AHA2007/11/27ANAHEIM HOUSING AUTHORITY
REGULAR MEETING OF NOVEMBER 27, 2007
The Anaheim Housing Authority met in regular session in the Chambers of the Anaheim City
Hall located at 200 South Anaheim Boulevard.
PRESENT: Chairman Curt Pringle, Authority Members: Lorri Galloway, Bob Hernandez, Lucille
Kring and Harry Sidhu
STAFF PRESENT: City Manager David Morgan, City Attorney Jack White, Secretary, Linda
Nguyen
A copy of the agenda for the meeting of the Anaheim Housing Authority was posted on
November 23, 2007 on the kiosk outside City Hall.
Chairman Pringle called the regular meeting to order at 5:05 P.M. in the Council Chambers of
Anaheim City Hall, 200 South Anaheim Boulevard for a joint public comment session with the
City Council, the Redevelopment Agency and the Public Financing Authority.
ADDITIONS/DELETIONS TO THE AGENDA: None
PUBLIC COMMENTS: No statements offered during the joint public comment session related
to the Housing Authority agenda.
CONSENT CALENDAR: At 5:51 P.M., Authority Member Hernandez requested Item No. 5 be
removed from the consent calendar for further discussion; Mayor Pringle removed Item No. 6.
Authority Member Kring then moved to approve the balance of the consent calendar, seconded
by Authority Member Galloway. Roll Call vote: Ayes - 5; Chairman Pringle, Authority Members:
Galloway, Hernandez, Kring and Sidhu. Noes - 0. Motion Carried
7. Approve and authorize the Authority Executive Director to execute and administer the
4960 Exclusive Negotiation Agreements with The Related Companies of California, LLC for
4961 the development of the Choc housing site and with SADI, LLC for the development of
the Manchester housing- site.
8. Approve minutes of the Authority meeting of November 6, 2007.
END OF CONSENT:
5. Approve an amendment to the Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher Administrative Plan
AHA 177 which will help accommodate the implementation of Project-Based Voucher units within
special needs projects.
Director Elisa Stipkovich reported this item was a request to amend the Section 8 administrative
plan in order to give priority for Section 8 vouchers to people with special needs. She explained
projects such as the Diamond Street Project had been constructed for special needs individuals
and in order to house them as tenants, priority was given to those qualified individuals on the
Section 8 list to match them up with facilities. Authority Member Hernandez remarked he
wanted to highlight the City's efforts to reach out and assist the special needs population and
Anaheim Housing Authority Minutes of September 11, 2007
Page 2
make the community aware of this program and moved to approve Item No. 5, seconded by
Authority Member Galloway. Roll call vote: Ayes - 5; Chairman Pringle, Authority Members:
Galloway, Hernandez, Kring and Sidhu. Noes - 0. Motion Carried.
6. Approve the Interjurisdictional Mobility Agreement between the Housing Authorities of
4959 Anaheim, Garden Grove, Orange County and Santa Ana, within the County of Orange,
California for the interjurisdictional administration of the Section 8 Housing Choice
Voucher Program.
Chairman Pringle remarked the Section 8 program was beneficial to many as it provided
housing rental assistance; however, Anaheim was obligated for higher administrative costs
because the City provided vouchers for more families than any other Orange County city. Ms.
Stipkovich concurred, stating Anaheim provided 6,300 vouchers for families, with the County
providing vouchers for the remaining Orange County cities except for Santa Ana and Garden
Grove, which oversaw approximately 1,500 and 1,000 vouchers respectively. She added HUD
allowed voucher holders to find housing anywhere in the country and that the interjurisdictional
agreement being considered handled the way the administrative fee was distributed. She
remarked the City had been in this agreement for some time, and while she recommended it be
approved this evening, she was researching whether it could be modified. With this agreement
in place, Anaheim would pay inspection fees to other housing authorities if Anaheim vouchers
were used somewhere other than in Anaheim.
She added, normally Anaheim would get 20 percent of the fee for administration of the program
and the other housing authorities would receive 80 percent, however, this agreement was
modified to give priority to Section 8 voucher recipients who live and work in Anaheim.
Therefore, Anaheim would keep 100 percent of the $830/year fee per voucher and administer
the program and give a flat rate of $150 to other housing authorities for inspections. She added
that HUD had cut the fee to $830 per year for all administrative costs which was okay when the
agreement was originally negotiated but was no longer cost effective and she was in the
process of discussing this. She indicated as plan administrator, the Anaheim Housing Authority
verified income, qualified individuals for the program, validated all information received and re-
examined that information every year in addition to cutting the rental subsidies. She added the
City had the right to terminate this agreement within 60 days even though the term of the
agreement was for three years and recommended it be approved while staff held discussions on
revising the contract. Chairman Pringle concurred asking staff to bring back a formula which
could be negotiated with other housing authorities, taking advantage of the 60-day cancellation
policy.
Authority Member Galloway asked if the $830 fee was per family; Ms. Stipkovich responded it
was on a per unit basis even though staff might process more than one family per unit. She
added roughly 20 percent of the 6,300 vouchers offered were for individuals living outside of
Anaheim. Authority Member Hernandez asked what the impact would be should the Authority
not approve this agreement tonight. Ms. Stipkovich stated it would be a hardship on the
program recipients as the Housing Authority would not be able to pay for other housing agency
services. She emphasized she would like to see this item approved and then return to the
Housing Authority as soon as possible with an alternative agreement. She added those
discussions had been started but no agreement had been reached. Authority Member Galloway
asked if Anaheim residents received priority over those who work in the City. Ms. Stipkovich
replied the live or work component was treated the same, although other preference was given
for veterans and special needs individuals. She remarked that was a local preference and could
Anaheim Housing Authority Minutes of September 11, 2007
Page 3
be changed. Mayor Pringle stated Authority Member Galloway's point was legitimate and worth
discussion. He asked how many names were on the voucher waiting list and Ms. Stipkovich
indicated there were 15,000 on the waiting list, 4,000 of whom were Anaheim residents. She
remarked staff could provide a report which included who had been receiving the vouchers,
whether they live or work in Anaheim as well as other statistics. Discussion was held on the
benefits of holding a workshop on this issue.
Authority Member Hernandez moved to approve Item No. 6, directing staff to prepare a
workshop for the January 8th meeting to discuss those points raised during this meeting
including attempts at improving the agreement, seconded by Authority Member Galloway. Roll
call vote: Chairman Pringle, Authority Members: Galloway, Hernandez, Kring and Sidhu. Noes
- 0. Motion Carried.
ADJOURNMENT:
There being no further business, Chairman Pringle adjourned the Anaheim Housing Authority
Meeting at 6:18 P.M. to reconvene the Anaheim City Council meeting.
submitted,
Linda Nguyen, Secre'ha~y
Anaheim Housing Authority