HomeMy WebLinkAboutResolution - 4932 - Cooperation Agreement - Housing Authority - Low-Rent Housing, 94 Units - 08_24_1995Resolution No. 4932
August 24, 1995
Item #24
RESOLUTION
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LUBBOCK:
THAT the Mayor of the City of Lubbock BE and is hereby authorized and directed to
execute for and on behalf of the City of Lubbock a Cooperation Agreement between the City of
Lubbock and the Housing Authority of the City of Lubbock and all related documents
authorizing up to an additional 94 units. Said Agreement is attached hereto and incorporated in
this Resolution as if fully set forth h rein audd shall be included in the minutes of the Council.
Passed by the City Council this 2`4th day of
VID R. L?WGSTON,
ATTEST:
.-
Ac,4
Betty .'John6n, City Secretary
TO FORM:
Linda L. Cha hales, Assistant City Attorney
:dplccdms\LJ1A2.Res
September 7, 1993
10
City Council Meeting
Item #24 - August 24, 1995
Page 1
Consider a resolution authorizing the Mayor to execute a cooperation agreement
between the Lubbock Housing Authority and the City of Lubbock involving 1,500
units of low rent housing.
Oscar Sharpe: Good afternoon. I'm back again to answer any more questions after you
studied the information submitted to the City Manager's office. If you
have any more questions to more or less clarify why we need additional
housing.
Langston: Do you have a copy of the resolution, Mr. Sharpe, that authorizes you to
seek 1,500 units of low-income housing?
Sharpe: No, I don't
Langston: Did your board pass such a resolution?
Sharpe: They passed a resolution for us to put in for additional applications for
additional housing. That's automatic, once that reaches... it is something
that we've done just automatically; we haven't had board approval before
to seek that.
Langston: So your comments last time were incorrect that you had such a resolution?
Sharpe: No, they weren't incorrect. That isn't what you asked me. You asked did
I have any permission for development. And that's what I had, permission
for development.
Langston: Okay.
Neugebauer: Mr. Sharpe, when you were here last week, I believe you said, and maybe
it was in the back up material, but you are currently authorized for how
many homes?
Sharpe: 700.
Neugebauer: You're currently lacking 600-what? Do you know what that number is?
Sharpe: You mean in housing needs?
Neugebauer: No, I think the number of houses that you're currently using for payment in
lieu of taxes, I don't think you're using your full allocation at this time. Is
that correct?
City Council Meeting
Item #24 - August 24, 1995
Page 2
Sharpe: We are at about that right now. The development application I put in is 92
units; that would take us over.
Neugebauer: How much over would it take you?
Sharpe: It would take us approximately 50 to 60 over.
Ince: Mr. Sharpe, correct me if I'm wrong, but the question was asked, of the
700 houses how many houses remain or you have on inventory that could
be utilized for housing, and I thought the number was 64.
Sharpe: 61. I called and 61 are the ones in our low -rent housing program.
Ince: 61? Explain that to me so I'll understand what you mean by that.
Sharpe: Normally we have a normal vacancy rates. We have turn over and
everything else. The 60 are the ones that we have trouble with in
Greenfair. By today's standards, HUD wouldn't allow us to build housing
there any more. It's not close to housing, not close to shopping areas, it
isn't close to hospitals, and so we wouldn't be allowed to build there at this
time. So we're having problems renting over there. Plus the crime areas;
it's a high crime area and the people don't feel safe there.
Ince: So of the 700--and I may not be using the right verbiage --but of the 700
allocated at this time, 61 of them are vacant?
Sharpe: Yes.
Ince: So you do have 700 units in inventory.
Sharpe: Close to 700.
Ince: Approximately 700. How many units do you have in inventory?
Sharpe: Approximately 672.
Ince: 672 in inventory? That's including Greenfair?
Sharpe: Yes, it is.
Ince: Of the 61 units of the 672 units that you have that are vacant currently,
those are all in Greenfair?
City Council Meeting
Item 924 - August 24, 1995
Page 3
Sharpe: The majority of them are. Now we do have ongoing vacancies where they
move out and we fill them right away. These 61 are...
Ince: How many would you estimate are Greenfair vacancies?
Sharpe: 61. It is all 61 in Greenfair... Approximately 4 project -wide. Now it
changes daily really.
Ince: I understand that. So of 700 allocation that you have, you would have
about 28 to bring it up to 700 that you don't even have in inventory?
Sharpe: Yes.
Ince: And you're asking for 92, is that correct?
Sharpe: We're asking for an additional 92 in the application.
Cooke: 94. It's 94 rather than 92,
Langston: When is your grant deadline?
Sharpe: The grant deadline has passed, but when the reviewers review the
application and there is something missing, they give us a certain amount of
time to submit that information. We sent it up there saying that we would
come before the City Council to get approval for additional housing. So at
the time the reviewers review this application, they send a letter saying this
is what they need.
Langston: Do you have a particular grant document that you can point to that shows
us that the deadline has passed?
Sharpe: I have the notice of funding.... yes, I do have it.
Langston: Can you show that to our staff, please sir?
Sharpe: Yes, I can.
Langston: Would you'do that, please sir?
Sharpe: Well, I don't have it with me. I submitted all of the information that your
staff repeatedly asked, and they didn't ask for that. So I didn't think I
would need any additional information.
City Council Meeting
Item #24 - August 24, 1995
Page 4
Ince: Mr. Sharpe, when you came before us two weeks ago, had that deadline
for that grant document already passed?
Sharpe: Yes, it had.
Ince: So you didn't know that you had to take care of this particular part with
the Council when you submitted that application?
Sharpe: No, we didn't have that much time.
Ince: The question is, did you know that you had to submit that to the Council?
Seems like you submitted an application grant with knowledge the Council
had to participate in this. The deadline passed, then you came to the
Council for approval after the deadline is passed. Is that not correct?
Sharpe: ...It was postponed. I applied for it in time, and I made it known through
the Health Department that I did need to get in there, but it was postponed
until another date.
Ince: And who postponed that?
Sharpe: It was Doug Goodman's office.
Langston: So it is the City staffs fault that it wasn't acted upon before the deadline?
Is that your position?
Sharpe: That is my position.
Patterson: My concern, as I mentioned in work session, is that we don't do anything
to inhibit an opportunity for additional dwellings in this city. I see a
miscommunication problem that we need to sit down and work out so we
can work this thing for the betterment of our citizens, that's what's
important. That is the way I see it myself, personally.
Ince: Miscommunication or lack thereof.
Neugebauer: Mr. Goodman, what is your response to Mr. Sharpe's comment that we
delayed that grant going to Council?
Goodman: Mr. Sharpe called me and asked me to get this on the Council agenda. I
said I was going out of town, if he would bring it over to the staff, we
would get it on the agenda. I think what he is referring to is the delay from
the last time, tabling it, because once you brought the information to us, we
City Council Meeting
Item 924 - August 24, 1995
Page 5
got it on the agenda at the next agenda meeting. The agenda meeting was
on Wednesday to set the agenda for the Council meetings. When Mr.
Sharpe brought it to me, or called me on it, the information, the agenda
meeting had occurred. It was already passed the deadline for getting
something on the Council agenda. I told him that it could not be brought
on the next one because the agenda meeting had already been held, we had
already had the agenda meeting, the agenda was set.
Patterson: What date was that, Mr. Goodman? Approximately what date was that?
Goodman: It would have been not last Council meeting, but the Council meeting
before that, it was Wednesday before that. We have an agenda meeting at
which the Council agenda is set on Wednesday morning. That is where all
items are brought forward; staff and everyone brings it on Wednesday
morning. Mr. Sharpe called me on Wednesday afternoon to say he had an
item that he would like to get on the Council agenda. I pointed out to him
that we had already set the agenda; Mr. Sharpe is aware of our agenda, the
way we set it, that I would get it on at the next possible moment if he
would bring it to me. He brought me the information and we got it on the
next Council agenda.
Langston: When was the grant deadline? Surely someone knows when the grant
deadline was.
Sharpe: The grant deadline was, I think, July 15, I believe. I would have to get the
information to you or your staff.
Langston: Ms. Forte', have we asked for the grant application deadline? In your
investigation, did you ask for the grant application deadline?
Forte': I have requested several pieces of information, of which I received all of
them except the audit and the grant application stating the deadline. Is that
not correct, Mr. Sharpe?
Sharpe: No, there would be no reason for me not to give it to you when you asked
for it because we did have it. In fact, I went upstairs to the grants writers,
and I think I gave you the document that told you about the grant. So it
would have the grant deadline there. The question was when will we have
to have the final notice whether we had the additional housing. That was
the question that you and I discussed.
Langston: Ms. Forte', would you give us the status of your investigation at this point?
Thank you, Mr. Sharpe.
City Council Meeting
Item 924 - August 24, 1995
Page 6
Forte': The City staff has requested several pieces of information from the office of
the Housing Authority. Those include a review of HUD documents, of
their response to the findings from the HUD review; we received a
clearance of certain HUD findings from the Housing Authority. We have
requested the audit and management letter from the Housing Authority, of
which I have received the management letter but not the physical audit or
the numerical portion. Mr. Sharpe has informed me that he does not have
that to release it to me, but that it will be on the September 12 board
meeting at 12:00 noon and that at that time I may have a copy of it so that
we may finalize our research. This information has been turned over to our
legal staff as well as our internal auditor; he will be looking at the financial
status. The last piece of information is, at the last Council meeting we had
inquired as to when the deadline was that you had to make a decision, if
you had to make it now, and Mr. Sharpe told you he thought it was in
September. I asked for that piece of information and did not receive it.
Additionally, I requested a copy, in reference to the 1,500 units total that
they were asking for at the meeting. He provided me a resolution that their
board had approved for 100 units, and he initially provided my minutes
where he had a minute order from his board to proceed negotiations with
the City to work on the Reese/Reuse effort and to try to talk with our
Council on 400 units in that vicinity.
Langston: And you found no resolution that authorized him to move forward on
1,500 units, is that correct?
Forte': That's correct.
Ince: Ms. Forte', in financial circles, isn't it really kind of unusual to have a letter
to management from the auditor and not have the auditor? Those usually
come together, or actually after the audit. So I don't understand.
Forte': Typically those would come together at the same time. There are certain
infractions that occurred in this management letter, however, that, should
those be of material in nature, the auditors will inform management
immediately so that they can address them. There were serious problems,
and Mr. Sharpe has tried to address those instead of waiting, it is almost a
year later, if they want until then, then management is delayed in fixing
them. Since there were several financial and management problems, I
believe that is why the auditors released that so that the fiscal problems
could be addressed early on. I cannot state as to why there is a delay in the
financial portion or the numerical portion of the audit.
City Council Meeting
Item #24 - August 24, 1995
Page 7
Ince: What you're saying is that normally they come together?
Forte': Normally, they do come together.
Ince: You're saying that this time the management letter went out earlier because
there were some things that they felt like they needed to address before the
actual audit came out?
Forte': That is correct. And I believe that they are working on those.
Cooke: Mr. Mayor, I would like to move that we table this issue until staff has
been able to get the research done.
Langston: I have a motion by Councilman Cooke. Do I have a second?
Neugebauer: I thought it was already tabled. Is it already tabled? It was tabled last
time. Is the motion to take it off the table?
Ross: It's on the table.
Cooke: The bottom line is I don't want to discuss the thing, however it needs to
be, I just don't want to take any action on this at all until we have all the
information put together.
Langston: Mr. Skibell?
Irvin Skibell: I'm Irvin Skibell and the Chairman of the Housing Board, and I think that
we have a problem of communication with the Housing Authority and the
City Council, but I don't think that materially affects what we're trying to
do today. And I think we should try to resolve our problems and to get a
cooperative nature. The application for 700 of the PILOTS (payment in
lieu of taxes) has been granted previously. We made application for
additional housing through HUD for 94 units. If we're successful in getting
these, we will be able to offer decent housing to 94 additional families that
we can't offer to today, but this will exceed our 700 that have been granted
in the past. Now, the 1,500 as requested would probably take us to year
2005 according to our projections. We don't know when funds will be
available from HUD. The current posture of HUD that it is going to be
more difficult to get funds in the future. Now, if the Council doesn't see
fit to approve 1,500 today, I would ask that you would at least approve
enough so that, if we were successful in getting this grant, we've got 94
more units in our inventory that we can help 94 more families. I would ask
that it not be tabled any further. It may be you could alter it to reduce the
City Council Meeting
Item #24 - August 24, 1995
Page 8
amount, but please give us the ability we have. As far as the auditor's
report, the auditors made a preliminary report to the committee. We have
not received the final audit from the auditors. We have a difficult problem
with the financial officer, who is no longer there, has created a horrendous
situation. He was depended on to give his service and credence to the
financial picture, and it turns out that he was totally ineffective, and the
auditors have been trying to reconstruct the damage that he has done.
Langston: Mr. Skibell, what specifically did the financial officer bring to the attention
of the board with respect to certain allegations that were made with regard
to the management of the Lubbock Housing Authority?
Skibell: I can give you that if you would like it as a public record. However, I think
it inadvisable in that there is a lawsuit pending that has been filed.
Langston: Isn't it true, Mr. Skibell, that that particular financial officer was fired by
the management after he reported, after it was reported that there were
certain actions that management was taken that were inappropriate?
Skibell: This was coincidental to his firing, Mr. Mayor. He was fired when HUD
called and said they were going to cut off funding because they hadn't
gotten certain reports that we thought he had sent it.
Langston: So there is some problem, though, with the financial affairs at Lubbock
Housing Authority at this time?
Skibell: From the preliminary report, and I can only give you the preliminary report
results, no, there aren't.
Sitton: Irvin, I have a question along those lines. Several people have asked me
that how is it that Lubbock Housing Authority can pay $400,000 for a
building. Do they have that much money in their budget? Being new on
the Council and not understanding it probably as much as I should, could
you address maybe just the budget for Lubbock Housing Authority?
Skibell: Let me give you a little background, if I may. When all of the
commissioners went on the board of the Housing Authority, we were
totally green. We went to orientation. In the orientation, they stressed to
us that HUD funds were not going to be forthcoming in the future, that
these funds were going to dwindle and they said that all the housing
authorities, if they were to be effective, would have to take an
entrepreneurial approach, that they would have to generate the funds for
the future. This was part of the project in acquiring the building that we're
City Council Meeting
Item #24 - August 24, 1995
Page 9
in currently. We were terribly overcrowded in our old facility. People
were using closets for offices. And we acquired this building at less than
$10 a foot. We acquired it for less than we could construct adequate
housing for us. Now, this building is larger than our current needs, and we
are trying to lease this and have been successful. We're making modest
leases with people who are doing a civic function. We are making
competitive leases, like with the annex, and through the leases and HUD
funds that have been granted us, we're able to acquire and maintain the
building.
Cooke: We've discussed about just enough units being authorized to be able to
complete this grant. We discussed that, and I think we were considering
that approach during work session, but I haven't heard that number. All
I've heard is about this and about that. Nobody has given us a number.
Skibell: Mr. Sharpe has a problem in giving you a fixed number because the
vacancies change day to day. Some move in, some move out. There are
basically 61 units at Greenfair that stay empty. Nobody wants to live in
Greenfair. If you would go over and look at Greenfair, you would
understand why. I can't blame anyone for not wanting to live there. So,
those 61 units that are vacant pretty well stay a stable number. So, we
have asked for funding for 94 units, so in round figures, I would say an
additional 100 units would get us by for the immediate future. We have to
by HUD's mandate, we have the HOPE1 project to sell homes in Cherry
Point. Before we can do that, we have to have replacement homes for
those. Well, you have a few number there in limbo. So, I would say a
figure that would carry us for the next year would be 200. That's kind of
an outside figure. But that also means that in 1997 somebody is going to
have to come back and make this same request.
Patterson: That's my concern, Mr. Mayor and Council, as I mentioned in work
session. Because of the number of calls I receive from the neighborhood
for places to live. The 94 is a fair estimate of what people can help. I
don't work for the Lubbock Housing Authority. I direct people there
when they are suffering for a comfortable place to live. It is one thing to
talk about it, but it is another thing to be there when they are knocking on
your door, "where am I gonna live at?" That's why I'm concerned. Now,
if we miss this opportunity, in my position, we are going to actually hurt
citizens out there who need a clean, decent place in which to live. So, none
of us would want to participate in the 61 vacant places at Greenfair. I'm
out there in that `hood. I see it, people are upset, they got nowhere to go.
Now, what are we gonna do? I don't want, Mr. Mayor, us to lose out on
City Council Meeting
Item #24 - August 24, 1995
Page 10
an opportunity that we could help somebody. That is my concern, I don't
want to lose that.
Cooke: TJ, that's what I'm trying to pin down. As we've discussed before, we've
all got the same concerns, that's why we're carrying on this long.
Patterson: But, if we table, are we going to lose something?
Cooke: Well, I don't mind withdrawing that, but we also don't have a comfort
level with what's going on. There are too many unanswered questions. In
terms of this body approving a blanket round number of units, as opposed
to exact specific number of units, whether it's 13 or 9 or 27, that will cover
this grant application, I don't think there is much chance at all that we're
going to approve anything, even I unit more than what it would take just
to cover this grant application. And I'm not sure there's enough comfort
level to do that.
Skibell: Let me bring up one other point. We never know when HUD will come up
with availability of funds that we can make another application. Certainly
94 units will not take care of our waiting list.
Langston: Mr. Skibell, I appreciate what you are saying, and I appreciate what Mr.
Patterson has said about the need for affordable housing in this community,
but last Council meeting, two weeks ago, we asked for some information.
The representation was made to us that the deadline was some time in
September. Our staff asked for the grant document to show us when the
deadline was, and I would think that the very simplest thing in providing us
with the grant document could have been provided. Now, I'm a little bit
concerned that information that we request is not being produced.
Skibell: I don't blame you, Mr. Mayor. And I think that you as Mayor and the City
Council have a right to all of this information. I say there has been a
miscommunication, and I would say that the spirit of cooperation has been
lacking on both sides. But, putting that aside today, that is a problem that
needs to be remedied in the near future, starting tomorrow.
Patterson: What about right now?
Skibell: Or right now. But don't hamstring our ability to acquire these units
because of our miscommunication with each other.
Sitton: Mr. Skibell, if you don't mind, I'd like to go back to the building because,
in my own mind, I want to be able to justify how we pay $400,000 for a
City Council Meeting
Item #24 - August 24, 1995
Page 11
building. First of all, did your present board draft a resolution to acquire
that building or was it the previous board?
Skibell: The previous board drafted the resolution to buy the building. Our current
board ratified that resolution.
Langston: Mr. Skibell, would you present us with copies of those resolutions, please
sir?
Skibell: If you would please give me written request for whatever you want, I will
do my best.
Langston: Is there some confusion about what my request is? I want the resolutions
that authorized the purchase of the First Federal Building. If you want me
to put it in writing, I'll be happy to put it in writing.
Skibell: You also wanted a copy of the document for bidding this 94 units. So, if
you don't mind, if you would put it in writing, I will do my utmost to see
that it is placed in your hands expediently.
Sitton: What is our net outlay every month to the rent of that building, exclusive of
our renters? Do we know that? I'm just trying to get a handle on what our
operations are.
Cooke: Debt service?
Sitton: Yes.
Skibell: I believe, and I don't have these figures right at the top of my head, I
believe the debt service is about $4,500 a month.
Sitton: What is our incoming rent for renters, do we know that?
Skibell: I don't know that because that figure changes on a daily basis. United
Bank has just made a lease to take the banking facilities there. The sale of
Hub Homes was $300,000 and that will provide about $140,000 toward
the purchase of this building that will immediately reduce the debt. There
are funds in the channel and by this, they have been approved but they
haven't been funded that can go toward the elimination of the debt.
Sitton: From HUD, you mean?
Skibell: Yes.
City Council Meeting
Item #24 - August 24, 1995
Page 12
Sitton: And do we think that is a prudent expense of money?
Skibell: Ms. Sitton, let me say this to you. The commissioners of the Housing
Authority have spent days, hours, and months agonizing over should that
building have been purchased? should it not be purchased? is it a good
thing? is it a bad thing? We agonized. To the best of our estimation, the
purchase of the building was a good thing. We had a meeting at the
Housing Authority with the Mayor, trying to explain what our thinking was
with the purchase of the building. Personally, I'd like to see that be down
in history. The building is bought.
Neugebauer: Mr. Mayor, I'd like to make a motion that we authorize 94, whatever
that's called, payment in lieu of taxes (PILOT), contingent upon this grant
being favorably approved.
Patterson: Do we have to take it off the table, Mr. Mayor.
Neugebauer: Mr. Ross says it's on the table. So my motion is that we would approve up
to 94 units for purchase, and that would be subject to this grant being
approved, the current one being submitted to HUD, to it being approved
and that we continue the dialogue and the things that the Council is
requesting to get comfortable with, the overall CHAS plan and how the
Housing Authority interfaces and the part it plays in that. Should that
grant not be granted, then those 94 units would not be authorized and
would be held at the current level of 700, and with the caveat that the
Mayor or staff immediately forward a letter to the Chairman of that and
request additional information which may or may not have been, that have
been indicated that they get the further documentation to this request.
Patterson: Mr. Mayor, I would like to second that motion also, with another invite.
Let's go visit the Housing Authority and see what they're doing, on a
personal basis. Let's look and see what's there.
Cooke: I've been.
Patterson: I know you have. We all have not been. So, I second that motion with
eager, Mr. Mayor.
Ince: I would like to make a comment. I have agonized, I think like all of these
council people have, on this situation. I will just make a personal
observation, it's a personal opinion of mine. I feel like I have been danced
on by the Housing Authority, and I'm not referring to you Mr. Skibell. But
City Council Meeting
Item #24 - August 24, 1995
Page 13
I have asked some direct questions and I have gotten indirect answers.
That upsets me. We have the obligation to make decisions and it is
incumbent upon people who come before this body to be sure to give us all
the facts that they can and all the facts that we can ask for because we just
cannot continue to roll over this situation and another situation. So, I think
it makes this body a little aggravated when we don't get those facts when
we ask for them. But, along with this line of thinking, I don't think that
because I'm upset over this situation I can penalize people who legitimately
need housing. And I'm going to support Mr. Neugebauer's
recommendation. I, too, would like to get this resolved.
Skibell: As I say, I don't disagree with you, I think we've had a communications
problem. I think a lot of our problems have stemmed from the building,
quote, the building. I think the commissioners on the Housing Authority
have not done an adequate job in running the Housing Authority for having
to tackle the building, should we buy? should we not buy? who are we
going to rent to? who are we not going to rent? But that's the Housing
Authority's problem to take care of , and I pledge to you and the City
Council my total cooperation and I will do whatever I can to bridge this
communication and confidence level gap so that you have a level of
comfort with the Housing Authority and the work we're trying to do.
Langston: Thank you, Mr. Skibell. Let me say this, the recommendation of the staff
started out this morning with the recommendation to pull this from the
agenda because insufficient information had been supplied to this Council
after a direct request from this Council and after meetings that Ms. Forte'
had had with the management of Lubbock Housing Authority, and they did
not think that they had received sufficient answers for sufficient
information. This is not a small matter, and I understand the needs for
housing, but I also understand the need for accountability, and I certainly
have not been satisfied, and so I will be voting nay on this proposition.
Cooke: I will be voting nay also. It goes back in terms of an exact number that it
would take. If there is an inventory, I don't know what it is. They don't
need 94 to fill this application. If we can get it tied down to where we
knew we would have some response and have further dialogue in the near
future, I could vote for a stronger number if we could get one, but I will be
voting nay.
Patterson: But I beg you to reconsider. I think it is important that we do this,
Council.
Cooke: I'm not saying we don't do it, I'm just saying we don't have to do 94.
City Council Meeting
Item #24 - August 24, 1995
Page 14
Patterson: If there was a time in Lubbock....
Neugebauer: I think the Mayor is exactly right. I think accountability is very important.
I think what we have, I can assure you that if you have ever done business
with HUD is that if that audit report comes back unfavorable and if they
are not in compliance with the criteria, they will not be given this grant. I
feel assured of that. As to improprieties that may or may not be happening
over there, I think we have installed a board of directors that that is their
responsibility to review that audit, and I have a lot of confidence in the
people who are currently on that board. I know a lot of them very well. If
there are some improprieties in place over there, that they will take the
necessary actions to take care of that. I just have a problem. That Housing
Authority is most likely going to be operating in the future. If they have
management problems or if they have certain things going on over there,
those will be resolved. I think the window of opportunity brings for
affordable housing into our community may be fewer and fewer, and so my
vote today is not to say the Housing Authority is doing a good job or not
doing a good job or whether there are improprieties, but that I know for a
fact that there is a need for affordable housing in Lubbock, Texas. I don't
want to be a part of the problem of not being able to deliver that. If we've
got some administrative and some personnel problems or whatever it is, the
Mayor has the ability to remove that entire board and appoint a new one.
So I think there's the accountability and safeguards in place. I'm just
fearful that there isn't going to be a lot of housing money in the future.
Cooke: It is a good board and it's a very talented board. My only point is, and I
know what you're saying is right, but my only point is that if they only
need 52, that's all I want to approve.
Neugebauer: I said up to 94. I think we can leave that up to the staff to...
Cooke: If you'll amend that.
Neugebauer: I think that's what I said, up to 94.
Langston: For clarification, the motion is to authorize up to 94 additional units.
Neugebauer: With a determination of what the gap is, and that could administratively
cap that at the level needed to fulfill that grant application if it's approved.
Cooke: And that authorization is only for this grant whose deadline passed July 15
or August 15, whatever date that was.
City Council Meeting
Item #24 - August 24, 1995
Page 15
Ince: I see a very good attempt to try to compromise the situation, and I
appreciate that. I wonder by asking our staff to verify the need if we aren't
actually taking the authority of the Housing board because that is their
goal. But I won't object to that because I think it is incumbent that we do
something. Again, I will reiterate my earlier remarks that I'm not happy, I
want this thing resolved, I want some answers, some factual answers, but
because I'm mad I don't want the victims to be people who need housing
because we don't have a communication network here that works. If we
don't go forward, the victim is the people who need housing out there.
Langston: The problem is that we don't know that; that's the problem. We don't
know what the situation is and we're voting in the dark, and whenever
you're voting in the dark, you're making a big mistake in my view. The
information that we have requested has been very reasonable. I don't think
that there was any question about the information we want. I agree that
there has been a communication problem, but I don't believe that it has
been on the part of the City staff. So, to that extent, my vote will remain
nay.
Neugebauer: Call for the question, Mayor.
Langston: There has been a request for the question to be called. Without objection.
Hernandez: Mr. Mayor, I do object. I have been very quiet throughout this because I
said my piece during work session, but I do want to reiterate a couple of
points. The issue here is very simple to me, it is adequate affordable
housing versus our fiduciary duty as Council members. We do have a
fiduciary duty simply because of the relationship that we do have with the
Lubbock Housing Authority and also because of the many contracts that
we have with the Lubbock Housing Authority, so I think that we would be
somewhat remiss in our fiduciary duty to not look into these matters. I
want to make it clear that that's where I'm coming from. However, I
would have to agree with Councilman Ince and disagree with the Mayor
that the need is there. I see the need just as Councilman Patterson. He
gets the same number of phone calls that I do. The need is there, so we
have to fill the gap, but I want to make it very clear to the Housing
Authority, as I think has already been done, that this time we'll let it slide
by. Next time, I know personally that I will not, because unless we do
have a cooperative effort in order to resolve all of these issues, then the
confidence level, the trust level is not there. Really, that's what we're
trying to overcome. I would make one final point and that if the Mayor is
that dissatisfied with what's going on at the Housing Authority, either
City Council Meeting
Item #24 - August 24, 1995
Page 16
currently or after the staff s review, he does have the authority, and I want
to make this real clear too, he solely has the authority, is my understanding,
to appoint that entire board or clean the slate and start anew with a brand
new one. I think that is something that we all need to take into account.
So, I will be voting for this particular motion today.
Sitton: Mr. Sharpe, would you answer the question for me, please, as to why our
staff didn't get the information that they requested.
Sharpe: [inaudible --Sharpe was speaking from audience rather than lectern]
Everything that was requested, I gave. The only thing that we didn't have
was the audit, and that was beyond my control. Everything else was given.
I don't know about this covert action and all this. I have invited repeatedly
the Council persons to come in and visit us and see what we do. We don't
have any hidden agenda.... Everything that they have ever asked us to give
to them, we supplied. I would like them to be more specific. They asked
about the deadlines. They did get the deadlines. The thing that they didn't
get was when they would need the agreement from the City Council. I
don't know when they're going to need it, but they usually review it, then
they call us. I said that repeatedly to the Mayor, and he kept disregarding
what I was saying. We have to wait until the reviewer sees what we have
done.
Patterson: Come to the mike, Mr. Sharpe.
Cooke: So what is the deadline?
Langston: Tell us, what is the deadline?
Sharpe: As I just said, we have to wait until the reviewer calls us, then when the
reviewer sends us the list that this is missing from your packet, then the
give us that they want to have it in 10 days.
Cooke: What was the original deadline?
Sharpe: The original deadline was July 15... well, the deadline for the application
was July 15 or August 15.
Cooke: July 15 or August 15?
Langston: Do you not have a copy of the grant request for application document?
Sharpe: Yes, I gave that to the City Manager's office.
City Council Meeting
Item #24 - August 24, 1995
Page 17
Langston: Doesn't that have a deadline on it?
Sharpe: It doesn't have the dead .... you asked me, Mr. Mayor, for the deadline that
we have to know whether or not we are going to have the agreement from
the City. That's what you asked me, you didn't ask me for the deadline.
Why wouldn't I be able to tell you that.
Langston: Fine, Mr. Sharpe. Fine.
Cooke: Call for the question.
Langston: The question has been called. Any further discussion on this item? Ms.
Ward, did you have some discussion?
Neugebauer: Mr. Mayor, I think the question has been called. We would have to take a
vote to see if we want to call for the question.
Langston: Is there a request for a vote on the question?
Neugebauer: Yes, sir.
Langston: Okay, the question, the issue before the Council is to shut off debate, and I
would call for that vote. All in favor, respond by saying aye. All opposed
by nay.
[vote was 3 ayes to 4 nays]
Langston: Ms. Ward?
Ms. Ward: I'm sorry. I'm not trying to be on any kind of a witch hunt, I've never
intended to be. My original concern was with the $434,000 being spent for
the building. In the last two weeks, it has extended to a lot more issues
than that. The 200-page report that I have seen from HUD that was
completed about a year and a half ago raised extensive questions about
poor management, some accounting practices, a lot of other things. I've
seen the last annual audit; I've seen the public housing management
assessment survey. I've also heard from a lot of people, some willing to tell
me who they are but would not want it to go any further than that. I have
also talked several times to HUD officials in Fort Worth who, quite
frankly, don't seem to have a knowledge of the current compliance with
some of these things. My concern is also with people that may be waiting
on lists for years to get public housing. The last count I had from some
City Council Meeting
Item #24 - August 24, 1995
Page 18
people who should know what there is was about 100 vacancies and 60
more in Section 8 housing, and that's one part of this that I don't think has
been addressed. I won't go into all of the allegations I've heard; it would
take you entirely too long to hear them to start with. The Section 8
housing is a compromise to some of this that seems to be the future
direction of this. If you're not familiar with it, it is a voucher type program
in which property owners maintain and furnish the housing and the
Housing Authority subsidizes part of the rent, is the simplest explanation I
know of. I also understand that there, could be some better ways of
keeping these maintained through something other than forced account
labor. I will be happy to work with staff on whatever. I didn't want to get
off into a lot of these types of things. Another question that I don't know
the answer to, but I know the Lubbock Housing Authority owns at least
four other apartment complexes that are not directly under HUD --Green
Gables, Courtyard, a couple of others --and my question might also include
how many of those are vacant. I guess I just see so many problems that at
least I have not seen any answers to, that it raises a lot of concerns with me
if we're not spending on things other than housing, and then, and I
understood that the Housing Authority Board had not even seen the 200-
page HUD report as of a week ago. So, I don't understand how we can
comply and make changes unless the board is watching a little bit closer
what is happening. And it has nothing to do with my not wanting people to
have houses; I'm as sympathetic, in fact, I passed on a letter to you from a
tenant in one of the public housing units today. Those are just some of my
concerns, and I appreciate you listening.
Sitton: And your conversation with the HUD office in Fort Worth was what?
Ward: I talked to several people there. It seems that each department deals with a
different grant and the contact person on the 200-page report, her
supervisor is the one I talked to most recently, who said they would love to
know some more first-hand information of what is happening currently and
would I please send them a copy of whatever I find out, that they were not
able to come do a hands-on look. You have asked about the building, I
have talked to the people there in the department who had authorized
purchase of the building. They also had not been out there to look. I
realize maybe they're short handed. I understand this window of
opportunity, and I don't want to jeopardize future housing either, but I'm
sure that you all have a handle yet on what the actual inventory is or why
we couldn't go more to this Section 8 type housing, which takes out a lot
of the problems that I'm seeing inherent in a lot of the reports, which
would be more of a direct voucher -type system and I think would lessen
City Council Meeting
Item 924 - August 24, 1995
Page 19
the problems and increase the efficiency and probably the overall cost. So,
that's just another angle to come at it.
Patterson: Will you comment, Mr. Sharpe?
Sharpe: All this time when Ms. Ward has been making, let's say these things, there
have been a lot of different facts associated with her remarks, yet she has
yet to come and ask us to show her this or to give her this information, she
has yet to do that, I have just seen her on television. As far as the Section
8, all she had to do is ask me. I'm aware of ...[inaudible]... They aren't'
vacancies at all. As far as the 20 pages, it wasn't 200 pages; it was 62
pages of findings and that happened two years ago. We were cleared of it
and it happened before my administration. So that can't be blamed on me
as something that we're doing; we didn't do it. As far as HUD saying that
they didn't have ... [inaudible] ... Just last week, we had 2 HUD
representatives reviewing some of our programs, so I don't know where
that came from. So, to me it seems like there is a lot of misinformation.
And I just want to clear that fact up.
Ms. Ward: When did Mr. Sharpe take over as director?
Sharpe: ...1962, I need 1996.
Ms. Ward: The 200-page report was February, the Mayor received it February 2,
1994. I realize it went back long before.
Sharpe: It happened December 14, 1993
Langston: State your name.
Kenneth Burns: My name is Kenneth Burns, I'm the pastor of Divine Love Baptist
Church here in Lubbock, Texas. I want you to know I have respect for
everybody on the Council and for you, Mr. Mayor. I think we're
overlooking the point. The point is, we understand that there seem to be
some problems at the Housing Authority, but if there business is not in
correct order, they won't get this grant anyway. We need to look past all
of that and look at the people that need a place to stay. I have people in
my church that have been trying to get on housing for over 2 years. We
can sit here today and argue about stuff that we can let the state handle
instead of trying to help those that need help. We need to leave our
personal feelings out of this. What we need to do is get to the business; the
business is helping folks that need help. If we're not going to help folks,
we're in the wrong position.
City Council Meeting
Item #24 - August 24, 1995
Page 20
Sitton: With all due respect, I think we all want to help people. I think where
we're sitting is that we're held responsible for the financial records, for
everything; we're just asking, we just want to make sure that we can
defend that position. There isn't a soul up here that doesn't want to
provide low income housing for people less fortunate that we are. Please
don't misconstrue that. This Council has said that from the beginning. We
have very empathic hearts. What we are saying is that we're being held
responsible and accountable for the financial operations of that
organization and we're just asking some questions.
Ince: I'm not going to take responsibility for being responsible for the finances of
that organization. I don't think legally we're held responsible to that
degree that you're talking about. Correct me if I'm wrong, Mr. Ross.
Ross: As I indicated in work session, the Housing Authority is a separate entity.
The only responsibility the Council has is the oversight of the grants that
you sign off on. To the extent that you do that, you have some
responsibility.
Langston: All right, without objection, I will call for the question. All in favor,
respond by saying aye. All opposed, by nay. 6-1 in favor of the
proposition. [Mayor Langston voted nay.]
Ross: Could I clarify something with the Council? I understand that we are to
change the basic contract to read "up to 94 units" rather than 1,500; is that
the intent?
Langston: Yes.
Ross: That will be done.
City Council Meeting
Item #30 - August 10, 1995
Page 1
Oscar Sharpe: Good afternoon, I am coming here to ask for an additional 800
units on our payment in lieu of taxes agreement. We are doing this,
we're looking into the future. And as it stands now we're getting
alot of HUD awards for family unification, for homelessness, for
address families putting them together and we want to put together
a package of housing for, first of all, unification. We have 50
section 8 certificates for family unification and we don't have any
housing for them. Family unification is bringing families together
that have been separated by substance abuse, by crime, or by just
virtue of being in poverty. Then the homelessness, well we know
how critical that's getting. We have coming into the housing
authority daily, with children, with families, even men with
families are coming in there and don't have any place to stay and
we don't have any place to put them. And then we have the senior
citizens. We have senior citizens that last time we opened up with
our little 48 units, we had them come from all over the country, all
over this part of the country to get housing, and we didn't have
anything for them, and no place anywhere else. Some of the
seniors got sick waiting for us to see if they were going to have
their chance. So that's what I'm proposing. I'm proposing for us to
get in here and try and help some of these people and do what we
are suppose to do. Now the demeanor of HUD is a cutback on
subsidies and monies, and that's what they're doing, so we have to
take a tone of entrepreneurship. So on these houses some say it's
low income, it's going to be affordable housing. Where we can
make more off of the money, off of the rents, that we have been
now. We would still be covering our obligation of low rent, but
then we will be encompassing all these other different people that
need housing. Are there any questions?
Ince: Sure.
Sharpe: Yes.
Ince: Back in 1993, I believe about this time of year, we entered into a
similar agreement for 700 housing units. Of that 700 units how
many are being occupied or utilized at this point?
City Council Meeting
Item #30 - August 10,1995
Page 2
Sharpe:
All but approximately 35.
Ince:
So, so...
Sharpe:
I say 35...
Ince:
So 665 of those units are now are now being occupied?
Sharpe:
For the most part, only the variance in that would be, I haven't the
latest figures on Greenfair, but we have used up all other units also.
Ince:
But, but it would be appropriate to say at least 600 of those 700
units are occupied and continue to be occupied
Sharpe:
Yes.
Langston:
How much money are we talking about, Oscar?
Sharpe:
This over a period of five to ten years brewing. As we get grants
and development grants, so sometimes it could be maybe 5 million,
10 million. Now, what do we have right now as we're waiting for
Cherry Point. That will be one more housing so it won't add to list
here of the original 700 that will be included in the 700 that's 12
million dollars that we hope to be getting very shortly. So it will be
over a period of years.
Ince:
Now this does not include Cherry Point one for one, it that correct?
Sharpe:
No.
Ince:
I mean it's not in the 700 that we have?
Sharpe:
No.
Sitton:
Oscar, I'm curious for my own information why if the need is so
great are those remaining homes not being occupied presently?
City Council Meeting
Item #30 - August 10, 1995
Page 3
Sharpe: The ones..., it's the Greenfair area, for different reasons, the high
crime there, the drugs that are going on there. And, we're trying
our best to recruit people down there. They just refuse. We've had
people that are sleeping in cars refuse to go to Greenfair. We're
slowly overcoming their fears by having a security force there, that
patrols 24 hours a day, we have a drug condition program and we
have other things that will help them so they are sort of a
mellowing, into moving into there, that's why we're beginning to
fill it.
Hernandez: A point of information, those houses in Cherry Point that have
been sold to low to moderate income folks, or can be replaced was
my understanding with other single-family units, and my
understanding is that we're not looking at apartment complexes
instead?
Sharpe: No it was going to be a mixture. But, when I came before the City
Council, it was a mixture, you know. We weren't able to find a
stop.... affordable stop. Or they were in areas of where we could
find them, but the Government wouldn't allow us to build in
impacted areas. So then we had to move to have a mixture of both
single-family dwellings and multi -family dwellings.
Hernandez: Do you know what the mixture is going to be?
Sharpe: No, no because the markets change, and HUD drags their feet, you
know something is on the market one day, but it might be off. I
would have to take a fresh look at it, but we're going to try to
adhere to just what we agreed to.
Hernandez: The reason I bring it up is cause, it's been my observation, reading
different articles that concentrations of low to moderate individuals
and market housing type projects are my thought a way of the past
not necessarily the way thing to be doing nowadays.
Sharpe: Well those gigantic, monstrous, housing authorities or projects are
just like Greenfair. We wouldn't be looking for them at all. We'd
be looking for 25, 35, 45 manageable apartments that you can
control.
Hernandez: Greenfair has how many?
City Council Meeting
Item #30 - August 10, 1995
Page 4
Sharpe:
Pardon.
Hernandez:
Greenfair has how many?
Sharpe:
235.
Hernandez:
So you're looking at obviously....
Sharpe:
Oh much smaller, yeah, because are larger as these are you can't
control them now.
Langston:
Mr. Sharpe, is there a particular rush on passing this resolution
today?
Sharpe:
There is, because these grants that we put in for all have time
limitations, these applications. And, they ask that we get some of
these documents that I'm asking for you now. But one thing, we
just don't go pell mell, and sign these. Right now, this is a specific
amount.
Langston:
Do you have a resolution of your Board that passed this, approved
this particular application or this particular grant?
Sharpe:
Yes.
Langston:
Before it came to the City of Lubbock.
Sharpe:
Yes.
Langston:
Do you have that with you?
Sharpe:
No I don't. But, that's automatic when we send it to HUD. I can
provide copies to the Council.
Langston:
What is your timeline on your grants? You said that there were....
Sharpe:
I think that this one here is September 15th, I think it is, September
15th, I'd have to check back with the grants writer.
Langston:
So if we waited till August 24th you'd still have adequate time to
get your grant application?
City Council Meeting
Item 430 - August 10, 1995
Page 5
Sharpe: I'd have to check back and see. What .... you know ... what the date,
deadline is..
Langston: I must tell you, and I'm pleased to hear staff comments, but I'm
very concerned about the Lubbock Housing Authority and I'm
concerned about the fact that I don't think that this Council or this
City organization really has a grasp as to what is transpiring with
regard to housing in this community, and I know that ... that the City
Manager has some initiatives underway right now and the staff to
try and get a grip on that. And, I think that it would behoove us as
a Council to postpone this item and allow the City Manager to
provide us with some input on it prior to passing it, because I feel
uncomfortable about where we are on housing at this point, and I
would just like to have some input from the staff and feel
comfortable as a member of the Council before we moved forward
on this item.
Patterson: Mr. Mayor I asked several months ago as a City Council, let's go
visit the Lubbock Housing Authority and see what they are doing,
I`m aware of the Greenfair project, other projects, and they need
our help in helping sure they take care of these problems. We're
talking about unity, this is an area in helping the community. I see
it all the time.
Langston: I'm not saying that I'm opposed to this project Mr. Patterson, I'm
saying that I don't feel comfortable with where we are with
housing or with the activities of the Lubbock Housing Authority,
and there are certain liabilities that the City incurs as a result of
these type of grants, in the form of oversight and otherwise, and
until I feel comfortable with that I don't feel like I'm fulfilling my
responsibilities. And, I feel like the City Manager can get back
with us. Can you give us a status report Mr. Cass or Doug, I don't
know which is appropriate person to ask about where we are on
trying to get our arms around housing at this point:.
Cass: We could be more prepared in a couple of weeks, basically what
we're doing at the staff level ... there are a number of initiatives
some of which don't even involve Lubbock Housing Authority
when we were looking at the possibility for example spinning off
our housing operations from the Community Development area.
It's simply been my feeling that the City Council, not just this
Council but previous Councils, have not really had a concept about
City Council Meeting
Item #30 - August 10, 1995
Page 6
where the whole housing program is. Not to say that anything is
amiss, but simply to say that it's so big and so complex that
Councils haven't felt that they were knowledgeable about what
was going on. Now that was the staffs initiative as far as looking
at making sure you fully understood the impact of every action you
take, that you are fully comfortable with regard to the liability that
you incur or don't incur. This particular matter that Oscar is
bringing before you now, does have an indemnification agreement
in there, which would offer some degree of protection, but if you
would like for us to look into that deeper, we certainly can.
Neugebauer: I too echo the same concerns that Mayor Langston has, and would
too like to put this off into our next Council meeting for final
disposition.
Cooke: Not just the Council, I think the entire community, is a little bit
puzzled by how it all fits together. I think there is some
misconceptions out there that ... for example the relationship
between the Housing Authority and the City Council, and the other
entities that are involved. There are alot of things going on in
housing and it doesn't .... it doesn't feel comfortable ... so ... I guess it
probably the same thing you're saying I don't feel like I've got a
tolerance around it to really understand what's happening in all the
different areas.
Ince: I would move that we postpone this till the next Council meeting
on August the 24th.
Langston: Motion by Councilman Ince to table. Do I have a second?
Cooke: Second.
Langston: Second by Councilman Cooke. Is there any further comments or
discussion on this item?
Patterson: Let me say ... in the meantime I would hope that this Council
would ... would look at some of those programs. You can't really
understand until you see what's there. I'm very serious about that.
You know, where alot of the programs in my area, I see alot things
daily.
City Council Meeting
Item #30 - August 10, 1995
Page 7
Cooke: T. J., two of them are within six or eight blocks of my house.
They're not just out in your area, is what I'm saying.
Patterson: I say I'm familiar with the ... on a weekly ... at least weekly basis, the
things that are done there, and I would hope for ... to have a better
intelligence of what's taking place that we go look for
example... Councilwoman Sitton asked me about Greenfair, I'd like
to take her and show her Greenfair and the problems that he has
with Greenfair for example, and you can see how difficult his task
becomes as trying to administer the program. I understand what
you're saying, but I'm saying that I think we can come back with a
more intelligent answer once we see...
Langston: T. J., and I agree with you, I agree with you, and I would welcome
that opportunity. I've been out to Greenfair, I'd be happy to go
back. I'd like to see some other projects. I'm very committed to us
to have affordable housing in this community and in all sectors of
the community, but until I feel comfortable, I don't think I can act
prudentially and in conformity with my responsibility.
Patterson:
One more in regard to the Cherry Point area, some of the refurbish
of the homes that I've seen. It's remarkable the things I've seen
there, that you have not seen.
Cooke:
True.
Patterson:
What I'm saying is ... I realize that there are projects all over town, I
understand that Ty, but I've seen a dramatic change on some things
of recent, you know up under the administration of Brother Sharpe.
Cooke:
I wasn't trying to imply that that is bad...
Patterson:
OK.
Cooke:
...or that that is messed up. I'm just trying to say that there is so
many things going on and I don't feel like I could...
Patterson:
OK.
Sharpe:
Mr. Mayor, that means that I get together with the City Manager's
office and we get together and see what's going on?
City Council Meeting
Item #30 - August 10, 1995
Page 8
Langston: You get together with the City Manager's office and I think it
would be helpful as Mr. Patterson has suggested to get together
with members of the City Council.
Sharpe: I did ... we had gotten together and made arrangements, and we were
expecting all the City Councilmembers and two showed up. So we
did have our doors open, and just two showed. I think Councilman
Cooke showed up and Councilman Patterson showed up. That's
the only two that showed up.
Langston: Well Mr. Sharpe, you know, all I can say to you is we have to all
continue to make efforts to communicate, and I pledge to you that I
will continue to work with you, if you pledge that you'll continue
to work with this Council, and so, I have a motion on the table, a
motion to table and if there is no further comments or questions
and without objection, I'll call for the question. All in favor
response by saying "Aye."
All: Aye.
Langston: Any opposed by "Nay." This item is tabled then till the next
Council meeting.
Resolution No. 4932
August 24, 1995
Item #24
COOPERATION AGREEMENT
BETWEEN
THE HOUSING AUTHORITY OF THE CITY OF LUBBOCK, TEXAS
AND
THE CITY OF LUBBOCK
This Agreement entered into this 24th day of August , 1995, by and the
Housing Authority of the City of Lubbock, Texas, (herein called the "Local Authority") and
the City of Lubbock (herein called the "Municipality").
WITNESSETH:
In consideration of the mutual covenants hereinafter set forth, the parties hereto do
agree as follows:
Whenever used in this Agreement:
(a) The term "Project" shall mean any low -rent housing hereafter developed as
an entity by the Local Authority with financial assistance of the United
States of America (herein called the "Government"), pursuant to the United
States Housing Act of 1937, as amended and the Department of Housing
and urban Development Act; excluding, however, any low -rent housing
project covered by any contract for loans and annual contributions entered
into between the Local Authority and agencies of the Government prior to
the date of this Agreement.
(b) The term "Taxing Body" shall mean the State or any political subdivision or
taxing unit thereof in which a project is situated and which would have
authority to assess or levy real or personal property taxes or to certify such
taxes to a taxing body or public officer to be levied for its use and benefit
with respect to a Project if it were not exempt from taxation.
(c) The term "Shelter Rent" shall mean the total of all charges to all tenants of a
Project for dwelling rents and nondwelling rents (excluding all other income
of such Project), less the cost to the Local Authority of all dwelling and
nondwelling utilities.
(d) The term "Slum" shall mean any area where dwellings predominate which,
by reason of dilapidation, overcrowding, faulty arrangement or design, lack
of ventilation, light or sanitation facilities, or any combination of these
factors, are detrimental to safety, health, or morals.
2. Municipality and Local Authority signed a prior Cooperative Agreement dated
August 26, 1993, covering seven hundred (700) units of low rent housing. By this current
agreement, the Local Authority agrees to endeavor (a) to secure a contract or contracts
with the Government for loans and annual contributions covering one or more Projects
comprising up to an additional ninety-four (94) units of low rent housing and (b) to develop
and administer such Project or Projects, each of which shall be located within the
corporate limits of the Municipality. The obligations of the parties hereto shall apply to
each such Project.
(a) Under the constitution and statues of the State of Texas all Projects
are exempt from all real and personal property taxes and special
assessments levied or imposed by any Taxing Body. With respect to
any Project, so long as either (i) such Project is owned by a public
body or government agency and is used for low -rent housing
purposes, or (ii) any contract between the Local Authority and the
Government for loans or annual contributions, or both, in connection
with such Project remains enforce and effect, or (iii) any bonds issued
in connection with such Project or any monies due to the Government
in connection which such Project remain unpaid, whichever period is
the longest, the Municipality agrees that it will not levy or impose any
real or personal property taxes or special assessments upon such
Cooperation Agreement with LHA
Page 1
Project or upon the Local Authority with respect thereto. During such
period, the Local Authority shall make annual payments (herein called
"Payments in Lieu of Taxes") in lieu of such taxes and special
assessments and in payment for the Public services and facilities
furnished from time to time without other cost or charge for or with
respect to such Project.
(b) Each such annual Payment in Lieu of Taxes shall be made within 30
days after the end of the fiscal year established for such Project, and
shall be in an amount equal to either (i) ten percent (10%) of the
aggregate Shelter Rent charged by the Local Authority in respect to
such Project during such fiscal year, or (ii) the amount permitted to be
paid by applicable State law in effect on the date such payment is
made, whichever amount is the lower.
(c) The Local Authority shall distribute the Payments in Lieu of Taxes
among the Taxing Bodies in the proportion which the real property
taxes which would have been paid to each Taxing Body for such year
if the Project were not exempt from taxation bears to the total real
property taxes which would have been paid to all Taxing Bodies for
such year if the Project were not exempt from taxation; Provided,
however, that no payment for any year shall be made to any Taxing
Body in excess of the amount of the real property taxes which would
have been paid to such Taxing Body for such year if the Project were
not exempt from taxation.
(d) Upon failure of the Local Authority to make any Payment in Lieu of
Taxes, no lien against any Project or assets of the Local Authority
shall attach, nor shall any interest or penalties accrue or attach on
account thereof.
4. During the period commencing with the date of the acquisition of any part of
the site or sites of any Project and continuing so long as either (i) such Project is owned by
a public body or governmental agency and is used for low -rent housing purposes, or (ii) any
contract between the Local Authority and the Government for loans or annual
contributions, or both, in connection with such Project remains in force and effect, or (iii)
any bonds issued in connection with such Project or monies due to the Government in
connection with such Project remain unpaid, whichever period is the longest, the
Municipality without cost or charge to the Local Authority or the tenants of such Project
(other than the Payments in Lieu of Taxes) shall;
(a) Furnish or cause to be furnished the Local Authority and the tenant of
such Project public services and facilities of the same character and
to the same extent as are furnished from time to time without cost or
charge to other dwellings and inhabitants in the Municipality;
(b) Vacate subh streets, roads, and alleys within the area of such Project
as may be necessary in the development thereof, and insofar as
allowed by State law, convey without charge to the Local Authority
such interest as the Municipality may have in such vacated areas,
and, insofar as it is lawfully able to do so without cost or expense to
the Local Authority or to the Municipality, cause to be removed from
such vacated areas, insofar as it may be necessary, all public or
private utility lines and equipment.
(c) Insofar as the Municipality may lawfully do so, (i) grant such
deviations from he building code of the Municipality as are reasonable
and necessary to promote economy and efficiency in the development
and administration of such Project, and at the same time safeguard
health and safety, and (ii) make such changes in any zoning of the
site and surrounding territory of such Project, and the surrounding
territory;
Cooperation Agreement with LHA
Page 2
(d) Accept grants of easements necessary for the development of such
Project; and
(e) Cooperate with the Local Authority by such other lawful action of
ways as the Municipality and the Local Authority may find necessary
in connection with the development and administration of such
Project.
5. In respect to any Project the Municipality further agrees that within
reasonable time after receipt of a written request therefor from the Local Authority.
(a) It will accept the dedication of all interior streets, roads, alleys, and
adjacent sidewalks within the area of such Project, together with all
storm and sanitary sewer mains in such dedicated areas, after the
Local Authority, at its own expense, has completed the grading
improvement, paving, and installation thereof in accordance with
specifications acceptable to the Municipality;
(b) It will accept necessary dedications of land for, and will grade,
improve, pave, and provide adequate access thereto (in consideration
whereof the Local Authority shall pay to the Municipality such
amount as would be assessed against the Project site for such work if
such site were privately owned); and
(c) It will provide, or cause to be provided, water mains, and storm and
sanitary sewer mains, leading to such Project and serving the
bounding streets thereof (in consideration whereof the Local Authority
shall pay to the municipality such amount as would be assessed
against the Project site for such work if such site were privately
owned).
6. If by reason of the Municipality's failure or refusal to furnish or cause to be
furnished any public services or facilities which it has agreed hereunder to furnish or to
cause to be furnished to the Local Authority of the tenants of any Project, the Local
Authority incurs any expense to obtain such services or facilities, then the Local Authority
may deduct the amount of such expense from any payments in Lieu of Taxes due or to
become due to the municipality in respect to any Project or any other low -rent housing
projects owned or operated by the Local Authority.
7. No Cooperation Agreement heretofore entered into between the Municipality
and the Local Authority shall be construed to apply to any Project covered by this
Agreement.
S. The parties agree that both the Local Authority and the Municipality are
independent units of government and that the Municipality has no control over the
administration and daily activities of the Projects developed by the Local Authority. Local
Authority, therefore, agrees to hold Municipality harmless, defend and indemnify
Municipality from any claims, actions, suits, charges and judgments whatsoever that arise
out of Local Authority's performance or nonperformance of its duties in regard to said
Projects.
9. So long as any contract between the Local Authority and the Government
for loans (including preliminary loans) or annual contributions, or both, in connection with
any project remains in force and effect, or so long as any bonds issued in connection with
any Project or any monies due to the Government in connection with any Project remain
unpaid, this Agreement shall not be abrogated, changed, or modified without the consent
of the Government. The privileges and obligations of the Municipality hereunder shall
remain in full force and effect with respect to each Project so long as the beneficial title to
such Project is held by the Local Authority or by the Government or by any other public
body or governmental agency authorized by law to engage in the development or
administration of low -rent housing projects. If any time the beneficial title to, or
possession of, any project is held by the Government, other public body or governmental
agency, the provisions hereof shall insure to the benefit of and may be enforced by the
Governments such other public body or governmental agency.
Cooperation Agreement with LHA
Page 3
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Municipality and the Local Authority have respectively
signed this Agreement and caused their seals to be affixed and attested as of the day and
year first above written.
ATTEST:
'�� a Qr�:� -
Betty Johnson, My Secretary
Linda Chamales, Assistant City
Attorney
ATTEST: LUBBOCK HOUSING AUTHORITY
Secretary Oscar Shar e, Executive Director
Cooperation Agreement with LHA
Page 4