 23, 2000
Page 3
7. COMMITTEE COMMENTS
None.
8. ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at 1:'52 p.m.
Staff Attendees: City Manager Alan Tandy; Administrative Analyst Trudy Slater; City
Attorney BartThiltgen; Deputy City AttorneyVirginia Gennaro; Deputy
City Attorney Michael AIIford; Public Works Director Raul Rojas;
Traffic Engineer Steve Walker; Senior Real Property Agent Don
Anderson.
Other Attendees: RiCh O'Neil, Marchelle Stevens, Stewart Voger
(L&L\LOOO323MIN.wpd)
CITY OF
BAKERSFIELD
Draft #2
GUIDE
TO THE
ANNEXATION
PROCESS
Draft #2
Prepared by the
Office of the City Clerk
May 26, 2000
PREFACE
The City Clerk for the City of Bakersfield has prepared this brief summary of the process
required by the Cortese-Knox Local Government Reorganization Act of 1985 regarding
annexations. This is a general guide intended to assist citizens in their understanding of
the annexation process. It does not reflect all regulations regarding annexations. Citizens
are encouraged to get the most up-to-date information available prior to beginning any
protest effort.
This document is provided as a broad, general overview of the proceedings related to
annexations initiated by the City of Bakersfield and may not be interpreted or construed to
be complete, conclusive, or as legal advice. Specific and complete requirements as well
as additional references to applicable State law may be obtained from LAFCo, 2700 "M"
St., Bakersfield, CA 93301. However, specific legal advice should be sought from an
attorney.
CONTACTS
The following addresses and telephone numbers are provided for your information:
City Council City Clerk
1501 Truxtun Avenue 1501 Truxtun Avenue
Bakersfield, CA 93301 Bakersfield, CA 93301
(661) 326-3767 (661) 326-3767
Fax (661) 323-3780 Fax (661) 323-3780
' e-mail: city_council@ci, bakersfield.ca, us
City Manager City Attorney
1501Truxtun Avenue 1501 Truxtun Avenue
Bakersfield, CA 93301 Bakersfield, CA 93301
(661) 326-3751 (661) 326-3721
Fax (661) 324-1850 Fax (661) 852-2020
Development Services Director
1715 Chester Avenue
Bakersfield, CA 93301
(661) 326-3733
Fax (661) 325-0266
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Annexations at a Glance
..................................... Page 1
LAFCo Proceedings ............ . ............................. Page 2
City Council Proceedings ..................................... Page 3
Protesting Annexations ................................... Pages 3 - 5
Effective Date of Annexation .................................. Page 5
Annexation Terminology .................................. Pages 6 - 7
Sample Mailed Hearing Notice ................................ Page 8
Sample Published Hearing Notice .............................. Page 9
Sample Written Protest by Property Owner ......................Page 10
Sample Written Protest by Registered Voter ................... :. Page 11
ANNEXATIONS AT A GLANCE
What is annexation and how does it affect residents of the County? With this guide, the
City of Bakersfield will answer these questions and provide a broad overview of the
annexation process. It is by no means intended to cover all the regulations regarding
annexations. However, we hope it will provide basic information to assist you in your
understanding of the annexation process.
Annexation is a jurisdictional change, from County to City, of inhabited or uninhabited
areas. This jurisdictional change, governed by the Cortese-Knox Local Government
Reorganization Act of 1985, can be found in the California Government Code commencing
with Sections 56000. The Act is administered and enforced by the Local Agency
Formation Commission (LAFCo). LAFCo has the authority to approve or deny all
annexation requests.
LAFCo of Kern County is composed of two members from City Councils (throughout the
County), two members of the Kern County Board of Supervisors, and one public member
(§56325 & 56332).
LAFCo regulates, through approval and denial, boundary changes proposed by other
public agencies or individuals. In reviewing proposals for boundary changes, LAFCo is
required to consider certain factors prior to approval. These factors include, but are not
limited to, conformity between city and county plans, current-service levels and the need
for future services to the area, and the social, physical, and economic effects that boundary
changes present to the community (§56841). Additionally, LAFCo is charged with
deterring urban sprawl and promoting orderly formation and development of local
government, based upon conditions and circumstances ({}56301).
Individuals included in the proposed annexation area have the opportunity to express their
opinions at two (2) public hearings. The first hearing is held before LAFCo. The second
hearing is held before the City Council of the annexing City. Citizens may submit written
materials and/or oral testimony to both of these entities. The public hearing conducted by
the City Council is considered a "protest hearing" where property owner(s) and registered
voters', within the area, may protest the proceeding.
Within this guide you will find sections on LAFCo Proceedings, City Council Proceedings,
Protesting Annexations, and Effective Date of Annexation. Also included is a Glossary of
Terms, a Sample Hearing Notice (used by the City) and a Sample Written Protest.
-1-
LAFCo PROCEEDINGS
Application Review:
The LAFCo Executive Officer reviews the application package and, within 30 days, of
receipt, determines if the petition/resolution meets all legal requirements, the project's
requirements under CEQA, evidence that a satisfactory exchange of property tax has
taken place within the time prescribed by law, and whether the application is complete
(§56828).
Notice of Filing:
If all of the documents are in order, the LAFCo Executive Officer issues a Notice of Filing
and sets a date within 90 days for a public hearing by the Commission where the
annexation proposal will be considered (§56828).
Public Hearing:
The LAFCo Executive Officer shall give notice of any hearing by the commission by
publication, as provided in Sections 56153 and 56154, and by posting, as provided-in
Sections 56158 and 56159. ({}56834)
Determination of Commission:
The hearing shall be held by the Commission upon the date and at the time and place
specified. The hearing may be continued from time to time but not to exceed 70 days from
the date specified in the original notice (§56840). At the hearing the Commission considers
the recommendations of the LAFCo Executive Officer on a number of factors and policies,
such as current and future population and density, current and proposed land uses and
potential incompatibilities with adjacent properties, current and future needs for public
services and the adequacy of the cost of those services currently, conformity with the
Commission's policies and standards, and other provisions of law (§56841). The
Commission also receives oral and written comments from citizens and other public
agencies at the public hearing (§56840 (b)).
Adoption of Resolution Makinq Determinations:
The Commission must adopt a resolution making determinations either approving, denying,
or modifying the annexation proposal within 35 days from the public hearing (§56851). The
Commission may also include specific terms and conditions in the resolution (§56844).
Additionally, the Commission designates a "conducting authority," the City Council in the
case of a city annexation. The Commission may authorize proceedings to conclude
without any further notice, hearing, or election if there is 100% consent of the landowners.
-2-
CITY COUNCIL PROCEEDINGS
The annexation process officially begins when the City Council adopts a Resolution of
Application to annex certain territory. The application is filed with LAFCo, along with the
certified resolution for annexation. By statute, the resolution must include specific
language and must be accompanied by prescribed documentation, such as a statement
of the reason for the proposal, a map and legal description of the boundaries of the subject
territory, a description of how services will be provided to the area proposed for annexation,
and California Environmental Quality Act compliance documentation (§56652).
The City and the County will determine a property tax exchange on each proposed
annexation. LAFCo reviews the application documents and the City's resolutions affecting
the property tax exchange and, if all is in order, a Notice of Filing is issued.
A public hearing is then conducted by LAFCo. Citizens may provide written and oral
testimony. Upon completion of the hearing, the Commission (LAFCo) adopts a"Resolution
Making Determinations" either approving, denying, or modifying the annexation proposal.
Upon receipt of this resolution, the City Council will schedule a public hearing, commonly ·
known as the "protest hearing," within 35 days of the Commission's resolution date. The
Clerk will give notice of the hearing, pursuant to Section 56154, at least 15 days in
advance and no laterthan 60 days (§57002). Notices are mailed to each affected agency,
the LAFCo Executive Officer, and chief petitioners. Citizens affected by an annexation
may request that a special hearing notice be mailed to them. This request must be made,
in writing, to the City Clerk.
Additiona. lly, the hearing notice is required to be published in a newspaper of general
circulation. The City uses The Bakersfield Californian. In accordance with Government
Code Section 6061, the notice is required to be published a minimum of one time
(§56153).
A notice is also required to be posted at least 15 days prior to the hearing date specified
in the notice. It is to remain posted up to the time of the hearing (§56159). The notice is
posted on the City's Official Bulletin Board which is located on the west wall near the
southwest entrance to City Hall (§56158).
PROTESTING ANNEXATIONS
Citizens affected by an annexation have two opportunities to voice their concerns
regarding the proposed annexation. The first is the public hearing conducted by LAFCo.
The second, and most important, is the public hearing or "protest hearing" conducted by
-3-
the City. Under State law this is the ONLY opportunity for citizens affected by the
proposed annexation to file an official written protest. Written protests of the proposed
annexation must be filed with the City Clerk up to and including the hearing. Any protest
filed after the conclusion of the.hearing will not be counted in the annexation proceeding.
For a protest to be officially counted by the local agency the following procedure should be
followed:
· Protest letter or petition must be filed with the City Clerk of the City of
Bakersfield after publication of the hearing notice, but before the conclusion
of the hearing (§57051). Each protest letter must:
· Be addressed to the City Clerk
· State whether the protest is being made by a landowner or registered
voter
· State the name and address of the owner of the land. If the
landowner's address is different from the affected property location,
you must include that information
· State the name and address of the registered voter as it appears on
the Affidavit of Voter Reqistration
· Sign and date the protest letter. You may not sign before the
publication date of the "Notice of Public Hearing"
· Be filed before the conclusion of the public hearing
· Those eligible to protest an annexation must be a land owner of property in
the proposed annexation area or, any registered voter residing in the
proposed annexation area. An individual that is both a registered voter and
a property owner may file a protest under either, or both designations. If
property is owned by more than one person, each owner is eligible to.file a
protest (§57051).
· Property owned by more than one person, either in joint tenancy or tenancy
in common may each file a protest letter. However, only the individual's
proportionate share in the value of the property will be considered in valuing
the protest (§57052 and 56710(b)). For example: John and Jane Smith,
Joint Tenants, each file a protest as property owners. Each is counted as
one-half (as half owners) for a total of one protest.
· The name on each protest letter will be matched against the voter
registration roll on file with the Kern County Election Official, and/or the
assessment (property tax) roll, depending on the nature of the protest. The
names on the protest letter must match the name on these rolls.
-4-
Upon completion of the protest hearing, the results are determined as follows:
· An election to decide annexation must be. held if at least 25% but less than
50% of the registered voters in the territory file a written protest;
· An election to decide annexation must be held if at least 25% of the number
of property owners who also own at least 25% of the assessed value of the
land file a written protest;
· If more than 50% of the registered voters in the proposed annexation area
file a written protest, the annexation proceeding is terminated;
If less than 25% of the registered voters or if less than 25% of the property
owners who own less than 25% of the assessed value file a written protest,
the annexation will proceed.
EFFECTIVE DATE OF ANNEXATION
The City Clerk will file with LAFCo a certified copy of the Resolution adopted by the City
Council. The LAFCo Executive Officer determines whether the City's Resolution meets all
the conditions imposed by the Commission and, if so, issues a Certificate of Completion.
The Certificate of Completion is forwarded to the City, recorded with the County Recorder,
and a statement of boundary change or creation is issued by the LAFCo Executive Officer.
The Certificate is then filed with the State Board of Equalization and the County Assessor.
The Secretary of State is also notified of this action. In addition, the property tax transfer
resolution or agreement, if any, is forwarded to the County Auditor to bring about the
property tax transfer (§§57200 - 57204).
Once the City receives the Certificate of Completion, the City assumes responsibility for
police and fire protection, building inspection, refuse collection, animal control, planning,
and other services.
-5-
ANNEXATION TERMINOLOGY
Annexation: A process whereby territory is incorporated into a City.
CEQA: California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code
§21000 et seq.).
Chief Petitioners: Persons designated on a petition or resolution for
organizational change, to a maximum of three.
Conducting Authority: The entity or agency responsible for conducting the protest
hearing for an organization change.
Detachment: A process whereby territory is removed from a City.
EIR: An Environmental Impact Report (EIR) that is required under
CEQA after an initial study reveals that significant
environmental impacts may occur due to a project.
Governing Body: The Board or Commission or a local agency, either elected by
the voters or appointed by a parent governing body.
Inhabited Territory: Territory wherein 12 or more registered voters reside.
LAFCo: The Local Agency Formation Commission, is the governing
body responsible for ensuring the laws related to
organizational changes are followed. It is also responsible for
making determinations regarding services, land use
compatibility, boundaries, and other such issues when
organizational changes are proposed.
Lead Agency: The agency responsible for preparing an environmental
document per CEQA.
Local Agency: Any local governmental entity--city, county, special district,
agency--created by State law.
Negative Declaration: A jurisdictional boundary change is considered a "project"
under CEQA. If under CEQA regulations the project is
determined to have no significant impact on the environment,
a Negative Declaration is filed.
-6-
Protest Hearing: A hearing conducted by the Local Agency, in this case the City
Council, where citizens have their opportunity to officially
protest annexation to a city.
Reorganization: A change to the boundaries of a city, county, special district,
county service area or sphere of influence.
Responsible Agency: The agency responsible for reviewing and commenting on a
completed environmental document per CEQA.
-7-
SAMPLE OF MAILED HEARING NOTICE
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING BEFORE THE
COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BAKERSFIELD REGARDING
PROPOSED ANNEXATION
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN of a Protest Hearing before the Bakersfield City Council regarding
the proposed annexation of territory to the City of Bakersfield as assigned by the Local Agency
Formation Commission (LAFCO) known as City of Bakersfield Annexation No.
LAFCO has determined the territory to be annexed is
inhabited or uninhabited (choose one).
The hearing will be held before the City Council of the City of Bakersfield and will begin at 7:00
p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard on WEDNESDAY,
in the Council Chambers, City Hall, 1501 Truxtun Avenue, Bakersfield, California,
93301. The purpose of the hearing is to receive and consider protests against the proposed
annexation into the City of Bakersfield.
The area being considered is generally located
See the attached map (Exhibit A) that shows the affected
territory.
These proceedings were initiated by the property owner or City (choose one)
The reason the has proposed this annexation is
The specific terms and conditions of the proposed annexation are detailed in the Resolution
adopted by the Local Agency Formation Commission. The Resolution is on file at the City
Clerk's office.
WRITTEN PROTESTS against the proposed annexation may be filed by any owner of property
or registered voter in the territory, with the City Clerk at any time prior to the conclusion of the
hearing on the proposed annexation. If you challenge the action taken on this proposal in
court, you may be limited to addressing only those issues raised at the public hearing, or in
written correspondence delivered to the City Clerk of the City of Bakersfield prior to the close
of the hearing.
Dated:
Pamela A. McCarthy, CMC
City Clerk and Ex Officio Clerk of the
Council of the City of Bakersfield
-8-
SAMPLE OF PUBLISHED NOTICE
1/8 Page Display Advertisement - To be printed on the Legal page of newspaper.
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING BEFORE THE
COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BAKERSFIELD REGARDING
PROPOSED ANNEXATION
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN of a Protest Hearing before the Bakersfield City Council regarding
the proposed annexation of territory to the City of Bakersfield as assigned by the Local Agency
Formation Commission (LAFCO) known as City of Bakersfield Annexation No.
LAFCO has determined the territory to be annexed is
inhabited or uninhabited (choose one).
The hearing will be held before the City Council of the City of Bakersfield and will begin at 7:00
p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard on WEDNESDAY,
__ in the Council Chambers, City Hall, 1501 Truxtun Avenue, Bakersfield, California, 93301.
The purpose of the hearing is to receive and consider protests against the proposed annexation
into the City of Bakersfield.
The area being considered is generally located
· See the attached map (Exhibit A) that shows the affected territory.
These proceedings were initiated by the property owner or City (choose one) . The
reason the has proposed this annexation is
The specific terms and conditions of the proposed annexation are detailed in the Resolution
adopted by the Local Agency Formation Commission. The Resolution is on file at the City Clerk's
office.
WRITTEN PROTESTS against the proposed annexation may be filed by any owner of property or
registered voter in the territory, with the City Clerk at any time prior to the conclusion of the hearing
on the proposed annexation. If you challenge the action taken on this proposal in court, you may
be limited to addressing only those issues raised at the public hearing ,or in written correspondence
delivered to the City Clerk of the City of Bakersfield prior to the close of the hearing.
Dated:
Pamela A. McCarthy, CMC
City Clerk and Ex Officio Clerk of the
Council of the City of Bakersfield
-9-
SAMPLE WRITTEN PROTEST
BY
PROPERTY OWNER
CITY CLERK - CITY OF BAKERSFIELD
I (Name) the undersigned property
owner do hereby protest the proposed annexation of the territory known as (Insert
Name of Annexation) , being proposed by
the City of Bakersfield..I own property located at (Insert address)
The purpose of this letter is to express my opposition of the above
entitled annexation.
Date:
Print Your Name (as it appears on the property tax bill)
Signature
Note: This document is provided as a broad, general overview of the proceedings related to annexations initiated
by the City of Bakersfield and may not be interpreted or construed to be complete, conclusive, or as legal
advice. Specific and complete requirements as well as additional references to applicable State law may be
obtained from LAFCo, 2700 "M" St., Bakersfield, CA 93301. However, specific legal advice should be sought
from an attorney.
-10-
SAMPLE WRITTEN PROTEST
BY
REGISTERED VOTER
CITY CLERK - CITY OF BAKERSFIELD
I (Name) the undersigned registered voter
do hereby protest the proposed annexation of the territory known as (Insert Name
of Annexation) , being proposed by the City of Bakersfield.
I am a registered voter in the area proposed for annexation and reside at the following
address (Insert address) The purpose of this letter is to
express my opposition of the above entitled annexation.
Date:
Print Your Name (as it appears on the property tax bill)
Signature
Note: This document is provided as a broad, general overview of the proceedings related to annexations initiated
by the City of Bakersfield and may not be interpreted or construed to be complete, conclusive, or as legal
advice. Specific and complete requirements as well as additional references to applicable State law may be
obtained from LAFCo, 2700 "M" St., Bakersfield, CA 93301. However, specific legal advice should be sought
from an attorney.
-11-
CITY OF BAKERSFIELD
URBAN DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
REPORT NO. 1-98
MAY 20, 1998
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
SUBJECT: ANNEXATION PROCESS
The City Council referred the Annexation Program to the Urban Development
Committee on March 25, 1998. The Committee, at its April meeting, discussed
proposed changes and additions to the program. The Committee listened to input from
several residents on suggestions for changes to the annexation process.
There was a consensus among Committee members that the program be
improved and expanded toinclude more opportunities for resident input. The
Committee recommended the following changes:
1. Improve and expand the functions of the annexation hotline to include
options 'for getting information on upcoming meetings, important dates,
etc.
2. Provide for individual noticing of protest hearings rather than relying on
newspaper ads.
3. Experiment with conducting a resident forum prior to the filing of the
annexation to get input from residents and notice the forum.
4. Revise the numbering system used to track survey results.
5. Coordinate a greater number of small neighborhood meetings in each
area so that each resident has an opportunity to attend a meeting.
6. Hold at least one City services faire in each potential annexation area.
URBAN DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
REPORT NO. 1-98
PAGE -2-
MAY 20, 1998
7. Develop an issue of Borderline which details how the annexation process
works.
8. Provide for no further "bundling" of non-contiguous areas.
The Committee .unanimously approved these changes to the process and
recommends Council approval.
Respectfully submitted,
Cbu~:ilmember Kevin McDermott, Chair
Councilmeml~r~P'a~ricia M. Smith
DBT:jp
S:\Urb-Oev-Com Rpt 1-98
R ,_-.. CE,,IVED
B A K E R S F I E L D
Economic and Community Development Department
MEMORANDUM
May 26, 2000
TO: Alan Christensen, Assistant City Manager
FROM: George Gonzales,~munity Development Coordinator
II
SUBJECT: Community HoC~fing Development Organization (CHDO)
As part of the HUD Home Investment Partnership Program (HOME), a new designated organization,
Community Housing Development Organization (CHDO),was established in 1992 with the
expressed purpose of helping cities and counties throughout the nation in their efforts to increase the
availability of safe and decent affordable housing to low income families.
As an incentive, for CHDOs to be setup nationwide, HUD mandated that 15% of all jurisdictions
HOME entitlement be earmarked to CHDOs to help finance HOME eligible projects. Failure to
commit CHDO funds to an eligible organization within a 24-month period, would cause a local
jurisdiction would lose that year's CHDO funds from their entitlement.
A CHDO (as defined by HOME regulation 24 CFR Part 92) is a private nonprofit, community-based
serVices organization that maintains the capacity to develop affordable housing projects. One-third
of the organizations board must be low income or reside in a low income areas to qualify as a
CHDO. Once an organization has been qualified as a CHDO, they can then access CHDO project
funds for an eligible HOME activities.
Since 1992, five CHDOs have accessed the City's HOME program funds for various projects. Those
CHDO organizations include Self Help Enterprises, Kern County Economic Opportunity
Corporation, Restoration Community Project, Inc., Affordable HOMES, Inc., and Haven Enterprises.
Currently, two other organizations have submitted separate CHDO applications for designation.
cc: Trudy Slater, Administrative Analyst
S:\Bonnic\Correspondence\Gcorge\C H DO memo.wpd