12/11/1989 CONF MTG - 5011•
.•.i�
CITY COUNCIL CONFERENCE MEETING
DECEMBER 11, 1989 - 7:30 P,M,
CONFERENCE ROOM A
1. SENIOR iiOUSING POLICIES�
2� PURCHASE OF GIS EQUIPMENT�
3� 1990 Goa� $ETTING RETREAT,
�
�
unroF
F�a�
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
DEPARTMENT
MEMORANDUM
D�TE: December 7, 1989
�'
TO: William Burns, City Manaqer,�•
� FROM:
SUBJECT:
Jock Robertson, Community Development Director
Barbara Dacy, Planninq Coordinator
Senior Housing Policies
Attached is a memorandum containing the additional information that
the City Council wanted after discussion at the July 31, 1989
meeting. Should any of the City Council members desire copies of
the previous packets distributed regardinq this item, please advise
me.
M-89-737
�
�
u ��
QATE:
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
COAIiMUNtTY DEVELOPMENT
DEPARTMENT
MEMORANDUM
December 7, 1989
Nilliam Burns, City Kanager
Jock Robertson, Community Development Director
Barbara Dacy, Planninq Coordinator
Continue Discussion on Senior Housing Policies
At the July 31, 1989 meetinq, the City Council discussed various
alternatives for developing senior housing policies. The City
Council directed ctaff to bring back information for specific
questions in three general areas:
1. The City Council had specific questions regarding the survey
conducted by Health Planning and Management Inc., as well as
questions regarding information from other communities that
staff obtained.
2. The City Council wanted more information reqarding the current
status of federal and state proqrams including the Section 8
proqram.
3. Finally, the City Council directed staff to prepare a list of
financial tools and prepare an analysis matrix with costs and
risks for each option.
Part A. Questions Reqardinq Survey and Background Information:
(1) The Citv Council re�uested an ex�l�na�tion of the use of
e Columbia Heichts ZIP code for the surveys Pat
McCullouqh, in a letter dated October 28, 1989, (see
attached) assured us that persons in Columbia Heights
vere not surveyed. The postal carrier routes with the
55421 ZIP code were obtained from the post office. The
post office assisted Ms. McCu�lough in separating
Columbia Heiqhts addresses from the Fridley addresses.
Senior Housinq Policies
December 7, 1989
Paqe 2
(2)
(3)
�,enior housina immediatelv. Table 2-10 in the survey
summarizes the breakdown of seniors by income.
Approximately 108 persons of a total of 601 persons
responded "yes, definitely" that they would consider
moving into senior housinq. Of the 18$ that indicated
that they would consider movinq to senior housing,
approximately 55$ had incomes below $15,000, 26� had
moderate incomes between $15,000 - 525,000, and 19$ had
incomes cver $25,000. Therefore, it can be concluded
that a majority of the segment of the population desiring
to move into senior housing are low and moderate income
seniors.
Attached is a letter from David Newman explaining the
components to the assistance given to Golden Pond. It
is a qood example of a project where a number of tools
were combined into one development package.
(4) �he City Council also rewested a statement from St.
�; ,,;�,� � � ��,,,T��, a� t� �hat tvne and what amount of
particular project. Don Howard, the Pastoral Counsel
President, and John Brandes, the Pastor, wrote Mayor Nee
on September 25, 1989 reqarding the Church's proposal for
their participation in that project (see attached
letter).
Part B. Policy Questions for Senior Housing:
(1) � e City Council requested ext�lanations of ava�lable
federal senior housing oroarams and state vroarams. The
federal proqrams available for senior housing are as
follows:
a. Section 202 Direct Loan
Section 202 is a direct loan proqram for construction of
elderly and handicapped households. Projects are limited
to non-profit sponsors with a"proven track record". In
1989, HUD authorized Section 202 monies for up to 100
units for the entire state of Minnesota. l+�unicipalities
in the metro area are cateqorized into Type A and Type
B communities as to senior housinq demand. In 1989, HUD
funded two projects, each 50 units larqe, and each in a
Type A community. Fridley, due to the existence of
Village Green, is a Type B community. Revin Wilson from
Senior Housing Policies
December 7, 1989
Page 3
the HUD office in �inneapolis stated that Fridley's
chance to receive Section 202 assistance ranqes from
�take your chances" to "don't bother".
HUD also has a proqram for insuring loans for elderly
projects. Revin Wilson stated that HUD is "skittish of
insurinq elderly housing projects because the market is
over-built". While he recoqnizes that there may be
pockets where there is a demand for housinq, as in
Fridley's case, HUD will prioritize projects in Type A
communities.
b. Community Development Block Grants
Fridley recgives approximately $100,000 per year in CDBG
funds. Cu�rent programminq includes acquisition of two
more homes in the Riverview Heights area. Thus, two more
years of CDBG funds will be necessary to clear the
property. The City does participate in the CDBG House
Rehabilitation proqram for low and moderate income
persons, as administered by P►tioka County.
c. Section 312 Homeowner Rehabilitation Pragram
The 312 Rehabilitation Program provides loans to single
family homeowr►ers for building improvements to meet
minimum HUD desiqn standards and local building codes.
A 3$, 20 year term loan is made to the homeowner, up to
a maximum of $33,500. This program must be used where
a CDBG housinq proqram is in place, because that program
targets/specifies low and moderate income neiqhborhoods.
d. State Proqrams
Pat Jenkins from PIIiFA advised that the agency's elderly
housinq interest rate write-down project has been
inactive for the last four years. IYIIiFA has never had a
proqram to subsidize rents; however, they have reduced
the interest rate on a mortqage in conjunction with a
Section 202 project when Section 8 certification vouchers
are included in the project (i.e. Village Green). Mr.
Jenkins stated that there are no funds allocated for any
type of senior housinq Bubsidies, and he does not
anticipate any in the next ten years. Mr. Jenkins stated
that the I�iFA believes the market to be qenerally over-
built despite small areas where there may be a demand.
Mr. Jenkins and Jack Jackson in the I�iFA's Marketing
Department reviewed our senior housing study. While they
acknowledqed that a project may succeed in Fridley, due
to its localized demand, they do not anticipate
Senior Housinq Policies
December 7, 1989
Page 4
participating in the interest rate write-down proqram for
a market rate project.
Steve Klein from �CCAP also confirmed the general
reduction in state and federal assistance for senior
housing projects. He stated that the federal
contribution to senior housing has declined 70�-80$ in
the last eight years. He stated that the policy
direction appears to be that the federal government does
not want to be a"major player" in housing policy. Mr.
/ Klein worked on a Section 202 Handicapped project in the
early 1980's in Coon Rapids (Grasslands). Even with
Section 202 monies and CDBG monies, ACCAP also needed to
use a siqnificant amount of fund-raising from the local
area, plus receivinq the land as a donation. Mr. Klein
also stated that the policy direction for Section 202
funds is to prioritize handicapped units.
(2)
in the Citv of Fridlev.
The Department of Housinq and Urban Development (HUD)
allocates approximately 80 vouchers/certificates each
year to the Metropolitan Council Housing & Redevelopment
Authority (Metroi�tA). The vouchers qualify the eligible
family to receive rent subsidies under the Section 8
program.
Metro HRA maintains,a metro-wide waitinq list for people
who have applied for rent subsidies. The Metro HRA
includes approximately 93 communities, includinq the City
of Fridley. At this time, the waitinq list consists of
approximately 3,010 people. Of this number, 702 are from
the senior population within the metro area.
Within the City of Fridley, there are 187 families
receiving rent assistance. There are 38 seniors
currently being assisted under the Section 8 program.
A majority of the seniors live at Meadow Run Apartments,
Rustic Oaks Apartments, Georgetown Court Apartments, and
Northeast Villa Apartments.
The majority of the 80 vouchers/certificates allocated
by HUD each year will be reserved for rental
rehabilitation proqrams to provide assistance to tenants
who may be displaced to provide assistance for low income
tenants in the buildinq. These persons, in effect,
Senior Housinq Policies
December 7, 1989
Page 5
bypass the waitinq list. � very small percentaqe of the
vouchers will be used for the waiting liet selections.
The most common way a new person is selected from the
waiting list is based on turnover. Turnover occurs when
a family no longer requires assistance based on their
income, or if they are removed €rom the rent assistance
program for reasons of fraud. The maximum number of
vouchers/certificates made available by turnover is 50
per month.
Prior to a person receiving assistance, they are
categorized as either "preference or non-preference".
They are then placed on the waiting list in order
of preference. Of the 50 vouchers made available each
month, only a few will be qiven to the 702 seniors on the
waiting list since most seniors are categorized as non-
preference.
Therefore, the Section 8 certificate or voucher program
is not adequate to meet the housinq needs of Fridley
seniors for the following reasons:
(a) Seniors typically fall in the "non-preference
cateqory" because they are competing with low and
moderate income families.
(b) There are 3,010 persons on the waiting list in the
entire metropolitan area. Of this amount, 1,666
persons are categorized as non-preference.
(c) The vouchers and certificates are allocated on a
turnover basis. A majority of the vouchers are
reserved for the rental rehabilitation proqram.
The remainder will then be awarded to those in the
"preference" category. The Metro area may or may
not receive additional vouchers or certificates
dependinq on federal legislation.
(d) Large low and moderate income families which�cannot
afford two and three bedroom apartments are renting
one bedroom apartments. These are the units which
seniors desire most, and unfortunately cannot rent.
The City Council also inquired as to whether or not a
resident of Villaqe Green could move to the proposed
apartment project at St. William's. Based on the package
that was. financed with I�iFA, the people residing in
Village Green cannot take their certificate or voucher
with them.
Senior Housing Policies
December 7, 1989
Page 6
(3)
Pat McCullough advised that more seniore tend to prefer
a rental situation over a condominium unit because of the
followinq factors:
(a) Seniors want to keep their assets liquid rather than
depending on the real estate market. After seniors
have sold their homes, they do not want to worry
about resale of the unit.
(b) Seniors do not want to burden their heirs for resale
of the unit.
( 4) The City Council wantea Lo �r+ow wneLner �r _ n�+.. wc „a. �
inventoried other housina sites. The survey indicated
seniors' general preferences for location of senior
housing. Through the comprehensive plan process, we will
use this criteria in identifying potential sites for a
variety of senior housing, either townhomes or
apartments.
Part C. Housing Policy Options
(1)
In order to enable seniors to stay in their single family
homes as lonq as possible, the followinq options can be
considered:
A. Pursue participation in the Section 312 Homeowner
Rehabilitation Proqram (�►CCAP would have to
administer)
B. Participate in the I+II�iFA Rental Rehabilitation
Proqram
C. Continue CDBG fundinq for human service qroups that
provide services to seniors in the single family
home.
D. Investigate reverse mortgage program with area
lenders.
E. Investigate fur�ding sources for e�tpanded service
programs such as chore services, meals on wheels,
conqreqate dining, transportation, and home care
services.
Senior Housing Policies
December 7, 1989
Page 7
(2) The City Cou cit wancea an anaiysis �� •� a�•.�..�-�-
too�s to assist senior housina. In raviewing other
cities' examples of participation in senior housing
projects, we have determined that the financial tools to
assist senior housing projects vary in deqree and amount
of assistance. The financial tools can be broken down
into two categories:
�es of Assistance
1. Bonds
2. Limited Revenue
Notes
3. Upfront/Direct
Assistance (i.e.
soil correction
qrants, land
write-down, etc.)
Forms of Securitv
1. Development
Restrictions
2. Second Mortgage
3.
4.
Restrictive
Covenants
Equity
Participation
4. Direct Purchase 5. Outriqht
Ownership
6. Special
Assessments
These tools are usually implemented where a project is
located in a tax increment district, so that the City's
cost can be recouped through the taxes qenerated by the
project.
In order to assist a project, the City usually combines
its' assistance with a form of security. In reviewing
the list of types of assistance, bonds are the least
financially risky, and the direct purchase option is the
most risky. However, as in the case of Golden Pond,
security forms can be added in order for the City to be
assured that affordable units are made available for low
and moderate income persons.
The Golden Pond project used CDBG funds, TIF assistance,
limited revenue notes, restrictive covenants, and an
equity participation program (Attachment �4). Rents
start at S427•00, the lowest for a market rate project
in the surroundinq area. The last unit tras rented the
Senior Housing Policies
December 7, 1989
Page 8
day it received a certificate of occupancy.
Brightondale, which is also located in New Briqhton, has
been operatinq one year longer and is still not at full
occupancy. Restrictive covenants were recorded to ensure
that the project would rent to persons over age 55.
Further, the city recouped its' S191,000 in TIF
assistance from taxes qenerated by the project.
We have found in reviewing other senior projects that in
order to provide housing units with rents which are
affordable by low and moderate income persons, the amount
of assistance may constitute up to 25$ of the project.
HUD, I�iFA, and ACCAP all aqree that the days of the
federal qovernment providinq low and moderate income
housing are over. They also aqree that the private
market cannot sustain construction of low and moderate
income units in today's market, given chanqes in tax laws
and mortgaqe rate financing. Therefore, more assistance
will ensure that more low and moderate income units will
be available. However, more participation may mean more
risk, depending on the type of assistance given and the
security.
Assisting elderly projects within tax increment districts
offers the advantage of the City recouping its cost from
the taxes generated from the project. A second mortgage,
which has been used extensively with commercial and
industrial properties in Fridley, can also be used to
ensure that the City's loan is paid back. The City also
receives the taxes qenerated from the project.
Development restrictions and restrictive covenants may
be placed on the project to ensure that the project
remains as an elderly project. Upfront and/or direct
assistance, and even a second mortqaqe may be compromised
by the fact that the project may fail in the future.
However, this is the same risk that the City encounters
when assisting any commercial or industrial project.
At the extreme end of the scale, the City could purchase
an existinq elderly project, own and manage it, or
develop its own project. While this has a high risk
financially, it also ensures that low and moderate income
units are available.
Senior Housinq Policies
December 7, 1989
Page 9
BD/dn
M-89-745
Pittached is the chart showinq a range of solutions for
the short-term demand of 72 units, and the long-term
demand of 155 units as estimated from the senior study
(Attachment �1). The proposed solutions can be "mixed
and matched" so that a balanced approach is taken toward
meeting the housing needs of seniors. Also attached is
a list of proqrams/activities which do and do not include
financial involvement (Attachment #10).
�
Senior Housing Policies
December 7, 1989
Page 10
�ZTACHMENTS:
1. Solutions versus Needs Chart
2. Letter from Pat McCullough dated October 28, 1989
/
3. Table 2-10 from Senior Study
4. Letter from Dave Newman dated October 18, 1989
5. Letter from St. William's Church dated September 25, 1989
6. Excerpts from "Housing America: Fifty Years of Federal
Investment"
7. Letter from Dore Mead dated August 25, 1989.
8. "Glut in Upscale Housinq for Seniors Grow", Auqust 7, 1989
9. "Suburban Counties Work to Meet Needs of Elderly", August 3,
1989
10. List of programs/activities reqarding Senior Housing
�
�
Z
O
�
�
�
J
�
�
i�
SHORT TERM
Immediate demand for 72
units.
]�. Proactive approach:
NEEDS
l. Identify site
2. Purchase land
3. Solicit RFP
4. Negotiate development
agreement
5. Own and manage project
B.
LONG TERM
By 1993, demand for additional
155 units
A. Regionalize demand, and
provide housing for
seniors in lower Anoka
County in order to create
economies of scale.
B. Monitor impact of reverse
mortgage and other private
sector financing techniques
to enable seniors to live
in their house longer.
1. If a project is located
in a TID, consider low C. Lobby for greater financial
to moderate financial responsibility by county,
involvement up to 25� of state and federal govern-
the project value if: ments.
a. rent levels are afford-
able by low to moderate
income seniors ($400 -
$700)
b. Location matches pref-
erences in study
c. senior only
d. meets "but for" test
e. approved development
plans by Plann�ng Coaun.
and City Council.
2. If a project is not
located in a TID, then
consider low risk, low
involvement by:
a. Housing Revenue Bond
b. Tax Increment Bond
($ of units required
to be low/moderate)
C. Provide no financial
assistance through TIF,
but identify housing
sites as part of compre-
hensive plan update
process, including:
(Continued)
Attechment t
,
,
/
/
,
�
�
z
O
-
F-
�
J
0
�A
NEEDS
Health Planning &
Man ment Resources, inc.
�
october 28, 1 sss
Barbara Dacy
Planning Coordinator
City of Fridley
6431 University Avenue Northeast
Fridley, MN 55432
Dear Barbara,
This letter is in response to your inquiry regar�es re eserrted adporthon
appeared in the survey retums, and whether the z�p P
of Columbia Heights.
Per the cop�es of information that 1 have furnished Y mo89a�rsons who
carrier routes, we segregated�er ma Co�lu�mb a He�ghts. We consuited with the
resided in the Crry of Fr�d ey
Post Office to determine how We � nuthe 55421nziP �code hatl We� me h� C��f
the postal carrier routes that were
Fridley. The demographic service then gav f the res a'ndents to he suSrvey weee
route. Thus, you can conclude that all o Po
Fridley residents.
Please advise me as soon as possible about pending meeting dates as my
schedule is quite sporadic and unpredictable• Pes our conversation, I consider a
meeting with the Cou�C� as a Part of our original cor�tract•
incerely,
��
Patricia A. McCullough
PAM/mf
prime Professional Center
4970 Lincoln Dnve
Edina, Minnesota 55436
612-935-6077
Attachment 2
W
�
o>
?vo
m�`�
O
w
Z Z Z
�'^ �C
O V/ G
`� W
J
W � �
� LL �
N �
Z �
0 0
U
� x
� O
Z
� �
a
N N
O
r Z
O �
N N
N p
Z
g� a�
O�
1f'�
r T
M �
•. Z
g � o�
b �
O et
r r
N
O Z
O �
r
a
�
O
2
ti
(7
Z
>
O
�
o�
W
N
�
V
O��G,
� � � O
�
� � co cc
�
���no
cco�iag
�
r � � �
OO)�O
� O N �
a7
�pC�pN�
o��o
r � � g
OCD��
cD
� tn � O
N(�p�0
r-
� � � �
T
apN00
N(�O�O
T
��NCQ
ca
m
��
m� m
c '� m
;� C �
� � C �
m�0~
}�Z
O
N
W
J
m
�
Attachment 3
�'irgil C. Herrick
James D. Hcefc
Gregg �'. Herrick
Of Counsel
Dat�id P. Newman
�d�����iuVia i� ����'���7
ATPORNEYS AT LAV�'
October 18, 1989
Barbara Dacy
Planning Coordinator
City of Fridley
6401 University Avenue N.E.
Fridley, MN 55432
Dear Barbara:
I am writing in response to your memo of October 17, 1989 in
which you inquired about the amount of assistance that the City
of New Brighton gave to the Golden Pond Senior Housing Project.
Golden Pond is a combination low income housing project and
senior housing project. The City of New Brighton issued tax
exempt housing bonds. In order to do so the developer has agreed
that at all times at least 40$ of the residents will have an
income no greater than 60$ of the area median income. Additionally,
the developer has agreed that regardless of income the residents
in this development will be 55 years of age or older.
It has been well over a year since I worked on this project
so my recollection of the details is somewhat vague. However, in
reviewing the Development Contract with the City of New Brighton
it is my recollection that the City provided the following
assistance:
1. CDBG Funds of $320,000, and
2. Additional City funds of $191,000.
This results in City assistance of $511,000. This money was to
be used for land acquisition and site improvement costs. These
funds were to be provided at the commencement of construction.
In addition the City is issued a limited revenue note. This
note is for a 10 year period and has semi-annual installments of
$45,000. In essence this note is structured so that on a
semi-annual basis a certain amount of the taxes paid is retained
by the City as a means of zeimbursing tbemselves for the $191,000
paid pursuant to paragraph 2 above. The balance of each
installment of taxes is then pledged to pay the semi-annual
installment on the limited revenue note in an amount up to $45,000 �
per installment. The bottom line is that assuming that there are
sufficient annual taxes then the developer will receive $90,0000
per year for 10 years.
Attachment 4
Suite 20�, 6401 Universit}• Avenue N.E., Fridle�•. I�4innesota 55432. 612-571-3850
Barbara Dacy
October 18, 1989
Page Two
Finally, there is a provision in this agreement for equity
participation by the City. This participation is evidenced by a
note in the principal amount of $125,000 bearing interest at 8$
per annum. However, this note only becomes due at which time
that the project no longer qualifies as a low income housing
project. Further, when the note comes due regardless of the
amount of accrued interest the amount owing cannot exceed 25$ of
the "Net Sale Proceeds". This is further reduced by the fact that
"Net Sale Proceeds" is calculated after first providing to the
developer an annual 10$ per annum return on his equity.
Consequently, while this is referred to as an equity participation
provision its true intent was to address the event if the
developer were to subsequently decide that the project was worth
substantially more servicing the open market rather than low
income individuals. In such an event then t'he City would
participate in a portion of this windfall.
In summary it is somewhat difficult to calculate the value of
the benefit provided by the City in this development. (Using an
8$ present value and assuming that all payments are made under
the limited revenue note this would have a present value of
approximately $610,000.) However, you can see why I have estimated
that the total amount of assistance given by the City was
approximately 1,100,000. The total estimated cost of this project
was approximately $4,440,000. Thus, while the information I have
received to date indicates that this project is very successful
it also needs to be remembered that the assistance provided by
the City is nearly 25$ of the cost of the project.
If you need any further information please do not hesitate to
contact me.
ncerel yours,
� ,;
, �� 1
�.• ��
David P. Newman
DPN:jeb
�
�
�
��
�
�
��
�
�
��
�
�
�■�I
�
�
`�
�
r
projecting rent ad�ustments for a 5324/month rent of a oae bedroom unit ����0 dollus;
monthly rent ad�ustments for central sir conditionin8 of ZO d°Uars'
recreation arca, garbage disposal, carpets, and drapes, an additional5 dollars a p�eoe, bringing
tbe adjusted monthly rent up to 392 dollars, or werall valuc of am� da�ofa �oll�e F�eral
2p year, Section 812 million dollars in addinonal subsid at p J
Government abou
The GAO concluded that tbe higii c�st of new and substandallY r�babil�tated housing was
blocking the attainment of the 26 million unit goal and failin8 to Promote an economic mix• The
housing produced under Section 8, was often so oosdY that � ld � d livein them. me
households could not afford it or that only the subsidiud poo
Furthermore, GAO ooncludad tbat HUD's emphasis on tbe pnvatc market nature of Section 8
did not justify the continued building az� W� � l��d ���'� bo��g bui t under1Section
better than most of the housufg in the
8 was usually readily recognizable by being not only the ne � t�d �es h�'igh quality of he ew�
often the only rental housmg bemg, built d�rin8 � i o�� �er in v�,blch fair market rent�
Section 8 hous�ng appeared to be pnmarilY
are established.
.�
, ~�..
'� -
�SECTION 202
r The Section 202 dire loan program B 198 b 97b� �� baa � n bu�and were occupied.
elderly and handicapped households y ,
The housing projects provided a rangc of services needed by the occuPants and as long as the
units were bamer-free, they could be used to build garden apartments, mid-hi�h-rise buildings,
as well as congregate housmg��l� o e location and the eaare�stabl shedlce 1 ng on�per un t
limited to a maximum of 200 u
costs.
PROGRAM DESCRIPT70N
Development of 202 projects is limited to non-profit sponsors and HUD's funding awards have
been made to those non-profit d cl ent-based �associat ons) twith a provena t a k' ecord".
community based orgaruzations, an
HUD allocates funds on a reg�'onal basis to area field offices which must distribute at least 2
percent of the funds to non-urban (SMSA) communities.
Supply-side assistance is made Tail�e o li �o �0�����um term foa 202 oans is 40
average yield of United Stated ry 8a
years, and coven 95 percent of costs.
Demand side assistance is provided o�e� aze�ir1O u'ved to pro 'dc afford bleshousang for 20
payments for eligible tenants. In fact, p� �9
percent of the uruts through the Section 8 program•
pltpGRAM EVALUATION ro am. In
�� Secti°n 202/g pr�S� rfu d n�ne ds,y the -pNational �lA.s ociatinon of Hous�g and
anticipation of 1989 fiscal 8 p
Redevelopment Officials estimated� athnadt �ap�m aaartments fo� senior citiuns and d'isabled
assistance to provide 11,000 more nr
persons. The estimatc yields unit construction costs o approximately 557,273. Of the new u�nit�
HOUSING AMERICA: Fifh' 1'ars o� F�� loveshoeat
Attachment 5
at least 2,200 (20°!0) would additionally require S�ction 8 rent assistana payment authority or �
similar rent credit assistanoe.
.:-
'��
.'�
VOUCHERS AND HOUSING ALLOWANCES
'Ibe housing.vouchcr �rogram supported by the Reagan adaunistration was very sinular to the
Section 8 e�astuig arh5cate program, except that tbe c�sb'�e9uivalent vouchers are paid to the
reeipient household, not tbe property awner. Like the Se�tion 8 program, the household selects
from the available, physically standard housing stock on the market, and pays a standard
proportion of income for rent'Ibe f�deral payment, then, �s the differenoe between the tenant's
rental payment and a 5xed subsidy caP based on the estimated oost of modest priced housing.
Households can select better, more oosdy housuig and pay the additional expcnse themselves,
or choose to live in less costly, standard bausin8 and use the "savmgs" for non-bousing expenses.
Analysis of The Frxperimental Housing Allowance Program (��) found that households
who had received vouchers used the additional money for non-housing related spending.
Through the voucher program, recipients gained an average inerease in income of 20 percent.
In 1988, the National Housing Task Force estimated that housing vouchers would initially cost
�1,500 per household each year. Tbe Congrassiona] Budget Office estimated that per household
costs would be closer to 53,600 annually To provide the housing aid necessary to serve the 15
million households would require a federal commitment of 22S to 42S billion (1983) dollars. If
rents increased at 5 percent annually, by 1999, the oommitinent would be doubled. Note: In
comparison, annual subsedies for publcc housing ►vere esti�sa�ed ot a2,400, nea' Section 8�nits
averaged $3,448 per unit and eristut8 Section 8 was a2,200 (u���R�,rnstc in the Llnited Stat� ).
Until recently, poliry debates on housing assistance programs have almost uniformly ignored
the shelter allowances provided through the welfare system and administered by the
Department of Health and Human Serv�ces(HHS). Althou�h perceived as an income
main�enance program, public assistance administered by HHS in oon�unction with the states
provides approximately Sl0 billion annually in c�sh assistance to low mcome households to
cover shelter costs. (Qual�ty and unit size are not regulated). Under welfare, there is enormous
variation in housing subsidies among the three major programs, within the programs, and across
the country. As a general rule, in aU programs, housing subsidies are available on a first-come,
first-served basis. For example, in 1983 there were 2.8 million renters on welfare who received
no housing allowance, and 13 million households that received shelter benefits through both
the welfare programs and also through housing certificates or vouchers; thus receiving double
benefits at the expense of other low income households.
INDIRECT FEDERAL ASSIS'I'ANCE POLICIES ,
With the exceptio e public housing program, fede � housing assistance programs have
typically included subs 'al levels of tax inant�ves to vact private imestors and provide an
attractive return compar 'th other investment o nities.
During the decade of the 19 o tax refo ere enacted which vividly portray thc effect
of taxat�on on multi-family hous devel n� In 1981, the Eoonamic Recovery Tax Act
(ERTA} was passed which offer v e income shelters to investors primanly through
non-recognition of interest earnings tax-exempt bond financing. Tben 5ve years later,
Congress passed the 1986 Tax Ref A signed to reduce the number of personal income
tax brackets to two�wn ied h�ft�n ��e t�• fre Tax �Reform A�of 1986 h�t thsc�'erely
t�me, the Act e
HOUSIhG Al►1ER1CA: Fift�' otFederal l°vest�e°t �27
,�
�
�
�
.'
�-�r
:
^ �.
� •�
yc
..,.._
�;�oes
� ��'•_
activity. There are also two piogr'ams w�� �e solely for rebabilitation-17K Se�on 3121oan �.,�
�� ���y Dev�lop ment Block Grant
�fogra�m and the Section 115 grant P� �,elopment Act o� 19'14, Pa�'ed the way
rogram, an initiativ� of the Housing and mm�h► �nents would play
for cream►e uses of rebabilitation dollars and caived the role t�at loc�l ��� �� baz
a � �8+ . .
in the housing procxss. Al o�u �� ��g � q�� of the Lvtn$ environment for
beoome nearly syn �►m
� lotiv-and-moderatc incomc persons.
D��' LppN pND SECTION 115 GRAN'I' PROGRAMS�
HUD SEC'I'ION 312 is to encourage propertY o�n��s �
e purpose of the Section 312 Rebabilitation ProgT� to HUD Mu�imum Des'
� their buildings uP �
specifically targeted urban areas to bring
Standards and local building code standards.
1�
�J
�
��
�
�
L� 1 !
�
�
�
�
�
�
1
PROGRAM DESCRIP'�ON
Under the Housing and Urban Development An of�� ��5 ould limi't�assistana tollower
for occupanc�► in 221(D)3 BNIIR pro�ccts. Co p Y,
income famiLes. Many claimed, bowever, that tb.is was an un ent to renewal efforts, sina
eteriorat�n roperties were usually of midd e or upper incom� �aeline1�The
the owners of d 8
for loans. For this r�e� of jO9 rtie�ssin low m�me ne ghborhoods rathe t a�n low income
program now serves o P P�
owner-occupied properties.
1'he Section 115 grant program is closely related to 312. Thc programs servc the same
geographic areas and are often used in combination Section 115 grants are limited to a
max�mum of 3,500 dollars, and cannot exoced tha T�te f�mplicaud formula th ta econsiders the
more than 3,000 dollars, the grant �s hauted by
difference between rehabilitaUon costs and ���mn�forarepaymen�tu1Thus, �5 rt� ��'te
housing costs, as ap�lied to a 25 percent in 8
restricted to the lowest income families and to finance rehabi1io �o� �o am�� the �y
would not have otherwise occurred• Tbe ��on 312 rehabilitat P Sr
program to retain se�arate status after the 1973 �un� d balancea o�SilS�million and annual
self-supporting and in 1988 the program had an
repayments of 5100 million according to NAHRO � io�atio� �� flow enables on-going
funding of the program without additional ann PP P
Although no specific resvictions apply to ��m� elig�bility for Secrtion 312 loans, priority
preference is based on income and �s typlcaily 8iven to low income (95% of inedian) owner
accord to the type of property improved, bowever, single
occupants. Rates and terms �a�y �8
family owner occupants generally t d�i� nd n�u nn househ d income.� ion 312 oans are
payable at 3% and 6% over 20 years pe P°
for a maximum of 10,000 dollars with up to a�5°�e ��ount to rehfinance exist g�debt, f the
rehabilitated residential properry may also includ
debt service paYments are m excess of 1/5 of thc owncr's inoome.
pRpGitpivi EVALUATION
Through 1969, 11,498 owner occuPants bad received loans, and 5,519 had received grants.
Slightly more than 1R of �� 115 and 312 went to urban renewal ron�eThst rateslto noome
in cod
e enforcement areas or those areas scheduled for renewal. �Yi a e been ible if there
levels has allowed grea�er P�iartic►PaU�i e thepe m�h e�been some criticism�in regard to
were established mco &S � �
HOUSING AMERICA: �'Y� °�F��� �°�tme°t
�
�
�
�
_'
�
paricipation by "higher" inoome households and
averall, the program has achieved its objectives
neighborhoods.
i � •�
' ,�� ,
' ',►
� �.
I
. _ �_ _. t_
that tbe program enoouraged gentri5cation;
of innprrnnng the housu�g stocl� in targeted
Tbrough 1969, Section 312 loans averaged 5,350 dollars, while �rants were 1,871 dollars. As
intended, thegrant program servad the very lawest inoome fam�es. Wh�e the loan recipients
were better off financially, 60% had inoomes of more than 60,000 annuaUy Both programs
ooncentrated on prop�rhes in tbe S,OOa1Q000 dollarrange, altbough 44% of properties
rehabilitated with had a higher initial value, oompared with �4% of tbose recxiving grants. 'I'be
small proportion of 3121oan recipients in the lawest inoome brackets suggests that grants and
loans were not usually oombined. The Section 115 and 312 programs a000unted for more
rehabilitation than any other tools, but assistanoc has been limited geographically targeted.
COMMUlvITY DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMS
:�L*•
��t
' ��w.r
.
`�4�
��
.�
OMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT �
P ed on the heels of the moratorium on federal housing programs in the 1970's, tf�e Housing
and mmuniry Development Act of 1974 oonsolidated an azray of categorical grant-in-aid
progra into a oomprehensive program to allow local design of compre�ensive stratcg�es,
enhance 'bility, and to generally foster innovation and creaUvity in problem solving. The
Community evelopment Block Grant Program (CBDG) was also desi8ned to use public
dollars to leve e pnvate investment in addressing neighborhood disim+estment and decline.
The Nixon Ad ' tration had hoped to create a"mimmal svings attached" program. 1"he
Democratic-control Congress, however, required that azry expenditure of funds meet
specified federal object es, and that administrativc regulations be followed.
Title 1 of the 1974 Act e'tled larger cities and urban counties to funding allocated on a
statutory basis. Three years 1 r, Small City participation was formaliud, and funded at 20
percent of the annual appropria . Until 1981, small cities submitted applications to HUD for
competitive awarding of funds, th Congress made a fundamental change in the program.
Under the Reagan Administration's "New Feckralism" efforts, administraUOn of the Small
Cities portion of the block grant pro was devolved to the States. Minnesota has been
administeruig the program since 1983.
Although there is considerable local determin 'on, HUD has promulgated an extensive array
of regulations �overning the award aad use of G funds. Other pertinent rules and policies
are contained m HUD, Treasury Department, Offi of Management and Budget, Department
of Labor, etc., handbooks, transmittals, notioes, lette and other written documents. In order
to receive CDBG funds, local governments must assu full rasponsibility for administering
the various elements of their rehabilitation �rograms, assure that program requirements
will be fully me� While e�titlement vommuniUes and coun s(those SMSA's with populations
in excess of 50,000) ha�ce been able to create administrative u and develop local capac�ty due
to the on-going natwe of direct federal funding, small cities w'ch must annually compete for
funding, are not �s able to develop the sophistication of their rban counterparts. In some
situations, hou�sing rehabilitation programs have bcen assi�ned a contract basis to other
government ot quas�-government agenaes, non-pro5t organizat�ons, r private firms. In others,
c�Ues havg.�tipted to %ire and secure vaiiung for staff. The oomplexi and scopc of the ]ocal
housing �ehabilitation pro�ram depends, tberefore, in large measure n the experience and
expertise of the administenng body.
�
HOUSING AMERICA: FiRy Ynrs of Federal Isvestment ��
THE CHURCH OF S�AINT W1Ll�AM
6120 Rlth Stieet Northeast, kidky. Minnesot�a SSr32-S099
'INePhone (612) 571-5600
Septe�ber 2S. 1989
Y1111a� J . Nee
Mayor. City of Fridley
6431 University Avenue N.E.
lridle�.rQ�1 55�32
Dear Mayor Nee.
�
On behalf of the Pastoral Council of the CAurch of St. Yillia�. �+e are vriting
to urge your support for sisnificant financial assistance by the City of Fridley
and a formal decision by the �nd of the ��as segarding the proposed Norvood Square
senior housing project.
As you are avare, the Churcfi of St. Willia� has a long and sustained interest in
helping to provide Aousing for lov and �oderate income seniors in our Fridley com-
eunity. ?he church has negotiated with the non-profit developer--Community Deve-
lopment Corporation--and its �anagesent co�pany--Hestainister Corporation--to
develop and manage a 70 unit sparteent building for seniors. ?he project vould
be built on land generally located east of St. Yilliam's Church abutting Fifth
Street N.E. ?he church vill sell sbout 2.S acres of land to the Community Deve-
lopment Corporaton contingent upon building the Norvood Square senior Aousing
project. In addi�•�on� the church has committed to contribute S60,000 of the pro-
ceeds from the sale of the land to subsidize five units a year for ten years at
S100. a unit.
The Pastoral Council is vell avarF of youz deliberated and organiaed approach to
determine the need for low and �oderate inco�e housing for seniors in the Fridley
area and to detersin� th� level of financial assistance thst the city can provide.
The Pastoral Council concurs vith this approach. Ye are also avare that the staff
from the Community Developeent Corporation and the city planning departoent have
�orked �ell together to help define the issues and the financial needs of projects
like Norvood Square. In sddition. ve are aware that your consultant has completed
a market study thac identifies the housing needs and preferences of Fridley area
seniors. and that the City Cou�cil is no� studying the best ways to meet those
needs. �
In regard, che Pascoral Council dr�es yon to autlwrise the IiAA and other city
offices to negotiste the CDC on a basis that vill provide substantial financial
assistance to Norwood Square Seaior Housiaa Psoject. We believe such assistance
is varranted because:
- 2he church's initial survey of its �e�bers, the professional sarket study
co�pleted by Co�munity Develop�ent Corporation and the professional sarkec
study completed by tbe consultant for Pridley all indicate a need for at
least the nusber of senior housing unity proposed at Norv�ood Square. Theze
is a pent up demand for additional housing units.
���+�r�A.( •
Attachment 6
- 2 -
It is iaportant to provide a full continuw of life cycle housing options
foz seniors vithin t�e Fridley area. includina lov to �oderate incose rencal
apart�ents. TAe Norvood Square Pro�ect is an i�portant part of that
continuum.
- This projecc cannot be built to sesve thc u��ds of lov to �od�ra�e income
,stniors vithout substantial fipaacial assistaece fro� tAt Cit� oi �ridley
��aad other potential fnnders wch ss tA� !linnesota 8ousit� i Tinancc Agency.
ver. che participation of otl�er funders is d�pendent oa a to�ait�ent by
idle .
- 2re Norvood Square develop�ent vould provide the opportunity for approxima[e-
ly �0 senior households to relocate to the proposed development and [hereby
enable the turnover of [hese ho�es to younger fa�ilies in Fridley. Over the
years this initia] turnover is �ultiplied �any tioes over.
- This project is ar. invest�ent to serve tAe need� of Fridley's seniors. ?he
Pastoral Council believes that tDe type of project that is proposed--non-
rofit ovnership vith a lo tera co■ait�nt to �anase a quality apar[ment
facility--Aelps asaute the City o r a sta e an it—y�eve2ap-
�ent t at vill benefit the corunit� for tAe lons ter�. The track record
and experience of the proposed ovners snd �anage�ent company are vell docu-
mented. In addition. the unagement company is coamitted to organize and
maintain a ComIDUnity Advisory Council that will reflect both the vievs of
the residents as vell as the broader Fridley coounity when vorking wich the
management company.
- This project vould be located on a site fairly central to the Fridley Commu-
nity and convenient to other support services needed and used by seniors in
the community.
Finally, che Pastoral Council is concerned that anv �ltional delay in reaching
s decislon on tfie level of financial assistance thst Tridley can provide uy
treate further difficulties ia obtainina other loas ter■ finsncing and �ay jeopar-
dite t�e project. In addition, further delay aay jeopardise a■id-1990 ground
breaking and in �eeting the pent up deaand in tAe Fridley co�unity.
We urge the City Council to proceed in such a�anner that vill assure a decision
bv t end of the year. ?his vould perait the Housing and Redevelopmenc Auchority
to complete its vork to define the best sethods of participation by early 1990.
It vould also permit other potential funders to �ake their decisions in a timely
manner.
Ye thank you for your consideration of this request. Ye understand the dffficul�
and complex nature of the debate regarding the best vays to �eet the needs of our
sroving elderly population. Ye fitsly believe that this project is sn important
totponent of a coordinated senior prograa, adds to the ability of seniors to
re�ain independent and a vital part of the Fridley co�unity. snd is consistent
vith tAe mission of the cAutch in serving the needs of our cosaunity.
Sincerel ,
� � u�4�
Don Hovard
Pastoral Council President
l� � � i<<;�C��c
L �j�.� G �l
/�
/ John F. Brandes
. �astor
i
HOU�SI�NG R �SOURC�E�S C�ORPO�RAiTI�ON�
112 EAST ELMW000 PIACE • MMNEAPOUS, MN SSt/9
Ma. Barbara Dacy
Planning Coordina tor
City of Fridley
6431 Univerrity Avenue N. E.
Fridley, MN 55432
RE: Potential financi�l assistance
for housing for seniora
Dear Barb:
. �tt,e�.�„
August 25, 1989
This letter is a fo11oW-up to last month's City Council conference meet-
ing on housing for seniors. I thought it might be helpful to offer a
perspective on the relative ease (financially) of housing Qroduction
efforts that took place a fev years ago coopared to the financial
struggles auch efforts entail today.
During the heyday of housing development (the mid to la te '70s), the
Federal government provided key financial tools to apur the production
of multifamily housing. The aajor Federal tools vere the Section 8
rental aubsidy program of the Department of Housiag and Urban Develop-
ment ("HUD") aad the loa-interest mortgsge loan programs of the Govern-
ment Na tional Mortgage Associa tion ("GNMA").
Initially, Section 8 vas primarily a production program intended to apur
the provision of houaing for lo�rer-income people. HUD and the developer
vould agree to a achedule of rents for the project. IInlesa the project
cost less, the rents vere usually aet at HUD's "Fair Market Rents" --
the rents typically charged at coeparable, nevly-construc ted� privately-
developed houaing. The ovner rould then obtain the most favorable
financing he or she could find and proceed to construct the project.
At that time, the benefits of Section 8 were available to all lover-
income people, defiaed by HUU as people vho eara 807. or lesa of the
sedian incone for the area (adjuated for family size). F•ach eligible
household �ould pay 30� of adjusted income toxard rent, and tbe balance
of the approved rent xas paid to the ovner by HUD. IiUD's Section 8 con-
tract rith the owner enabled the owner to provide affordable housing for
lover-income people, Without draining the owner'a financial resources.
:ERYICES FOR rllLTIfAMILY MOUEM6
Attachment 7
Ns. Barbara Dacy
August 25. 1989
Page 2
The economics of most Section 8 projects "worked" very vell. Typically,
the guaranteed Sec tion 8 rents vere sufficient to support a mortgage
loan that, in effect, covered 987 to 100� of project costs. In most
cases, no additional source of funding Was necessaty.
Except When they vere coupled with Lhe Sec tion 8 program, the GNMA lov-
� interest loan programs apurred the production of housing for somewhat
higher-income people� effectively taking over Where Section 8 left off.
The most videly-used programs provided 40-year mortgage financing at a
7. 5% in tere s t ra te . Typica l ly, the lov in terea t ra te and long term made
it poasible to provide affordable houaing for people vho earned 80ti or
more of inedian iacome. Again, project economics uauelly worked well
enough that additional aources of funding were not required.
As you know, the days of intenae Federal involvement in housing produc-
tion are noW long since over. Except for the very-limited funding under
the 202 program, Section 8 is no longer a production program. Rather
than providing contracts that guarantee necessary rents to owaers, Sec-
tion 8 vouchers and certificates travel with the resident -- and the
rent levels they cover are iatentionally aet by HUD at a level that is
substantially below the new conatruction "Fair Market Rents".
Even the 202 program ao longer serves all loWer-income people. Several
years ago, HUD revamped the Section 8 requirements under its 202 pro-
grac�. Rather than serving people With incomes at or below 80% of inedian
income, the program ia now effectively restricted to serving "very low-
income people", people With iacomes at or beloa 50'G of inedian income.
With thst one major chaage nlone, HUD made it imposaible for the bulk of
the private market to serve the "upper lover-income narket" (people Who
earn between SOX and 80x of inedisn income) -- without subatantial finan-
cial assistance from other sources. A large gap was created between the
income levels of people served by the Section 6 program and the income
levels necessary to afford "narket-rate" (non-Section 8) houaing.
Compounding the gap vas the government's abandonment of its loW-interest
mortgage loan programa. The long-ter�, lov-interest loans throngh GNlfA
vere discontinued, leaving developers to face aignificantly higher bor-
roving costs and shorter loan terms. In turn, those higher coats and
sborter term� further widened the gap between the income levels of
people served by Section 8 aad the incomes required W afford the
marke t- ra te ren ts a t new deve lopmen ts .
Usually vithout outaide financial assistance, private induatry has taken
care of people at the upper end of the senior bousing market, people who
demand (and can afford) fairly luxurious housing. In fact, houaing foY
this part of the senior �arket has been overbuilt in the TWin Cities
lta. Barbara Dacy
August 25, 1989
Page 3
Metropolitan Area. Almoat all of the senior housing nov "troubled" offer
intense servicea (such aa houaekeeping) and require very high rents,
aost starting a t about $700 a month for an efficiency (no bedroom) unit.
The part of the senior houaing market that has not been served well are
the people Whose incomes fall in the gap. They are people Whose modest
incomes lie between 509: of inedian income and the amount necessary to
afford today's rents at market-rate housing for seniors.
This is the part of the aenior market that developments auch as NorWOOd
Square are intended to aerve. Aa your survey of surrouading communities
indicated� the development of such housing requires aubstantial finan-
cial assistance to make the housing affordable for its intended market;
and a wide arrey of toola have been used to provide needed asaistance.
Given the mood in Washington today, it is unlikely that the Federal
government will renew its former interest in housing production� at
least for the foreseeable future. As has been the case for the laat fev
years, affordable houaing for people Kith reatricted incomes is likely.
to be produced only vhere local initiativea are provided.
Barb, I very much appreciated the opportuaity to discuss informally the
development of housing for aeniors� both with the City Council at its
conference meeting and in meetings with you and Jock. I vould be happy
to continue those conversations. Please call me at 825-9I11 if you have
questions or comments or if I can help facilitate the City's decision-
making proceas.
Very truly yours,
HOUSIN ES RCES CORPORATION
�C��
S. Dore Mead
Presiden t
SDM:em
cc Ms. Mary S. Gabler
�
cu y
's �
0
=cE"' �'
2 =t V l^�C
A �-'�3a.
� v CZ N
- s r. F. ci
=-� o.
�
=R�� c
- y i � � c
_�AC+`�+U
'= �
_�a �� � o
. l+ yRj Q,'C �
` ` y a•� C
= � E ,+� � c
V .
=� cCap 3
� C � O: �
� �c � °o eo 00
'saao.°o H
L r 9`n c0 w�..
� auw � �
T:c: v�
� N >LZ
7 �L O .�- �+
� Q
N �
� �'
H N
� �
G
� •�
G �
�� cd
� y
I � �
� O
�
1
�
; •�
, � �
: �w Q%
� f,n
• �. �
> �
� a.�
) �
.�
� �
y O �
r
J~ y 4•�
J
, '� 3
�
� 3 �
n
�
n
!0
y. �
$ A
? in
�D
M
0
O
x
m
d
q
d
N
�
a�
0.
G' '
�,
�
�
V,�
G
�
�
C�
�
�
�
O
�
�
0
•�
�
�
�
�
O
�
�
�
•�
�
�
O
�
�
>
�
v
e
N
G
�
_
>
^:
�a
0
J
�
,g e
s
Ln �
C Q
=
�
�
V
�
�
�
�
•�
�
�
�M
m
�
�
•
m
�
0
�
0
�
�
m
a
� oo �o
; rm er N�~ �J m Et � W
eoo��:°.E..o a c•
r m m mt E� m c� c �'; V�
VL�t3E3o�3'a, cp� �3
c" E� o o c v� �� o� � o
3e�oaa�av�--..� m �>
��C�•1iDV� OO�epO �a °
oon tE m �
m��c �mC VU� m�"CL � W
� 0 C V 0 Y. �
.�; o Y� a� m�; o 0 7 c t
maty��cW�3m�pOa�
{� 7 � ; � •� Y ~ � � t m U � C
�Ct���°'�~>;`°�''E
.. 3 � E c ..
° am m�,� � a`a ° � o° a� o
� t �t� a0 �� "' O�O� U
a� am� � a� ot ��'t� �
O 3m'�m��=�c�ow�rn�—a�oo
H• aob m� m... v 3 ow� >>•
� W
0
��� °i� y
OdOy�a. T�6y' �,�„�p�A..�i
1y. .� Cy 6� 6i O. 6+ `^ C
p� C� 6) .�. �y p,�in �. R�
Lt°.�3 eov �& E ��,.�°. m
�
� � � �
d y .1� � �.
.�' �`� G. � v' Et.. �e S. u
�" � O �� Z"' � � t"'O C
� d � �.� � � � d � V C � �
p� cEC r.o� p�+0. ��a.�+
d G � j o�,� i � p i C++ � o 0y ��
� v� � d!0 e7 N!0 Ir �' l0 ��..
C �- O �
�.�+ E d O C�ry `� 6i�t
F� �� A�� V y 00�.r
�. � � �
4! C O
Gi�`���y� "'���-
^� c � _ o+tr v'., `°-
� $�AaAi«=�� a�oh
G�e �.. p. � � x
�r ° c�c � °r' 'v ° v
m ,��d�ee0.U,v A`'°�va�i
� °°°°�EA�vu ��d�
C��mRCee oc"E
�q r.
0
� �^E��w p�a+ y��A
o,oa�« ( �` c=Av
dG � � 'v� � � � c Z c �- �i
ar.•:r„ e... o v•- o..:�v
$'vouc°E3� u�n�a
.�
� o I�Yu'eo
eo r,, •+ n ., {�
�d �"i � � ; � �y a �� �wy w� �'�� V � �1
O E C EO pr'S ��,Vy wiL"' N3� t� � pr�� �,tg �
� CR+�
'°o°''g `° '"�5a�'' �°.:c����
� vE. `�, v,� s a`° ;� °' � y E ;
C��� �w K�p j� ���y O� ,�� � p� a S� C� �
:w C� L. y 61 y �9�`�+ yV�� �� V�^ �"'����y L.
�� A�> �SyO'r6� ��AmC�C3,�^„t'�A O
�� w�' aEco 5'+°�Paaoc�3i��
a°ov�tE,�c. °°'''ysa, �i°�EGe�°�.a�i�
tp, a�
�Ca�CY� � ��_ �p£ ��D'O.�C
�'�=�,'°e—o�'°,,� ���>�`� �a�~°�'� �����
� s ��
�° a�' o� e eEr, .- er;�'�d' �L� � a^' A G{i y��
�.. °7 y� a, �. gr-'� ��"'9°�p°�v.'��a
E=w y 'y
°y�E' � � � 's�.X� �� �a a��a � � 3p.��..�� d a
�� �A M � a. �j O� G
a� Q A� d dw' �� a".� jE' � d A�v� Q��f� 6 p
� �.�.� V � �.��'�� � 4i�$� ��� >���
'���'�°�EF'aA��e�° ° '.°� �'
m �±
��ov :�aoa °'����°+��,XOC ��
� v=� S�' B wo��i OC a��'S �'� o�O3
bo����0000R
� "' �o ea V U '�
N E�»�yN � � a O'Ef%
� �
'E
ao�'Te EV ' `av� e� d
_ ���3d,�=��� ..,
�3
me
� �
Ev
�F
A ,r� 1�
� o� �
� � � , .. .
�v � ° -
EO
E''
� �
�
kb
��
��
� •
� •
�1 `,
f
��
,
�
�
I
i
!
1
�
Attachment e
�� � .....' �,.�����.� ir � T7TTTiT�. ` — --
- • - . . --r -r� — --:r. =� ." - •-. . . - . ... . . _ .�. � .,.... �.. . • �- - --- •
'�� y • . :�.. •.ti.4,r�,��.•''�, ... :..= ; _ . � .�' . ._ . .: : • �
� . � . . _•Y. 4, . �•s•' . •,+' . .. , ' - , . _. C • r Y !ir ' r.
.. �• � � � � �r a � Y � �1 Y V ��,,, �.
: . .' ' �' �.. � �.
. Y � � . O �S =�
- .................� e � . ug ���_„; i.,_
� � � � 7 � � Z � . = TJG� s'� �Y�=3r c� ��":
� c e
� s� : 0� n � E�� r c c E=
: � Q � ��%: �■�.y;t 'L,�: : � � :�„trtl � m'°Y� E 3 ^ ` �c p°c
� � R � . t�. Ji� y� .. + � ��r�Y G_`7��'!'sCVe7
� S ' L:: _J 5 S. ..........7i.............i��� r�•~� ��Y � �v �r � c .. � �L,
-.• � �- �_ � g
(� ._�.... � .� - , - o � - _ -
• ' '�! L: � •"'" �- •t�i J aw�qpYca� �+����--
� • �';. �{ � �', .i ._:�: . �. . � � � ° 'i � L c L" a � ? � d `
.i ... iv� �•r � �� € i V m ��`o� E� c�i CY = G�c 3
� � 9
�
�
�
�
• �
�
O
�
�
�
O
V
• �..�
�
0
�
�
�
�
�
: :. �y : ��
�� � . � -•
....._..::� s.-� � ......»_.
.�. :��
� � ���s r'.�,
�� .... .F�
.............. �� % � ..�
�� �"� � :� �
j, / � O �
� � .. � .. �...-----
� •.. �
. .
........, .
. �� .
� ��
o a
���.`: g �
� � .• . a
� � �
i � �. � .
- '� �
� , � .
�t, . _'� Y
�
� • A
�
!L
• �
j•�., ��Y
i�� _
�€ � �
g�
�
W
I • , �
. ..S � ' : ...........
.���I. �
.� , $
� �
� �
v
W �
��
�
�C
Nf $
��
oo_
�or
,,�3
a�c
�•e
A
�HN
.o
� OY
c ��
Y � 0
� C O
Eu�
.
�:n
� Q Y
f � � q
O � O M
v �
Ot O�J
�;: .
N
��E�
;���
o� o
O
�o c 3
� 0 � L
�; �Y
V
� �� � e
$ r� ^ �
.o�„ � C� , c�
� ��� � �= ��`-� s= � �
= � b � L .� .j r7 � � r �
]: ' � � C � ^ C � � A. � �
� ?�`�E�c„�_�_ o.
� vv:�°w3c�..»=r
�._—
3 i�_>?`epc3�5r �
Y� fj �� 3 J`.• k �
� I C; 3O Y� �yZC .
c^ ^c=`v..�oce o:'
ii� VQ�Y �S�'��9 c�
�t �V �G C � i ��C � '
� <>�o Ew>,��i=
E°_ r w� 3�`0 � co `o
� � n T
9 �. �
T C
O�` % c p C c9�. �
�� p�- G� L q �
O C � ��„' � � �..�.
N
�EE��� `� �`'s
,�, •v
+��,c.`,t_' =.. oc
Cy� r' N 0� fs > C > C b
S s E L^ .c`, n E_o, ��E c
� a `� E v c+ c^=
o�p� C e`� � S ^ 3 e
E ef
� Y � ✓ (� � O � 7 ;� r" � `
��Y � O �' : t G
�.��E�e -`-.iE �'•n
ON A R N MC A G�I
� �nC+ ao j}aw S � `� .--°a� � �`
V a d a. � S� YpC `� t� N � � �+�M w q� . �p � e+�[
4j.. Jy/�: V C.. C� y�•JCq M �w� � oCMb���O�� w���.t9 C MbOCG,�3p` pp��
`d /�A�w O 4�„ I�r�E Y� C� �• y�`�� f ? �� ���AC � �YCLprY4� h
° m` �o'ow�a".= �=.'�`.i�C� �� eNS.3..Zs���L��`'��d� ����Y�wC�E�'i��a�d��
� �%.� w °y � r -
e.. a ao- . � i w � • n . � w w._ o —
pqo�����cu �°��oE���"�%.'�'�g'� 4��i.���,'a� � v�s���+ ��xs'-'c �Yr�ac00�+ ��r_z�`n,c
� C "°�C o�e`�' ={�'uL�°.1�:�q'��� �• 8 � � �c�� u� >���e'��=SE °`°:.r, Q9'"6En'
n�4C V V�F�O ��ty���9��r�: y 6YCr' r�0� �+q�Z� ��+ .� �� Y��i i�� .Y V C� ���4►..—gY � E�
E �yYx�: �=qL.� �YY.�...�i �T� °� ^��e�2'4�Y`o�y°—�Y}.�}s' '���>$�w�a"e4+,G�X2S��g�����_o
� "C° C� i�=twr'� 5� .Y'�� ��a �3s q � �� ��5 y� ��E��, :��.�.gB�g�`c�Y`�` �
y��c��,�i�s`��Y_�,'ti� }s'8 � Mo yt E� �y �L�y+ 9' �t$ a��� �P�� a.:
3 �1��.����� E•�e$s;,�-,`,���3a� � ��l� ��g° ;�.� i'x^=". ��Ce�S` gZS��—,=�fQ:+�N$s�am'��'�_
p ii.
� $r n o �dyt-!' .gY �pr � �r > �E ��� o —s�F. �i+ $"��a�s ag 3 ga �' �Ca� n�' � _p `a a �' � v �
47�CriE �4Y �A S „QY G Lo �#` wia�E� �e�d..wEij-3"e��$�d$
.. � .� �X > 3'� � �
�1i i� �, �Y.�°�'��S ��'Z� ��� � � I $��' �.°.3�+' �3 � a� �+ �� E 3� s�� +Ti� � � �3i5� wii a`c$'� �, � w 3'3 a �O
-------------------; .,
o � �'
q Qn
o � '�
o C C
� C9
��a
y � O
� o»
S t�
� �_
' E
: �=
N �
N �
:=
_
:_
��
gu
i$�
Ys p
r
.
� M �
�so
,.
�
�
C
1
F
1
�
1
r
�
r
I
�
�
S
Z
.
.
a
,.
�
�
C
�
�
�
�
�
N
�
�
�
�
<
�
�
�
�
—
�
�
O
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
O
�
L
�
�
�
�
�r
O
�
�
l�
�
�
�
Y�
�
a-�
o�c
Y� � �
i���Y
o���
����SY
L C 'pC� �
L',�Y= a(�
C � ' ; L
� � � � �
c`FE:~
.�
C
O
U
�
.�
i.
�
�
V/
.0
a�
.O
�
�
C
N
�
U
L�
O
.0
�
�
�
�
�
Z
.�
s
�
=
�
i
C
�
�
� �c
��'�x
�e�
= � C
�°.� i
�T�' �
6
C � C �
��.S�E
� �� M T
�`C
�
<'R CS� �
�
C
0
—
O
�
iE� �e �.c
�� =�
_
� g�9� �
�>a<��
-� a=a.
Eo��� .�
.
��=t �.��E
y=
C�` � y z�
E���`�C
<vvSi p_= �
T{rL��
Cr � �Y
�a s �:
8=0 . r
� `-� Ei
C w Q ��_
�>.g °
��' T! 3
°�Ee�=
c
�����`
.
.c�_E;�
4 E �;���y�
� as�SiT
•
�
�
4
�
�
i
�
�
Y
r
�
�
c
�
���e
C
�4��:
�$� �
� �
�E��
'SE`E
���°
��o
�� s
>.� �—_ p� `
� � O�t%7�si.
�� E� �.-_ o
�,�3���gt k�
.� ��b-;a€:,��
� ` �� :��
Y �e C C �=
E �� � �
e.-�= �
:$ -�
� y C .
�- �rEt���s-
= •o ;
"�-� =�r�e.
�_ �� � g � 3 �'> e �.
�;pp O rL Mi ����
�iCO �i.�F� � ' �
E •• Y
��O L �. J � C �
LLm°.�>Er��i$>
a;
��
. ���� 4v
� ���
i s: a
�_�
: ��a
Eo�er
g ���
���.�r
ad > s.
�����
; � ��t O
� �` =���
�, � �
: ��i�z
�t ���:�
S
1Cir..3����
r w
��iE
� w �
�
�
�
� G �
���g
s�3�
�s
5�s ��
� �g�g
�.--
����Y
�`s�� >
�i�i�€
��� ��
y oc
' E�,��
.� � �
�� �9 a:
��t�Ee�
�c�E�
,�
►
s
• �
1� i �
� ' � , t
-
1 , �.
�1
•
1
;��1
.� � ��
i=
y� e� ��
T_ � >
VJ �-� j
�v ar+
� �� ��
h
�t �����
i'' 3����
s; �;�
g4s:E�
��a�YE;`
� �
��e��:
� `
V V V t
o :E�
� �' s t u
� a�a�
. 7 c.
� � k y �, C
=F :
��' ` C C
C '�
C
w � Y� 3
C t `
•�� 3 e � �
.; r
'^ w
T �
R�
ty G
C
4 �
Y' :
�`
YL^
� w �
� � N
�L �
� R
�s�
s =' >
r�_
Fc�i:
S C
�
�> 9�
�� G�
�, R � L
w� � ��
>
C i i C Y
�` i9 v R
L�C �
� � .
V `^ �
C � A r �
�� r'1�
- s =c ;
� C
.� Q
� O
� �
. C �c
.� � _
��
� � .�e Q`�
� �L
��
� � � �
� � �
�
!� c� ��s ; L
� ;
C '�
t
-- ���-------- � �-�=
� ��
�g��
����
��
�.�- �. �
�u�•�
� �E
�����
�_���
�����
r%���o�T
_����>�
a�-��� ��
� g� ki s.
�c<LL.��.�t
�C��� :;
S' �. V �' � � �
E ��.�-s� > 9
����', � �` �G
'E° �° E
�.�����$s=
����� ��� �
_�� ����:
c � g
e � SM�11
#� - b_."
��� �C�c�
� ��' �`.Y � a�
'G y O `� � G
E� Z � �.z `2S
�•���
�����z�
� rar� �
�y-z:YS"ii
C � � y � i
s��E���
�� g
�:.� �F
�' � :
3 �
• V�� �� �
� C�,p
-'�,E�3
<���SE�
�:�=
���c
ae�
>� -
's �G�
_ �{ y
G
_=
��=� ;
• o.Y
�
�r:
�-��
C � t L
�g E ��
�r �
C � � L
�w �.L
f, ✓ �
�C r� C
���iE
�.�� � � � Att.cl�.nt •
i g's — = - --�- -
o•C��ar O�PbU� do�W� ���� �'�^
s�pr t�TArnO�tstO��+t
� N�y�r1 M/e � t 2. B�rrr. CalMOrr� ss��so � W•—.
►rb�1 r+ ]D. Gu.+wn. Ca�� dM N�1 Nrr�sl�rwoa
��� ��
w.w� �
n.rr+� SrM
�M � 7frM
,�...r.� M/�t
,MR'eti0�q �1/N
1�� �Li
u...� �
�� su�a�
Y�i 7!!
11�ta�Yn 7!�!t
wri0� 7%O
M�ke CM► 'JT/%7
Mwow 57�
AwMrd.. SuM I�w� 7N1
wln,,, 7yN /b. o�+ 7710
Meb�Oe� nM �� ��
��9 �y— tib — �VTt
s.�.e, s+�a �r e. �.�. w'ro
a..r� .a�ee �.�. �
w,,,,,e. ex�so s.� �e.. eve+
r....r so� � t.er w�
� 72Nt fbo�a�aY� S!/!4
C�raca� 75/9C lyM/ q/dt
� �/dt T�A Mv T3A4
O�6Yn SS�d6 Te�1q 75�77
lY�YY�1 wb� VW�r SZ/E6
Oww w6t Mlrnw M/70
� � �u �
� !� �
O.Ct�ar o�Pardy GlouOy •�Cloudy
R�qn� S�Snow T.TAund�rstorms
Elderly CoaNnued from Page 1B
cvcn grcatcr numbcrs of oldcr adults
wi11 live in the suburban counties by
thc cnd of the ccntury.
w'hile the proponion of clderfy peo-
plc in the total poputation is expected
to incrcasc onh s:ightly in each of
thox counues, ihe number is expect-
rci to grow by as much as 50 to 60
perccnt in Anoka. Washington and
Dakota counties between 1990 and
,�
.�Ithough that forccast by the stau
drmographer's oPiice is based on the
t 98Q ccnsus, local officials said an
incrcasing demand for servias and
huusing for low-income elderiy peo-
plc confirms its continued validity.
vcarly SQO clderly coupla or indi-
viduats in Dakota County arc on'a
waiting for 700 subsidized housitt6
units. Thc average wait is 1'/� to 2
ycars. Ulfccs said, but Cor some build-
�ngs it's as long as four years.
In Wash�nston Couaty, as we11. do-
mands are grester thse acpected even
today.. sa�d lamcs Shu�„ soc�al ser-
viccs du+ector for WasAtapon Coan-
ty. Ncw home carc u�d day cue
programs beg�n two yws a�. As
pcoplc found out about ibem. re
said, the programs arcw at a 6ster
ratc than wu ezpected. -�'��
.� '.Ce, . �..
�►nd Shu� beGtves tbst peater de-
mand is ahad. L�st roo�th tbe ooun'
ty hircd a human servias Dla��
Lb�s Ydbwthunder. W teep b�d� of
dcmographic changcs for loq-taye
� i.
a �.. �,
+ •r,
planning purposes.
,,._.... ... _._.._. _. ...,. _ .. _ �. ;: - . . �. �� ..�.., „ ..T
��R vA� lows r1 Mt IOr c
, __-_v w�n� FriON. ►YpNS n Yr �Ot
����
paA� vdd�r tod�! � a drne� d tru+d�"K bY -
�lnooa Mas in tM �PP�► !Os e bir�r 90a. Mw a p�rtly �d�r IMouph FAOr1
drr� d IMs�+^s tarqtK ura FY�dM. lows to�q1K �1omn wst ►1i4�s tod�y arx
in u,. e.ea�. eos. wy►�s Friayr n an upv.� �+� ... IM. 9a. taiw �or�t in �n. i
� M�.�/
� �•-•° Y
111� FSf11a1fIS Of i1UrTlCifl� � �'
a�xoss
�al T�xas. Ban t i�dMs
�e.ne�el�rim �g � d�
�s ..(',p�/f1ry. Rilfl i1S0 MI�S lC�lMb
d11�f SlC00�15 Of th! SOUth 8fld Na1:1'
�si Fh�ricans wamirgs w�n Oa�
fa U�a l:asser AnUMs and PtNr10 �O.
$�/1 �1d �T100fl/
� 6:00 a.m. Suwt.&36 A-m.
Total d�pli�t t 4 hours. 3d minutes
• � O ��
Pl�r
. 31 Aug. 9 Iwp. 18 .�
Elderfy housing units also arc in
short supply throughout the subur-
ban portion of the metro rtgion.
While high-ris�. subsidiud apart-
mcnts for low-income elderly peoPk
in Minneapolis and SG Paul are los-
ing tenanu, there is � waiting list of !
two to fivc years in suburban Henne-
pin and Ramsey counties, as well as
m the five suburban coantia. The
parents of people who live in the
suburban countia 'ate movi� there
from the oore cities and dsnvha'e to
be with their families. Peopk alresdy
u,�� �� � �rt� �m �u � ,
spec�alined elderiy hoa9n� as tLeY
age, oRcials said.
, .,�" �., r, - . -
' � ���
.,Jt�1Y 1989: ��=.
, a�w�� ''•"�%
r: �� � �oa�1
^ p�p�as iham nomyl
� ..� • .
� ToMI pnc�pilatla►br n
p�s kan� namal
�. . Tbli�pweipiWio� fa Y
� � p�q� ftpfn nortnal
increasing elderly in suburba� counties
��p�1at� pf eldsrfy psopb is expected to increase much faats
i� the oulM�9 ms�o �^� dunng the next 10 years than it wiq i�
Hennepin and Ramssy countlss•
- ��_-_ `_ _ _ � _ -- ':�
_ �- � : ��,-� :_�.��; � .�-
-- ���_-
;, - �
- •, _ - -
_ _ "'- �i�S
. . z
: _ �'.��.:E�,. � _ --
�a �gpa� -13r521 256,636 21.835 61.596
Washi n 143,062 9,451 172.052 14.417 52.5'ri
O�p,� �.510 17.282 318,234 25.425 �.�'
� 54.418 4,070 86.251 5.49/ 34.9%
Carvar 4S.2M �.9A2 53.130 5.104 2�.5�.
�sp� 953,337 11a.467 928.322 t2.i`.2�3 7.5%
R,n,sey 15s.2t� s�.ns 137.75s a2.721 �.9x
sww�i� D��"rs ol�a
In counties such as Moka and Hen- f� ��� i� Q� in derdopin8
nepio. the cities rather• than county
apvernment have been �esponsibk housing
for housing Some dtia art� doie� '� County Hoesin6
studies to deurm�ne the need far Tf� Mlashinpoa nt Autbotit is us-
��y h��, .. .. _.. .. and Redevdopa�e Y
�,��. •--� -.. iu�• taxt�tempt 6nancini an� Iand
la Dakou County. a aommiva of dooaud b�c qs ati�s ��� five
tNe aount�r bo�t+d 6�s apP+o�red a S32 . � . ;�;r � -
million propam to build one housin� . '' � � .. - .., • � � . .
of 10 b SO unils is e�ch. d .- -` � "'� '='.` �'� .
�i�e t 10 pea�s. Aapoval b7 t!e � CMtiwel6we Mt� ls
� q�. � � ��. bs �d` aidi � ie �`E;�
is under eonitr�ct�oA. werlc whe� PR isw pactita
� �en1'�o�eY (&"� `' � :,: !i �es�`ttiore�inbo �ee
`�i i� 1��-
elderty boa�i� has dried ap. D�Irata tiw bdieve_he aaJd achieve thcm
� �°� �p�a�a �� - � � �iue �1 �
� ipecW tu ler7► rt 6AC oo�ee�d" �
i 988. Aaoks Co�mtx �a ' j�j iwe +i ��#,��������
�.� ��*AM�7L� �"....f�...� i. -a��
. .. . . • . . . .. �.: e
housit� projec�s w�th �60 unit
the end of 1990. Others arc ►
propo�ed. Dennis Balyea� W►as
ton County HRA direcwr. sai
�xp�cts that c�entually there w'
one Dr'oJat ia ncb of tl�e count;
oommunitxs.
: .s -��: jr. : �'i'"".
. �. � . �"
��
. -.. - '• ' ' - =�t_ _, - -
M � � �pp��ved r
in tbe aty's history, u �he k
p� � w�t�i�N
apolis raiaenu aod •vith a
�nbe� �6o a�s, brtl�e to
�meh�a in P�blic dis�m
� ...�•� �� � � �, _ .�.. ,.,
•�l����ir . 'F� ' Y �
� -S�1 . -�+►
! ;+; . I-„�.r ^"' � . r:
_ ����.-�s��. i—�---
pROGiW[8/�CTZVZTIEB �: ssxioa soosz�a
NON-FINANCIAL PROGRAMS
1. Investigate fundinq sources
for expanded senior proqrams
such as chore services, meals
on wheels, congreqate dininq,
transportation and home
� care services .
2. Investigate reverse mortqage
program with area lenders.
3. Identify housing sites as part
of Comprehensive Plan Process.
4. Lobby for greater financial
responsibility by county,
state and federal qovernment.
FINANCIAL PROGRAIrIS
* 1. CDBG Human Service
Programs
+� 2. 1�IIiFA Rental Rehab
* 3. Section 312 Homeowner
Rehab
4. When a project is not in a
TIF district Tax Exempt
Housing Revenue Bonds can
be used.
5. When a project is within
a TIF district, establish
TIF policy as to form of
assistance and method of
security.
* Programs that do not require expenditure from City budqet.
AttactNnent 10
MEMORANDUM
'� .
'11D: Willi�ta W. Burns, City Manag�er,�;�� PW89-459
F!%�I:
L�TE:
8t)B�7DL'P:
Jahn G. Flora; Public Works Direc.�r
Deoe�ber 7, 1989
GIS SyStesn
In March, 1988, the City dau�cil ez�tex+ed ir�to a Joi� Piow�rs Aqreesnent to
establish the Arbka Qau�ty GIS Task Fbroe. Zhis Task Foroe is made up of cities
in the axuYty at�d the Ar�ka �a�uYty Hi9hwaY D� to determine tl�e type of
system ar�d pra�edures for imple�enting a �*a*+�*+�� zed geographic information
systega (GIS) . At the pr�sent ti.me, there are the six (6) cities ar�d the oounty
in the Joint Pt�w�ers Agre�ent.
In initially develapirig the need.s for the GIS, aur staff inet and identified a
mm�be.r of it�s that they desired to be inQl�saerYted within the GIS capabilities
in order to pravide for more e�editiws aooess of inforniation, identify prablem
areas as,sociated within the varia�s jurisdictioa�s ar�d assist in P��J
informatio� in on�er to provide better reoa�dations and decisions.
Ba.�,� tlj]03'1 � TI�.S Cr1�,Y'13 �St.clbllStl� bjT e3dl 17Id1V1Clt1211 Cl� cilXl �'1@ T'�iSk
Foroe as a whole, ar�d a review of syst�ns RFP's; the �virormiental Syst�m
Researrh Instibute (ESRI) ARC-Info Sjrste� was suUmitted and appraved by the Anoka
Oonuity Board of �i�ers at their July 26, 1989, meeting.
Oix� the software �ras id�entified, the Task �oroe and the C�ntY P� Plans
ar�d specifications for the ha�clware. Respa�ses to Ft�est for Proposals w�ere
Y�eceived aixi the Z�extronix Model �68/10 was the reoaQmerrded choioe. This
reoom�eridation is beirig submitted to the �ty Ck�issioners at their Deoe�mbex
12, 1989, meetirrg for apprvval. Everyor�e uridexstarr3.s that it will be approved
and the purchase of the hardware will be authorized as of that time.
As su}�nitted in my a�snorat�� of Nvvember 30, 1989, subject - Procure�nP.nt of
GIS Haniware, Software and Petsormel Trainirg, I ideritified the GIS oosts for
the hardware (ta�rkstatian and quezy station) as $59,302.60, software for the
stations as $20, 350. 00, arxi the trainityg for bvth syst� at $19, 400. 00 for a
tatal of $99, 052. 60. In the 1988 l�II.S Stixly a�bmitted ar� apprwea bY the
Douncil, $100,000.00 was allocated for ti�e GIS initial syst,em.
In additi� to the upfro�t oosts, w�e are loakim� at a mairrtenarioe requi.rement
after their fiYSt year of waizanty of appz�oacimately $2, 000.00 per year, plus the
associated paper ar�d inks which wvuld a�o�uzt to appYnxiunately $2, 000. 00.
v
�,
r�
c,
r
�..
1� •
t
�
�:i�
�
page �ao - PW89-459
As the GIS data is irQutted and exparyded, I for+e�.,ee a r�eed in the future for
a3ditioc�al queYy stations within the athex deparbnents of tiye City. Z'his oould
be avaaiplistied by modifyiriq sctoe of aur existir�g ISri oanpatible equipnent for
an amoimt of les.s than $6, 000. 00.
We are also erivisioriinq as an ev�4�a1 it�n, priiaarily for vi.sual pr+esentation,
oolored data to the Cb�u�cil, I�?A, Plannir�g ar�d Appeals �ions. A color-
gxaphic produoer which wvuld produoe 8 x 10 �lored pt'�atographs of the PC screen
is estimated bet�a�'� $6, 000. 00 to $9, 000. 00.
In o�er to initiate a GIS systea in the City atxi also tA maximiZe the
clevelc�pment of the ba.se map with Anaka Cau�ty, I r+eo�nd that the Co�uzcil
authprize the purd�se of the initial Y�ardware with associated software ar�d
trainit�g this year.
If you clesire ariy additional b�acJagrcxnxi infonaati� oa�► this subject, please let
me la�iow.
JGF/ts
L
2.
3.
4.
5.
b.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
�•
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
u.
22.
Z�.
24.
25.
26.
27.
28.
29.
30.
31.
�f
33.
34.
35.
36.
37.
38.
39.
40.
tl.
42.
43.
44.
�5.
46.
47.
48.
�9.
���4��r
L2 Sectim Map
4xnty Base Ma�._
City Hase trlap
Util ity Iacaticn l�ap
Electri
R�opograpiiic t+lag�.
m�nty and State iiic�way
D�gfneering Drawing�
Ric�t-a�-�Y Ma,�
Easement Ma� -
Traf f ic Co�t
Util ity Irne�tory
ImFxweaent Project Liat,
il�gireering Design
Structure Code�..,
Property Address MaD
property Owrer Mag__
Legal Descripti�
Pl at Map
property l4easurea�ts_._
Paroel Identif ication N�
Plat Name, Lot and B1xM
sectian, 'Ib�nship, NangE
I�Bdl FStdtE TaY
Lal� AtE+f! �41��1�I..__
b�ecial Assessnent�
Zoning l9aD
Assessed Valuaticxi.
Del inquent Ta�oe�
Del ir�quent Util ity Bill�
Tax Forfeit Property
Permit Locatirn�
A,; � ding Locatin►
Building Size ��
Inspection Rea�ras --
Sic�age Pl�+s+� -
Lar�d ose 7Yp�e _________
�bpulation Deta.
Larxiscape Pl �*+�
I�eBevelognn'�t Pl�
Tree Inventory_
8�i1 qj►pes
site P2an�
Aocident Locations._�.
Aocident �pes�
Fire Locators
Response TimerL
liaad Obstructicn/ticsir
Util ity Outages Locate�
Cbmpl air�t Locatia�n$_
• � Z/rf�-y
� � � �
� .� W �
� m b . � w
�
� � a � � � � �
�
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SIIBJECT:
P,irkti
Sirce;s
�IMainten,ance
MEMORANDUM
William W. Burns, City Manager
John G. F1ora,�Public Works Director
November 30, 1989
Procurement of GIS Hardware, Software
And Personnel Training
PW89-448
During July, Anoka County entered into a contract with ESRI, Inc.,
for GIS ARC-Info GIS system. Last week, hardware bids have been
received for the GIS Workstations and Query/Edit Stations.
The Anoka County GIS Task Force has recommended the purchase of the
following GIS Workstation Hardware:
WORKSTATION
Tektronix Model XD88/10
36" x 48" Digitizer Table
Pen Plotter
Total Workstation Cost:
. $ 33,329.50
6,000.00
5.295.00
$ 44.624.50
Fridley can purchase Query/Edit Stations from the MSAS Division of
MNDoT at the discounted price. The Task Force Members recommended
to purchase the following Query/Edit Stations GIS Hardware as
follows:
QUERY/EDIT STATION ,
IBM PS/2-80 (MSAS System after rebate)
150 MB Tape backup
Auto Cad Software and Digitizer
Total Query/Edit Station:
$ 9,843.60
1,692.00
3.142.50
� 14,678.10
Software purchases from ESRI, Inc., for the ARC-Info system are as
follows:
Workstation ARC-Info Software
Query/Edit Station ARC/INFO. Software
Total Software:
$ 15,000.00
5.350.00
$ 20.350.00
1 •
�. � a
�
Page Two - PW89-448
In order to efficiently utilize the system, GIS personnel training
will be instituted at various levels and time elements. The
initial training from ESRI, Inc., for ARC-Info will be as follows:
�ANUARY - 1990 - INTRO. GIS ARC-Info
3 people - 3 days at $800.00 $ 2,400.00
Additional training will be required. Available dates and costs
have not yet been established as ESRI has only recently opened
their local office. Recommend that approximately $17,000 be
reserved for this additional training and unexpected initial
startup supplies and equipment.
The initial total cost for the ARC/INFO. GIS System for Hardware,
Software and Training will be as follows:
�
Workstation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .$ 44,624.50
Query/Edit Station . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14,678.10
Software . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20, 350. 00
Training (Intro GIS) . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,400.00
Additional training, startup
supplies and equipment. . . . . . . . . . 17.000.00
TOTAL GIS SYSTEM: $ 99.052.60
In the MIS Fund the City Council has approved $100,000.00 for the
GIS System Hardware, Software, and Training. If the Council has
no objections or needs no additional information, the Fridley
Engineering Staff will proceed with acquisitions of the above
items.
JGF/ts
MIEMORANDUM
cit� •� s����•� Q}�i�� ot tM City Yan���
��iti Y�I��t�lt� A����• M.t. w1111�f1f W. sYf'1f•
�.i�i•�, ri..•.•�• ssa�:
►�... c��:�s»•ssse
TO: The Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM:
DATE:
William W. Burns, City Manager "�
�
December 7, 1989
SIIBJECT: 1990 Goal Setting Retreat
Once again, I am suggesting to Council that we hold a goal setting
retreat to plan our future priorities for 1990 and 1991. To
fulfill this aim, I have spoken to Lyle Sumek, and have tentatively
identified February 9, 10, and 11, 1990, as dates for the proposed
retreat. I have also asked Bill Hunt to begin talking to
conference facility managers to determine where we might qet the
best price and service for our money.
As we do these things, it is important that I understand Council's
intentions. At Monday night's meeting, I would like to ask you to
let me know your intentions. Do you want to have a goal setting
retreat in 1990, or would you rather not do it this year? If the
answer is ��yes,�� I would propose that the department managers meet
on February 9, 1990, and that Council and I meet with Lyle Sumek
on February 10 and 11, as we did last year.
The purpose of the retreat will be to review the priorities that
we set up last year, and to assess progress that has been made
toward accomplishment of those priorities. I think we would also
be interested in revising our priorities and perhaps expanding the
horizon of our priority setting process. We may want to look at
a multi-year approach, or to widen our perspective to regional as
well as local issues. The LRT issue, the County dispatching issue,
the solid waste disposal issue, and the State fiscal disparities
program might all be issues that we may want to discuss.
Obviously, I feel very strongly that the retreat is worthwhile.
Although it did cost us about $8,500 in 1989, the money was well
worth it. My reasons for wanting to have a retreat include my
belief that it is important for Council to work out a sense of
their own priorities and direction. It is also important for staff
to get a sense of Council's priorities as they proceed to develop
departmental goals and objectives, Capital Improvements
recommendations, and budget recommendations for the coming year.
Honorable Mayor and City Council
December 7, 1989
Page Two
In this respect, it is a qood tool for promoting sound
staff/council relations. It is a communications tool that helps
us to understand each other and to proceed in a more predictable
manner than we might ordinarily proceed.
It is also a good tool for improving public relations. It helps
both council and staff inembers to communicate clearly the City's
priorities, and to show publicly a sense of direction.
Additionally, I think that it helps us to improve our responses to
citizen inquiries. iiaving done the planning that we have done, it
helps us to identify where we are on any particular issue, and when
we plan to address that issue. It also helps us to build
credibility. As we plan and accomplish our goals, we all feel a
heightened sense of self-confidence, and prove to the people that
we are capable of following up on our visions.
With those lofty ideals, I would propose once again that you
support the goal setting retreat. I realize that it is a time
commitment on everyone's part; however, I do believe that for the
reasons stated above, it is well worth the effort.
Thank you for considering my request.
WWB:rsc