1976-03-24 Special CC HAB Minutes����� ���^
^^ ��
SPECIAL MEETING OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ALAMEDA AND
THE HOUSING AUTHORITY HELD WEDNESDAY, MARCH 24, 1976
The meeting convened at 7:30 o'clock p.m. in the Council Chamber of the City Hall with
President Corica presiding.
ROLL CALL:
The roll of the Council was called and Councilmen 8pckom, Diament, Hurwitz, Sherratt and
President Corica, (5), were noted present. Absent: None.
The roll of the Housing Authority was called and Commissioners Douglas, Godfrey, Kofmon, O'Dell,
Palmer and Chairman De Witt, (6)., were noted present, Absent: Commissioner Littlejohn, (1).
President Corica announced discussion would be limited to members of the Council and the Housing
Authority, as this was considered a work session,
1. Receipt of the Notice and Agenda of this Special Meeting had been acknowledged by the Council-
men and Commissioners and was on file. The purpose of this session was to consider the following
items and take action thereof, if desired: Closing of Makassar Housing; Makassar rents; Planning
and financing low income housing (selling Webster Street frontage/Section 8/loans/et cetera);
Housing and Community Development Act implementation (rehabilitating of Alameda High School homes);
Board Personnel; and Other related items.
2. ' Chairman DeWitt requested Commissioner Godfrey to relate the problems faced by the Housing
Authority which led to their decision to close the Makassar Housing Project.
Commissioner Godfrey stated he thOught1t would be important for the Council to know what had been
attempted hy the Commission since the closing of Makassar Housing had been decided upon. He
reported that HUD had indicated to the Commission within the past several weeks that there was
no relocatable money to assist those oersons who must leave Makassar; also there was no money
available for rehabilitation through HUD. However, he said, the state did have money for some
rehabilitation work but they had been told by the Building Inspectors that the city would not
issue a building permit unless it could be shown the buildings were structurally safe, sound and
sanitary. He noted the state had rated the project zero on a scale of ten, however there was an
appeal process avai7nble. As to tearing down and rebuilding the project, he reported several mem-
bers of the Commission and the Executive Director had journeyed to Washington, D.C. to see if there
would be any money for construction and had been informed non9 was available at this time. As the
issuance of bonds to be used for this purpose would be subject to a referendum, and also because
of "Measure A", they had been advised by their Bond Counsel that this would not be possible.
Councilman Sherratt asked if the Commission had considered Selling portions of land fronting on
Webster Street. Commissioner Godfrey replied this had not been formally dfscuSSAd, although it
was a p0Ss1bility.
In answer to questions put by President Corica, Commissioner Godfrey stated the project had first
been scheduled to be closed down in 1955. However former Assemblyman Crown had obtained several
extensions of time. He also reported the buildings had originally been built to substandard
standards.
President Corica asked who would be responsible if damage or injury should result because of an
earthquake or other catastrophe, Commissioner Godfrey replied their legal counsel had advised
that since the Commission had made the decision to do something to comply with the law, that they,
as individuals, would be protected and would not be subject to punitive damages.
President Corica stated he personally felt Alameda had the showpieces of low-income housing within
the County, and compliemented the Commission on their accomplishments with respect to the Esperanza
Project, the Senior Citizens COmPlex at Park Street and Otis Drive, and the modular units. He asked
what procedure had been followed when Esperanza was built.
Commissioner Palmer stated when he and other Commissioners were first appointed to the Housing
Authority they were faced with the problem of the Estuary Housing Project, as a great deal of pressure
had been brought to have the buildings lowered by the then existing Authority. At that time, he said,
they were confronted with the very emotional and painful process of dealing with tenants who had
lived in the project for some twenty vears. He stated they had held numerous meetings with the tenants
and finally, with the aid of local realtors, were able to move some of the tenants, and other were
consolidated into existing projects. He reported a number of tenants were evicted as they were over
income, and he felt they were effective and successful in demolishing the Estuary Project and relocating
the people who needed and deserved relocatinq. He said when it came time to build some new units,
they went through the same process at the then called Western Housing Project. He stated they had
rehuilt and relocated many of the people hack into the units and had since serviced a number of
deserving and worthy families who, he thought, were very pleased with their surroundings and would
socially benefit a great deal better from what had been rebuilt. He reported the same process had
been followed when they started to tear down portions of Makassar to put up the mudulars, and those
that could be were absorbed into existing housing. He noted that other families could not be absorbed
as they were either ineliqible or over income,
Commissioner Palmer reported the Makassar Project had to be razed because of its structural situation,
its ane, the internal accoutrements such as water heaters and furnaces being badly worn and used,
and the nrnject did not provide onod, safe and sanitary housing. He stated a date would have to
be set to remove these units and they could not operate under an open-ended arrangement.
Commissioner Palmer stated when the Housing Authority was faced with the situation of tearing down
the Estuary Housing Project, a Mayor's Study Committee had been appointed and made recommendations,
some Of which had been rejected as not being feasible and others could not be applied as Alameda
was not a referendum city. He said the Committee had been dissolved at the same time the Housing
Authority, as then constituted, was dissolved and some members of the Study Committee were appointed
to be the new Housing Authority. The new Housing Authority had then determined they wished to pursue
the Section 23 Leasing Plan as being the most desirable funding available and where there was a
reasonable chance of getting it. He said Mr. Marquardt had been recruited at that time to assist
them in putting together the necessary paCkaoeS for this PlaD. He stated an allocation had been
received and they had nroceeded. After this program had been in effect for a number of years, they
felt they had pretty much saturated the community with leased housing, and this was the time the
Authority had concluded to tear down the Western Project and rebuild. Mr. Palmer reviewed the efforts
made at that time to secure financing, and the final allocation of S2,A00,000 from the federal
government.
Councilman Hurwitz asked if it were possible to relocate the 200 families presently living in
the Makassar units, as had been done when the other projects had been closed. Commissioner Palmer
replied the Housing Authority had nowhere to relocate them, however some twenty families had been
placed in modular units which were primarily studio and one bedroom units, Executive Director
Marquardt reported over fifty percent of the modular tenants came from the Makassar Project, and the
modulars were now full.
Commissioner Palmer noted the decision to close the Makassar Housing Project had been triggered
by the tenants who had appeared before the City Council on September 16, 1975, with their complaints.
President Corica referred to the minutes of the Housing Authority meeting held November 5, 1975,
at which time a motion made by Commissioner Kofman that all vacancies be frozen and all vacant
buildings be boarded up at once, that the Housing Authority put all tenants on notice with the under-
standing that they have to look for housing on their own, that the Executive Director make sure
that all of Makassar be vacated and demolished at the same time, carried by a vote of five ayes and
no noes. He asked if the Commissioners were still of the same mind.
Commissioner Godfrey reported this had been a second step, as when the initial decision to close was
made the representatives of the Tenants Union had come to the Housing Authority and demanded a
closing date be set, at which time a motion hdd been made to close the project effective June 30,
1976, with Commissioner Kofman voting no. Commissioner Kofman noted this action had been taken
at their second meeting in November, 1975.
Commissioner Kofman reported his vote was not to close the or0ject on June 30, 1976. He said his
main concern had not been the date, but that they had not come up with a relocation plan and were
not aware of what the Blue RfbbOn.COmmfttee appointed by the Chairman would propose,
Commissioner Palmer stated they were still all in favor of the closing of the project, but faced
with no other alternative suggestion by the Blue Ribbon Committee or anyone else, that more than
likely the June 30 date was as nO0d as any. He reported they were more than willing to listen to
anyone who had a reasonable solution or reason why it should be held off, but up to now nothing
had been proposed other than the hardships which would be imposed upon the tenants. He noted that
no matter which closing date was selected, these hardships would exist.
There followed a general discussion of the possibility of a relocation plan for the existing tenants.
Chairman DeWitt emphasized the Housing Authority had already filled all existing leased and project
housing and no more was available. Commissioner Palmer noted that since December 1, 1975 there had
been 93 vacancies and 189 units remained occupied however by June 30 other tenants probably would
have found housing on their Own or moved because of school and Navy transfers.
On request, Executive Director Marquardt estimated there would be 100 vacancies due to normal attri-
tion in a six month period. He said he would also estimate there would be approximately 50 families
whVw0Uld refuse to move.
Councilman Hurwitz asked if the Blue Ribbon Committee was working on a relocation plan. Councilman
Diament replied the members of the Committee, on which she served, were at a disadvantage in not
being able to answer the question this evening, as the charge of the Committee was to study all
possible alternatives and return to the Housing Authority with a recommendation. Thus they were
not a liberty at this time to say what the Committee was even thinking of proposing.
Mr. Marquardt, in answer to a question put by Mr. Beckam, explained the new Section 8 program was
a privatized plan of housing with the bulk of the effort being on the private landlord who would
select the tenant, make all repairs and collect his own rent. He said he was not sure how saleable
the Makassar Project tenant would be to the Alameda private landlord.
Chairman DeWitt noted there were some relocation areas yet undeveloped, one being the houses
obtained from the Alameda Unified School District which were presently sfttino on wooden blocks
because of lack of funds to rehabilitate them, He also stated one of the most difficult problems
they were faced with in relocating of the Makassar tenants was the need for three bedroom housing,
some of those houses would fill this need.
There followed a discussion of the possible sale of Webster Street frontage property. Commissioner
Palmer reported at this point no effort had been made to have the land appraised, and its sale
would be affected by the limitations imposed hv "Measure A", and their as yet undeveloped plans
and determination of the need for the replacement of the low-income housing units. He said that
should all the tenants in the Makassar Project relocate, there would be no need to rebuilt the
project. Councilman Diament noted the recently adopted Housing Element recommended that low-income
housing not be concentrated in one area of the community.
3. The next topic under discussion was the rehabilitation of the Alameda Unified School District
houses.
Commissioner Godfrey stated these houses had been acquired and moved by the Housing Authority with
the feeling that it met the policy of the City Council not to tear down any houses within the city
which could still be used for housing. He said they had used the last of their available moneys
for this purpose. He stated Mr. Marquardt had explored with the City Manager the possibility of
utilizing Housing and Community Development funds to complete their rehabilitation, with bids for
the project being called for and presented to the City Council and the funds administered by the
City Council rather than the Housing Authority. He asked for direction as to how soon this process
could commence.
City Manager Goss reported there were substantial first year HCDA funds set aside for this project.
He said it was his proposal that the city assume the front end position as the conduit for the HCDA
funds. He stated that HUD, which agency administered the HCDA program, required there be formal
bids and a formal bid award. He said it was his understanding the Housing Authority had already
prepared the specifications and were in a position to go out for bids, with the understanding that
the payments would be made by the city. He stated he was confident the flow of funds from HUD would
be satisfactorily rapid and the project would not jeopardize any of the city's current projects or
funds.
President Corica asked concerning the time frame for the project. Mr. Goss stated the project could
begin as soon as the Housing Authority could act on the awarding of the bid, assuming the procedure
he had outlined was legal,
Mr. Marquardt stated he did not know if the specifications had been prepared. Commissioner Godfrey
reported these could he prepared on very short notice.
Commissioner Godfrey said he agreed with Mr. Goss' outline and they could go to bid themselves,
however they would have to have some assurance from the city that if something in the bid was not
covered by HCDA funds, that the city would pick up that tab and the full bill would be paid, because
the Housing Authority had no money.
Mr. Marquardt said he thought the Authority would have to ask the city to also pick up the tab that
would be pOyable to the architect for the specifications. Mr. Goss said he thought a simpler solution
would be to have the city review the specifications before going out to bid, which would eliminate
any gray areas.
Commissioner Godfrey stated at this time they only had a true feeling for the cost of what was
necessary for the foundations. He asked if the funds would be available to complete the rehabilitation
and put the houses in a habitable condition.
The City Manager said the real question was the estimated total cost Of the project. He reported
the money remaining from the current year's application was substantially in excess of S100,O0O,
and in the application for the year beginning July 1. 1976 there was additional money to be
utilized as backup. He stated it should be stressed that the work done in accordance with HCDA
guidelines and this could be done by a review of the Sp2Cificdti0n3.
Commissioner Godfrey stated it was his opinion they could put a packet together to present to the
City Manager within a very short time.
Councilman Beckam suggested the packet also include a very close cost control system or accounting
system to insure conformance with the federal requirements, so there would be no problem in identifying
chargeable items.
Assistant City Manager CreDgh suggested the specifications be reviewed, at least informally, with
HUD to make sure that every bit of work could he reimbursed hy HCDA funds. He reported there was
approximately $I75,090 remaining of the original first-year application which could be used for
rehabilitating the houses and siding improvements for the modular units.
Councilman Beckam suggested the City Manager and others on staff visit with the Housing Authority
Executive Director and insure that the cost accounting system was adequate to insure job identifi-
cation and backup accounting, so all bills would fall within the scope of the specifications.
Mr. Goss reported Administrative Assistant Robert Yonder had worked with the Housing Authority staff
and had developed a form which could be utilized for processing the bills.
It was the consensus of the Council that the Housing Authority should proceed with preparation of
the specifications, and the project he funded as outlined by the City Manager.
4. The next item discussed was the rental charged for Makassar Housing Project units.
Chairman DeWitt asked if the City Council had any questions on this item.
Councilman Hurwitz said that since the Housing Authority had determined the project would be closed
in June, and the rent increase was scheduled for May, it appeared unconscionable to raise the rent
and two months later give an eviction notice. He asked if there wasn't some way funds could he
found in another manner.
Commissioner Palmer reo0rted the project was not carrying itself. He noted the other housing projects,
including Section 23 houI1no, were more or less self-sustaining, whereas Makassar Housing was running
into debt. He stated their decision to raise the rents should not be confused with their decision
to close the project. He said the Executive Director had recommended an increase some six months
before, however they had delayed until they had reached the point where it could not be put off
any longer.
Commissioner Godfrey noted that costs associated with utilities, garbage collection and repairs
had risen, and they had been forced to raise the rents to offset these.
Commissioner O'Dell stated if records of other Housing Authorities were checked, it would be found
the rents charged by the Alameda Housing Authority were much lower.
5. Chairman DeWitt reported the Commissioners of the Housing Authority wished to bring to the
attention the matter Of Board personnel, specifically as it dealt with one of their members who
wrote articles for the local newspaper.
Commissioner Palmer related their complaint was that the news articles did not show both sides
of an issue, and had caused dissension and terse words between some of the Commissioners. He
alleged some of the articles contained information which had been dCuqir2d by the writer through
his privileged rank as a Commissioner and they wished to officially inform the City Council
that they found themselves at a disadvantage in working with this condition,
Commissioner Kofman noted his articles had contained information on discussions which had taken
place in public meetings.
6. Chairman DeWitt stated he believed this closed off discussion on the items which had been
listed on the agenda, however there were some areas that could have been gone into, namely those
concerning long range planning. He noted the Council had decided it would be best for the City to
have dispersed low income housing rather than concentrated areas, and guidelines would be needed.
He informed the Council that the Blue Ribbon Committee, upon completion of its study, would report
to the Housing Authority their recommendations concerning the Makassar Housing Project closing
and how it should be handled. He said no date was now known as to when the study would be completed.
Councilman Beckam said it was his opinion the closing date of June 30 should not be held at this
time unless every possible alternative was explored and found to be not feasible. He said he hoped
the committee would conclude its study as soon as possible, as the time for getting AB 2899 adopted,
passed and effective was growing short.
7. Commissioner Godfrey stated he wished to add an item to the agenda, which he and the members
Of the Housing Authority believed was of utmost importance. He said that although they were a
quasi-state agency, they felt very strongly that they served at the will and pleasure of the City
Council. He reported that by necessity they had had to no to the local Assemblyman for help, and
had also sought assistance through the State Senators in Washington, D.C. He said some of the
Commissioners did not feel they could go too much further unless they received a complete vote of
confidence, or a vote of no confidence, from the Council and a resolution either backing or not
backing the policies of the Housing Authority,
Following discussion, Councilman Pfament moved a resolution be prepared for consideration at the
next regular meeting of the City Council, in support of the Housing Authority policy.
Commissioner O'Dell expressed her concern that two members of the City Council had appeared at
a Commission meeting and read letters taking issue with the June 30 closing date for Makassar
Housing, without having first discussed the matter with the Commission or staff members.
Councilman Hurwitz stated he would be reluctant to adopt any resolution which would give unqualified
approval of the actions of the Housing Authority, as he could not endorse a June 30 closirg date
for the Makassar Project or the rent increases.
Councilman Sherratt seconded the motion made by CnUnCi]0Jr Diament.
Councilman Beckam suggested that instead of a resolution to be considered at a later date, he
would move the Housing Authority be given a vote of confidence at this meeting.
Councilman Sherratt stated he NOdld withdraw his second on the resolution, and second the motion
made by Councilman Beckam,
At the conclusion of discussion, the motion carried by unanimous roll call vote.
ADJOURNMENT:
O. There being no further business to come before the meeting, the Council and Housing Authority
adjourned.
Respectfully submitted,
City Clerk