95-1484 Council File # 9 s - (y8i-
y r
Green Sheet fi
RESOLUTION
CI O SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA
Presented by �--
Referred To Committee Date
RESOLUTION ON THE HOUSES TO HOMES
PROGRAM GUIDELINES REVIEW
1 WHEREAS, the Saint Paul City Council has reviewed the Houses to Homes Program Objectives
2 and Guidelines through the Community and Economic Development committee resulting in
3 Council File #95 -1260 and Housing and Redevelopment Authority (HRA) resolution 95- 9/27/4
4 which
5 1) affirm the program's objectives; and
6 2) affirm the subsidy level of $40,000 for a single family structure and $60,000 for a duplex.
7 WHEREAS, the high acquisition costs of properties to be rehabilitated often bring total project
8 costs above program guidelines, and this is particularly the case for the acquisition costs of U.S.
9 Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and Veteran's Administration (VA) owned properties;
10 and
11 WHEREAS, in the case of HUD and VA owned properties which the City wishes to acquire for
12 rehabilitation both the seller and the buyer are working in the public interest, but there are
13 ongoing concerns by the City about acquisition costs and sufficient timelines to acquire these
14 properties; and
15 WHEREAS, communication between neighborhoods and City government is essential for the
16 identification and maintenance of vacant properties; and
17 WHEREAS, the identification of vacant HUD and VA owned properties and their subsequent
18 inspection is essential prior to potential City acquisition for rehabilitation; and
19 WHEREAS, new homeowners are often not fully aware of the ongoing risks and responsibilities
20 entailed in home ownership and they may not have the necessary skills and knowledge required
21 to keep a home in adequate condition through routine repairs and preventative maintenance; and
22 WHEREAS, the current three year timeline for acquisition of tax forfeit parcels is too long,
23 whereby it is not serving the public purpose, and is hindering City goals and programs, including
24 the Houses to Homes program; now therefore be it
1
«D
25 RESOLVED, that the City Council, based on its detailed review of the rehabilitation costs for
26 single family homes and duplexes attributable to City code compliance and marketing
27 considerations, reaffirms the appropriateness of the current subsidy levels of $40,000 for a single
28 family structure and $60,000 for a duplex, and direct Houses to Homes staff to administer the
29 program accordingly; and
30 RESOLVED, that in the case of acquisition costs of properties, the City Council directs staff to:
31 1) explore alternative funding sources to offset some of these costs;
32 2) explore ways to reduce costs by fully utilizing current city programs and ordinances that
33 deal with vacant structures and through inspection of properties prior to sale; and
34 3) continue to talk with HUD and VA to try to establish a better and more fiscally
35 responsible method of obtaining these properties for the good of the taxpayers.
36 FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Council directs staff to establish a process whereby new
37 owners of Houses to Homes properties may learn about the requirements of home ownership,
38 preventative maintenance and general home owning skills; and
39 RESOLVED, that the City Council directs staff to report back to the City Council on
40 mechanism which may act to speed up the identification and subsequent inspection of newly
41 vacant HUD and VA properties; and
42 RESOLVED, that the City Council refers the issue of the timeline on tax forfeit parcels to
43 Intergovernmental Relations for inclusion in the 1996 Legislative package and priorities, to
44 request the reduction in the timeline required for tax forfeit parcels from three years to one year;
45 and be it finally
46 RESOLVED, that the City Council, based on review with City staff, community leaders,
47 residents, stakeholders and other partners, reaffirms the Houses to Homes program goals and
48 objectives as crucial to the revitalization of Saint Paul neighborhoods.
1 Yeas 1 Nays 1 Absent Requested by Department of:
Blakey
Grimm ✓
Guerin
Harris ✓
Megard ✓ By.
Rettman ✓ Form Approved by City Attorney
Thune
rl o O B y:
Adopted by Council Date: \q9 S Approved by Mayor for Submission to
Adoption Certified by Council Secretary
Council
By. _ _ By: �...�. �_,
Apprae%t' by Mayo ate:
By. _ ,�
DEPARTMENTS DATE INmATED
N_ 3 2 7 2 2
GREEN S14EET �--
Ci Council 12/13/95 mAUDrE —
0 DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR cm COUNCa. _---
la M 0 ASSIGN CITY ATTORNEY CITY CLERK
MUST M BE ON AOENDA BY ( 0 BUDGET DIRECTOR 0 FIN. & MGT. SERVICES DIR. j
December 20. 1995 ORDER MAYOR (OR ASSISTANT)
TOTAL # OF SIGNATURE PAGES ' ' (CUP AU. LOCATIONS FOR SIGNATURE)
ACTION REQUESTED:
Reaffirms subsidy levels provided through the Houses to Homes Program, directs staff to develop home ownership education and T
refers issue of timeline for acquisition of tax forfeited properties . to the City Council's Intergovernmental Relations committee.
RED: Approve (A) orRaleot (R) PERSONAL SERVICE CONTRACTS MUST ANSWER THE FOLLOWING QUESTIONS:
_ PLANNNrGCQMMA18810N CIVIL SERVICE 0810N
1. Has this persordf rm over worked under 8 contract for this department? s
NO
CS COMMITTEE YES
2. Has this personmrm ever been a city employee?
_ STAFF YES NO
_ DISTRICT COURT 3. Does this person/Wm possess a Ndil not normally possessed by any current city employee?
SUPPORTS WHICH COUNCIL OBJECTIVE? YES NO
Explain all yes answers on separate shoat and attach to Shan shoot
INITIATING PROBLEM. ISSUE. OPPORTUNITY (Who. What When, Whore. Why):
The City Council and Housing and Redevelopment Authority (HRA) Board in Council File #1260 and HRA resolution 95- 9/27/4
determined that further review of the Houses to Homes program guidelines as they relate to building code issues was necessary, aid
this resolution provides for no changes in current program subsidy levels based on the review.
ADVANTAGES IF APPROVED:
The City Council will reaffirm the subsidy levels provided through the Houses to Homes program, as well as provide for home
ownership education and refer to the Intergovernmental Relations committee for potential action, the ongoing and problematic issu e
of issue of the length of time required to acquire tax forfeited properties.
DISADVANTAGES IF APPROVED:
None.
DISADVANTAGES IF NOT APPROVED:
The City Council will not 1) reaffirm the subsidy levels provided through the Houses to Homes program, 2) provide for home
ownership education, or 3) refer to the Intergovernmental Relations committee for potential action, the ongoing and problematic
issue of issue of the length of time required to acquire tax forfeited properties.
{
TOTAL AMOUNT OF TRANSACTION $ COST /REVENUE BUDGETED (CIRCLE ONE) YES NO
FUNDING SOURCE ACTIVITY NUMBER
FINANCIAL INFORMATION: (EXPLAIN)
•
NOTE: COMPLETE DIRECTIONS ARE INCLL D IN T HE' BEEN SHEET IfISTRl1CTIONAL
MANUAL AVAILABLE N THE PURCHASING. OFFICE (PHONE No. 29S- 4224.•
ROUTING ORDER:
Below are correct routings for the five most frequent types of documents:
CONTRACTS (assumes authorized budget exists) COUNCIL RESOLUTION (Amend Budgets/Accept. Banta)
1. Outside Agency
1. Department Director
2. Department Director 2. Budget Director
3. City Attorney 3. City Attorney
4. Mayor (for contracts over $15,000) 4. MayoNAssistant
5. Human Rights (for contracts over 650,000) 5. City Council
6. Finance and Management Services Director 6. Chief Accountant, Finarroa and Management Services
7. Finance Accounting
ADMINISTRATIVE ORDERS (Budget Revision) COUNCIL RESOLUTION (al others. and Ordinmoes) '
1. Activity Manager 1. Department Director
2. Department Accountant 2. City Attorney
3. Department Director 3. Mayor Assistant
4. Budget Director 4. City Council
5. .City Clerk
6. Chief Accountant, Finance and Management Services
ADMINISTRATIVE ORDERS (all others)
1. Department Director
2. City Attorney
3. Finance and Management Services Director
4. City Clerk
TOTAL NUMBER OF SIGNATURE PAGES
indicate the #of pages on which signatures are required and paperclip or flag
each of these pages.
ACTION REQUESTED
Describe what the project/request seeks to accomplish in either chronologi-
cal order or order of importance, whichever is most appropriate for the
issue. Do not write complete sentences. Begin each item In your Nat with
a verb.
RECOMMENDATIONS
Complete if the issue In question has been presented before any body, public
or private.
SUPPORTS WHICH COUNCIL OBJECTIVE?
Indicate which Council objectives) your project/request supports by listing
the key word(s) (HOUSING, RECREATION, NEIGHBORHOODS, ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT,
BUDGET, SEWER SEPARATION). (SEE COMPLETE LIST IN INSTRUCTIONAL MANUAL)
PERSONAL SERVICE CONTRACTS:
This informatlon.will be used to determine the city% liability for workers compensation claims, taxes and proper clvN service hiring rules.
INITIATING PROBLEM, ISSUE, OPPORTUNITY
Explain the situation or conditions that created a need for your project
or request.
ADVANTAGES IF APPROVED
Indicate whether this is simply an annual budget procedure required by law/
charter or whether there are specific ways in which the City of Saint Paul
and its citizens will benefit from this project/action.
DISADVANTAGES IF APPROVED
What negative effects or major changes to existing or past processes might
this project/request produce if it Is passed (e.g., traffic delays, noise,
tax increases or assessments)? To Whom? When? For how long?
DISADVANTAGES IF NOT APPROVED
What will be the negative consequences if the promised action is not
approved? Inability to deliver service? Continued high traffic, noise,
accident rate? Loss of revenue?
FINANCIAL IMPACT
Although you must tailor the information you provide here to the issue you
are, addressing, in general you must answer two questions: How much is it
going to cost? Who is going to pay?
9 S - 9
CITY OF SAINT PAUL
I' '
®s1 ' J
` . ; . ' r i < i OFFICE OF THE CITY COUNCIL
MARIE GRIMM HELEN WELTER
Councilmember Legislative Aide
CED COMMITTEE MEMBERS VICKI SHEFFER
Secretary
Marie Grimm, Chair
Jerry Blakey
Roberta Megard
Marcia Moermond, Policy Analyst
Date: November 22, 1995
COMMITTEE REPORT
COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
1. CED Meeting Minutes for August 23, September 27 and October 25, 1995
Minutes were approved, 4 - 0.
2. Historic Preservation Policy, Subcommittee List
Committee directed staff to prepare a resolution establishing an advisory committee on
historic preservation policy. The resolution should include the names of the groups to be
represented on this committee. 4 -0
3. Houses to Homes Program Building Code - Related Guidelines
Based on a staff presentation and committee discussion about the proportion of costs
attributable to building code requirements, the committee determined that Houses to
Homes program guidelines and subsidy levels are currently appropriate. 4 -0
Committee requested staff to prepare a resolution to be forwarded to City Council, based
on committee "in concept." Recommendations will be discussed at City Council to
finalize. 4 -0
Committee also recommended that 1) staff explore additional financing sources for
acquisition costs of HUD -owned properties; and 2) the Inter - Governmental Relations
Committee discuss a potential timeline change in state law for acquisition of tax- forfeited
properties. 4 -0
CITY HALL THIRD FLOOR SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA 55102 612/266 -8660
846
Printed on Recycled Paper
\ \ City of Saint Paul
.1 � CiTY oA ;`, Office of the City Council S , IL-k&
lit %,s,
o N : Room 320 City Hall
A 1111 1 11111 c
Saint Paul, Minnesota 55102
612/266 -8660
Marie Grimm Helen Welter
Councilmember - Ward 6 Legislative Aide
Vicki Sheffer
Secretary
December 13, 1995
•
TO: Councilmembers
FROM: Councilmember Marie Grimm, Chi
Community and Economic Develo ent Committee
RE: Committee Report and Resolution For Houses -To -Homes
At the November 22, 1995, Community and Economic Development
Committee (CED) meeting we had a great discussion about the costs related
to building code compliance and program requirements, and CED agreed to a
number of actions.
However, because we created the actions and recommendations for the
resolution during the meeting, CED directed staff to prepare a resolution on
the issues which the committee agreed to "in concept."
We hope that this resolution is a good representation of the CED
Committee's direction, but it was agreed that there may be changes to these
items when brought forward to the full Council for approval.
I appreciate your consideration and welcome discussion so that we might
approve a resolution that we can stand behind! Thank you!