LOU between City Housing & MCC

anything related to city politics, code enforcement and city rules

Moderator: Board Members

m74reeves
Posts: 36
Joined: Mon Jun 10, 2013 1:21 pm

LOU between City Housing & MCC

Post by m74reeves » Sat Sep 28, 2013 4:16 pm

In relation to the public records request 2013-5012392 submitted July 2013, I finally received the info below. I requested "Copy of Memorandum(s) of Understanding between Environmental Code and Compliance Dept & Housing and Neighborhoods Dept regarding Demolition/Clearance Activities for NSP1, NSP3, and/or CDBG program." Here's the body of the email I received from the Housing office:

Ms. Reeves:

I apologize for the delayed response. After extensive research, here is the information I am able to provide in response to your C.A.R.E. Issue request.

Please see the attached scanned copy (C & D LOU) of the executed LOU for CDBG Clearance and Demolition (requested as part of 2013-5012392.)

Please see the attached email conversation (2008-2009 NSP Demolition & Clearance) containing a DRAFT copy of the MCC MOU for NSP1. Housing staff does not have an executed MOU, only the draft copy as attached to the email.

Regarding NSP3, “there was no supporting documentation found to support the need for an MOU” and staff is in the process of revising the NSP Substantial Amendments to remove that language.

Thank you.
Last edited by m74reeves on Sat Sep 28, 2013 4:23 pm, edited 1 time in total.

m74reeves
Posts: 36
Joined: Mon Jun 10, 2013 1:21 pm

Re: LOU between City Housing & MCC

Post by m74reeves » Sat Sep 28, 2013 4:21 pm

And attachments provided:

1st Attachment is the DRAFT LOU b/t Housing and Code for the NSP1 Demo/Clearance activity
2nd Attachment is the fully executed LOU (Letter of Understanding) between Housing and Code for the CDBG Demo/Clearance activity for the past fiscal year.
Attachments
2008-2009 NSP (Demolition & Clearance).docx
(27.27 KiB) Downloaded 219 times
CDBG.LOU.pdf
(867.16 KiB) Downloaded 211 times

iloveionia
Preservation SOS Member
Preservation SOS Member
Posts: 3307
Joined: Wed Aug 18, 2010 6:37 pm

Re: LOU between City Housing & MCC

Post by iloveionia » Sat Sep 28, 2013 6:26 pm

It's a bone.
Nothing of substance.
The city is a joke.
Nicole Lopez

“One of the advantages of being disorderly is that one is constantly making exciting discoveries.” A.A. Milne

m74reeves
Posts: 36
Joined: Mon Jun 10, 2013 1:21 pm

Re: LOU between City Housing & MCC

Post by m74reeves » Sat Sep 28, 2013 7:21 pm

I agree. But the CDBG agreement does state that the Recipient (MCC) is the entity responsible for performing the "historic preservation environmental reviews," which we all know are not being performed.

Too bad the Housing Department didn't have the foresight to require same of MCC for NSP1/NSP3 funds, because they will be on the hook for these recent demos done with NSP funds without the proper reviews.

User avatar
Gloria
Preservation SOS Member
Preservation SOS Member
Posts: 4114
Joined: Wed Aug 18, 2010 6:05 pm

Re: LOU between City Housing & MCC

Post by Gloria » Sat Sep 28, 2013 7:38 pm

Fantastic Meredith. Thank you

User avatar
Gloria
Preservation SOS Member
Preservation SOS Member
Posts: 4114
Joined: Wed Aug 18, 2010 6:05 pm

Re: LOU between City Housing & MCC

Post by Gloria » Sun Sep 29, 2013 8:34 am

m74reeves wrote:I agree. But the CDBG agreement does state that the Recipient (MCC) is the entity responsible for performing the "historic preservation environmental reviews," which we all know are not being performed.

Too bad the Housing Department didn't have the foresight to require same of MCC for NSP1/NSP3 funds, because they will be on the hook for these recent demos done with NSP funds without the proper reviews.
Aren't NSP funds part of CDBG?
"To create a little flower is the labour of ages" William Blake

m74reeves
Posts: 36
Joined: Mon Jun 10, 2013 1:21 pm

Re: LOU between City Housing & MCC

Post by m74reeves » Sun Sep 29, 2013 8:01 pm

Both NSP1 and NSP3 are one time grant funds that came out of the financial/housing crisis. NSP1 was specifically funded through the Housing and Economic Recovery Act of 2008 (HERA) and NSP3 was through the Dodd-Frank Act in 2010. Jacksonville received funding from HUD for both of these on a formula basis. The formula took into account numbers of foreclosures, subprime loans, etc. in the area. As an aside, there was a NSP2 funded through American Recovery and Reinvestment Act; it was competitive funding, and I don't think that Jacksonville received anything (not sure if they applied or not).

Jacksonville receives CDBG funding annually from HUD since they are known as an "entitlement community." Basically that means that they receive an annual allocation of CDBG funding. Again a formula is used, including poverty statistics, age of housing stock, etc. CDBG projects have to meet one of 3 national objectives: (1.) Prevent slum/blight, (2.) Aid low/mod income individuals, or (3.) Urgent Need (this is rarely used). These 3 objectives break down into further categories.

#1. Prevent/Eliminate slum & blight can be on an "area" basis (and includes more than simply clearance and demo)...and that area must be specifically designated as blighted by the local government using certain criteria. N'hood improvements could be funded in this area to help combat blight including concentrated housing rehab and infrastructure activities. #1 Slum/Blight can also address needs on a "spot" basis, which is where you typically see demos used.

For #2, Aid low/mod income, funds can benefit an area where at least 51% of the people meet low/mod income (park improvements, community centers, infrastructure are some examples of this), funds can be used if at least 51% of the people affected are low/mod individuals (senior center, homeless cntr, ADA improvements to public buildings are some examples); funds be used to aid for housing for low/mod income person (such as the housing rehab programs the City performs); and job creation.

For #3, it really has to be an urgent need, such as some natural disaster hitting the area and funds used to demo something in immediate danger or to help fund police to prevent riots/looting, that type of thing. This is seldom used.

Here is a more detailed explanation of what can be funded using CDBG:
http://portal.hud.gov/hudportal/HUD?src ... y/deskguid

iloveionia
Preservation SOS Member
Preservation SOS Member
Posts: 3307
Joined: Wed Aug 18, 2010 6:37 pm

Re: LOU between City Housing & MCC

Post by iloveionia » Mon Sep 30, 2013 11:00 pm

Demos.
That's basically all they've done.
No balancing.
Just abate.
Nicole Lopez

“One of the advantages of being disorderly is that one is constantly making exciting discoveries.” A.A. Milne

m74reeves
Posts: 36
Joined: Mon Jun 10, 2013 1:21 pm

Re: LOU between City Housing & MCC

Post by m74reeves » Wed Oct 23, 2013 8:18 pm

I'm bumping this thread b/c I think this needs to be looked at again in light of the recent news articles that have come out.

m74reeves
Posts: 36
Joined: Mon Jun 10, 2013 1:21 pm

Re: LOU between City Housing & MCC

Post by m74reeves » Wed Oct 23, 2013 8:41 pm

I would love to know why no letter of understanding was completed for NSP funds. Obviously HAND crafted a very specific document to address the nature of this program and areas it was targeting. No other correspondence was provided with this public records request.
From: Stagner-Crites, Laura
Sent: Friday, February 06, 2009 10:44 AM
To: Carswell, Lacree; Coles, Dayatra; Allen, Eldre
Cc: Richardson, James; Bailey, Clayton; Ray, Carla
Subject: 2008-2009 NSP (Demolition & Clearance)
Importance: High

All,

Please see attached 1st draft of the letter of understanding for the demolition and clearance portion of the NSP program that will be carried out by the City's Municipal Code Compliance Division.

The one addition that I'm proposing that we make is to specifically attach the maps of the targeted areas (I can do that quite easily) so that there is NO CONFUSION as to which demolitions they can charge to the program.

Please take this opportunity to look over the LOU and provide any additional comments that may be relevant so that I can prepare this document for transmission to OGC for form approval. I would like to get this one transmitted today if at all possible.

Post Reply